Who taught early americans to build pyramids and write in heiroglyphs?

[Shogun]

Did you want to provide support for your claim or should I go ahead and take your word for it? I assure you, my standard is higher than simply quoting the book of mormon

 

[Shogun]

The existence of the Jaredites is rejected by mainstream historians and archaeologists.

Jaredites - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Truthspeaker]

The existence of the Jaredites is rejected by mainstream historians and archaeologists.

Jaredites - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Of course it would be rejected by "mainstream archaeologists and scientists." They have dogma's too. For example the Smithsonian dogmatically teaches to this day that pre-Columbian maritime expeditions to the new world were impossible without citing any evidence other than their opinion that "all ancient inhabitants of the new world came from the Bering Strait during the last Ice Age."

You wanna talk dogma? Where is the science in that statement? They don't even consider that people back then were smart enough to get across the ocean. Yeah I know it's hard, but it aint that hard.

There is already a mountain of evidence that suggests otherwise from non-Mormon scholars.

How about the worlds foremost meso american archaeologist Michael Cohn,a non mormon, in his book, "The Maya", he makes it clear in chapter 2 on page 41 sixth edition. "There is little agreement among scientists as to who colonized the americas... Boats must have been available to the people of Eurasia. Since there was no land bridge from Siberia to Australia but that continent must have been reached via maritime travel. Therefore the Siberian landbridge only theory is destroyed. It must be considered a possibility of maritime voyages from other parts of the world into the New World."

 

[xsited1]

Who taught early americans to build pyramids and write in heiroglyphs?

Gunny. Now you know.

 

[Shogun]

then provide some links and cite your sources. I'm not interested in your "us vs them" take on the smithsonian. If you have evidence then present it. That is how science works.


I;ll start


Study supports single main migration across Bering Strait

a unique genetic variant is widespread in Native Americans across both American continents - suggesting that the first humans in the Americas came in a single migration or multiple waves from a single source, not in waves of migrations from different sources. The variant, which is not part of a gene and has no biological function, has not been found in genetic studies of people elsewhere in the world except eastern Siberia.

The researchers say the variant likely occurred shortly prior to migration to the Americas, or immediately afterwards.

'We have reasonably clear genetic evidence that the most likely candidate for the source of Native American populations is somewhere in east Asia,' says Noah A. Rosenberg, PhD, assistant professor of human genetics and assistant research professor of bioinformatics at the Centre for Computational Medicine and Biology at the U-M Medical School and assistant research professor at the U-M Life Sciences Institute.

http://www.sciencecentric.com/news/article.php?q=07112809

 

[Munin]

Why do the ancient americans bear such similarities with Jewish and egyptian traditions?

In the case of pyramids :

Pyramids are the most simple form of making a building, for example: if you make a fire then the most easy way to do so is by making a "pyramid" out of wood.

Pyramids have also been made by numerous other people for grave-hills (northern Europe), the forts, rooftops, ... . Their is a certain logic in building, these basic logics are quickly understood by many different people and are getting more advanced by a self-learning process.

Many other inventions from the past often happened in a parallel way: where two men on different parts of the world can invent the exact same thing (Chinese invention of advanced ships that could travel on sea <-> European invention of advanced ships that could travel on sea).

There are also a lot of cultural similarities between people based upon being all human. Could it be that genes (DNA) are responsible for it? America & Africa (where both Jews and Egyptians are from) used to be connected a long time ago, so it could be that their people were descendent from the same race.

 

[KittenKoder]

We have recreated several possible ways in which it could be done easily by ancient cultures who had even basic levels of mathematics. The ancient Egyptians had advanced mathematics, their entire culture was based on math. Not sure about the others but it's not a stretch to think that they to had the same levels if not close, since we also learned that the ancient Egyptians actually traveled to other parts of the world and even traded with some of the Americas occasionally. Why is it so hard for people to just admit that humans are smart when we try to be?

I think people need to be taught before they can be smart. The question is where did anyone learn anything from? I think the Mayans learned things on their own but also advanced on the knowledge they brought with them from the old world.

So ... we didn't invent the computer? Someone came down and somehow taught the entire world how to make computers without leaving any evidence?

This is just lame, we are a smart species, that's what makes us different from other animals. Why can't humans just take credit for being able to figure things out and doing the right thing? This is why I hate religious extremists of all walks.

 

[Truthspeaker]

then provide some links and cite your sources. I'm not interested in your "us vs them" take on the smithsonian. If you have evidence then present it. That is how science works.


I;ll start


Study supports single main migration across Bering Strait

a unique genetic variant is widespread in Native Americans across both American continents - suggesting that the first humans in the Americas came in a single migration or multiple waves from a single source, not in waves of migrations from different sources. The variant, which is not part of a gene and has no biological function, has not been found in genetic studies of people elsewhere in the world except eastern Siberia.

The researchers say the variant likely occurred shortly prior to migration to the Americas, or immediately afterwards.

'We have reasonably clear genetic evidence that the most likely candidate for the source of Native American populations is somewhere in east Asia,' says Noah A. Rosenberg, PhD, assistant professor of human genetics and assistant research professor of bioinformatics at the Centre for Computational Medicine and Biology at the U-M Medical School and assistant research professor at the U-M Life Sciences Institute.

Science Centric | News | Study supports single main migration across Bering Strait

Now it's not possible to prove either way right now, since both sides only have theories. But what I want for people to realize is the just the plausibility of my argument. Most of the information I am getting is from books and I can't really find links to them but maybe I will. See Dr. Hugh Nibley's "Lehi in the Desert and the World of the Jaredites."
"An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon." By archaeologist John L. Sorenson
Michael Cohn's "The Maya" the world's foremost authority on Meso-American archaeology.

If we can have a healthy discussion, rather than trying to prove who's right and who's wrong(which is impossible). I'll get you some links though, just let me do a little more google searching.

 

[KittenKoder]

then provide some links and cite your sources. I'm not interested in your "us vs them" take on the smithsonian. If you have evidence then present it. That is how science works.


I;ll start


Study supports single main migration across Bering Strait

a unique genetic variant is widespread in Native Americans across both American continents - suggesting that the first humans in the Americas came in a single migration or multiple waves from a single source, not in waves of migrations from different sources. The variant, which is not part of a gene and has no biological function, has not been found in genetic studies of people elsewhere in the world except eastern Siberia.

The researchers say the variant likely occurred shortly prior to migration to the Americas, or immediately afterwards.

'We have reasonably clear genetic evidence that the most likely candidate for the source of Native American populations is somewhere in east Asia,' says Noah A. Rosenberg, PhD, assistant professor of human genetics and assistant research professor of bioinformatics at the Centre for Computational Medicine and Biology at the U-M Medical School and assistant research professor at the U-M Life Sciences Institute.

Science Centric | News | Study supports single main migration across Bering Strait

Now it's not possible to prove either way right now, since both sides only have theories. But what I want for people to realize is the just the plausibility of my argument. Most of the information I am getting is from books and I can't really find links to them but maybe I will. See Dr. Hugh Nibley's "Lehi in the Desert and the World of the Jaredites."
"An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon." By archaeologist John L. Sorenson
Michael Cohn's "The Maya" the world's foremost authority on Meso-American archaeology.

If we can have a healthy discussion, rather than trying to prove who's right and who's wrong(which is impossible). I'll get you some links though, just let me do a little more google searching.

There is no evidence stronger than genetics ... to debate that is like debating that gravity pulls you to the planets surface.

 

[Truthspeaker]

then provide some links and cite your sources. I'm not interested in your "us vs them" take on the smithsonian. If you have evidence then present it. That is how science works.


I;ll start


Study supports single main migration across Bering Strait

a unique genetic variant is widespread in Native Americans across both American continents - suggesting that the first humans in the Americas came in a single migration or multiple waves from a single source, not in waves of migrations from different sources. The variant, which is not part of a gene and has no biological function, has not been found in genetic studies of people elsewhere in the world except eastern Siberia.

The researchers say the variant likely occurred shortly prior to migration to the Americas, or immediately afterwards.

'We have reasonably clear genetic evidence that the most likely candidate for the source of Native American populations is somewhere in east Asia,' says Noah A. Rosenberg, PhD, assistant professor of human genetics and assistant research professor of bioinformatics at the Centre for Computational Medicine and Biology at the U-M Medical School and assistant research professor at the U-M Life Sciences Institute.

Science Centric | News | Study supports single main migration across Bering Strait

Now it's not possible to prove either way right now, since both sides only have theories. But what I want for people to realize is the just the plausibility of my argument. Most of the information I am getting is from books and I can't really find links to them but maybe I will. See Dr. Hugh Nibley's "Lehi in the Desert and the World of the Jaredites."
"An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon." By archaeologist John L. Sorenson
Michael Cohn's "The Maya" the world's foremost authority on Meso-American archaeology.

If we can have a healthy discussion, rather than trying to prove who's right and who's wrong(which is impossible). I'll get you some links though, just let me do a little more google searching.

There is no evidence stronger than genetics ... to debate that is like debating that gravity pulls you to the planets surface.

You know what is rich, is that in that article put forth by the university of Michigan, they claimed to have evidence but didn't cite any of their research except for saying"We found evidence."
Go look at the article. there are no explanations of their findings.
Even if there is evidence, we all know that it's not proof. There is evidence both ways. I believe it is highly illogical to ignore the evidence of transcontinental oceanic voyages as the Michigan study does. It's just one study by one university and further proves that scientists are divided on their opinions as much as religions are.

 

[KittenKoder]

Some ancient cultures did circumnavigate the globe, Egypt was one. Though much of the evidence was lost because they didn't make it a habit. During this time it is widely thought that they shared legends, lore, and myth from the various cultures they met (naturally). The most profound evidence comes from ancient Egyptian tombs, where they found star charts from as far as South America. The point of all this, Imhotep was also elevated to godhood just before this time and the myth of his advancement seems to appear in many cultures "touched" by the ancient Egyptians. The outline of the myth goes as such:

Imhotep was a great healer and even had helped people thought to be dead. (Scientific evidence he even performed brain surgery successfully)

Imhotep also advanced many other sciences at the time, but they wrote more on his compassion and general goodness.

Imhotep died with the favor of Ra, and all the gods agreed that he should join them by their side.

Imhotep lived long before Jesus (at least the one spoken of in christian myth) and the legend was already well known by the time the christian Jesus was even born. The myth however was modified based on location and the name was always changed, but it shared a common structure. As with many myths and legends in the christian lore they added it to their own, and like all others changed the name and locations to suite their culture at the time. The purpose was to give people a reason for being good, a reward above all others only possible by being compassionate. Just because the myth is common does not mean any one version is fact, the only fact we know is that Imhotep was the greatest doctor in the history of humankind, because of evidence. Brain surgery with our current level of technology hasn't only just been able to match what he had done with very little technology.

 

[Truthspeaker]

Some ancient cultures did circumnavigate the globe, Egypt was one. Though much of the evidence was lost because they didn't make it a habit. During this time it is widely thought that they shared legends, lore, and myth from the various cultures they met (naturally). The most profound evidence comes from ancient Egyptian tombs, where they found star charts from as far as South America. The point of all this, Imhotep was also elevated to godhood just before this time and the myth of his advancement seems to appear in many cultures "touched" by the ancient Egyptians. The outline of the myth goes as such:

Imhotep was a great healer and even had helped people thought to be dead. (Scientific evidence he even performed brain surgery successfully)

Imhotep also advanced many other sciences at the time, but they wrote more on his compassion and general goodness.

Imhotep died with the favor of Ra, and all the gods agreed that he should join them by their side.

Imhotep lived long before Jesus (at least the one spoken of in christian myth) and the legend was already well known by the time the christian Jesus was even born. The myth however was modified based on location and the name was always changed, but it shared a common structure. As with many myths and legends in the christian lore they added it to their own, and like all others changed the name and locations to suite their culture at the time. The purpose was to give people a reason for being good, a reward above all others only possible by being compassionate. Just because the myth is common does not mean any one version is fact, the only fact we know is that Imhotep was the greatest doctor in the history of humankind, because of evidence. Brain surgery with our current level of technology hasn't only just been able to match what he had done with very little technology.

I don't believe he had "little technology". I think many ancient civilizations had far greater technology than we give them. Lots of times technology learned by these civilizations is lost to time and humanity has not always progressed, like scientists would have you think.

I mean really, would you rather have lived in the roman days or the 12th century european countries. Makes me cringe when I think of just their hygiene compared to the greeks and romans.

 

[KittenKoder]

Some ancient cultures did circumnavigate the globe, Egypt was one. Though much of the evidence was lost because they didn't make it a habit. During this time it is widely thought that they shared legends, lore, and myth from the various cultures they met (naturally). The most profound evidence comes from ancient Egyptian tombs, where they found star charts from as far as South America. The point of all this, Imhotep was also elevated to godhood just before this time and the myth of his advancement seems to appear in many cultures "touched" by the ancient Egyptians. The outline of the myth goes as such:

Imhotep was a great healer and even had helped people thought to be dead. (Scientific evidence he even performed brain surgery successfully)

Imhotep also advanced many other sciences at the time, but they wrote more on his compassion and general goodness.

Imhotep died with the favor of Ra, and all the gods agreed that he should join them by their side.

Imhotep lived long before Jesus (at least the one spoken of in christian myth) and the legend was already well known by the time the christian Jesus was even born. The myth however was modified based on location and the name was always changed, but it shared a common structure. As with many myths and legends in the christian lore they added it to their own, and like all others changed the name and locations to suite their culture at the time. The purpose was to give people a reason for being good, a reward above all others only possible by being compassionate. Just because the myth is common does not mean any one version is fact, the only fact we know is that Imhotep was the greatest doctor in the history of humankind, because of evidence. Brain surgery with our current level of technology hasn't only just been able to match what he had done with very little technology.

I don't believe he had "little technology". I think many ancient civilizations had far greater technology than we give them. Lots of times technology learned by these civilizations is lost to time and humanity has not always progressed, like scientists would have you think.

I mean really, would you rather have lived in the roman days or the 12th century european countries. Makes me cringe when I think of just their hygiene compared to the greeks and romans.

Though to think it was so advanced ... the fact that there is no evidence shows they did not utilize advanced metals, so their tools were still primitive by todays standards, and even compared to 12th century. It wasn't the technology that they had advanced, it was knowledge. Much of it was destroyed by wars since then though, the Roman empire wanted to destroy most of it to keep in power by not allowing the people to be smart enough to over throw them, much like how the churches did in Europe. By keeping the masses less informed they were able to control them better. So when Rome invaded Egypt they destroyed almost everything they could, but still there would have been some evidence of higher technology if it existed. Also many of the writings that survived (in the tombs that the Romans could not get into) show how they made the tools from wood, stone, and clay. While advanced compared to what lesser empires were able to, they were less advanced in metals than even the Romans.

 

[Truthspeaker]

Very true, but we digress.
I think it is interesting to find that hebrew writing and egyptian embalming practices were found in the new world right around the times of the early Maya were forming up.

 

[KittenKoder]

Very true, but we digress.
I think it is interesting to find that hebrew writing and egyptian embalming practices were found in the new world right around the times of the early Maya were forming up.

The embalming in Ancient Egypt was not exclusive nor is it a stretch to think that other cultures could not have come up with the same techniques.

As for the writing, there is a serious debate on where the Hebrew tribes traveled and how they got there. While many of the Mormon myths are not proven or even sound, all myth is based in part on fact. Many Hebrew tribes were just lost to history, their paths became untraceable for various reasons.

There is however the logic that languages evolving from the heiroglyphs which all language started from could likely have come to something like Hebrew. Remember, all languages started as pictographs, most evolved into heiroglyphs, but they are not the same as those Ancient Egypt used, heiroglpyhs are pictographs simplified in reality.

 

[Truthspeaker]

Very true, but we digress.
I think it is interesting to find that hebrew writing and egyptian embalming practices were found in the new world right around the times of the early Maya were forming up.

The embalming in Ancient Egypt was not exclusive nor is it a stretch to think that other cultures could not have come up with the same techniques.

As for the writing, there is a serious debate on where the Hebrew tribes traveled and how they got there. While many of the Mormon myths are not proven or even sound, all myth is based in part on fact. Many Hebrew tribes were just lost to history, their paths became untraceable for various reasons.

There is however the logic that languages evolving from the heiroglyphs which all language started from could likely have come to something like Hebrew. Remember, all languages started as pictographs, most evolved into heiroglyphs, but they are not the same as those Ancient Egypt used, heiroglpyhs are pictographs simplified in reality.

When the gold plates were translated, one of the authors, Moroni, said "If the plates were sufficiently large we should have written in hebrew, but the hebrew hath been altered by us also. Wherefore, we write in the characters which we call the reformed Egyptian, which hath been altered by us also, so that none other people knoweth our language."

You have to admit that is a fascinating statement.

 

[KittenKoder]

Very true, but we digress.
I think it is interesting to find that hebrew writing and egyptian embalming practices were found in the new world right around the times of the early Maya were forming up.

The embalming in Ancient Egypt was not exclusive nor is it a stretch to think that other cultures could not have come up with the same techniques.

As for the writing, there is a serious debate on where the Hebrew tribes traveled and how they got there. While many of the Mormon myths are not proven or even sound, all myth is based in part on fact. Many Hebrew tribes were just lost to history, their paths became untraceable for various reasons.

There is however the logic that languages evolving from the heiroglyphs which all language started from could likely have come to something like Hebrew. Remember, all languages started as pictographs, most evolved into heiroglyphs, but they are not the same as those Ancient Egypt used, heiroglpyhs are pictographs simplified in reality.

When the gold plates were translated, one of the authors, Moroni, said "If the plates were sufficiently large we should have written in hebrew, but the hebrew hath been altered by us also. Wherefore, we write in the characters which we call the reformed Egyptian, which hath been altered by us also, so that none other people knoweth our language."

You have to admit that is a fascinating statement.

No, it's not. This is where you lose logic and begin to stray from the logic while sounding like you agree. Ancient Egyptian language evolved faster than most people realize. There are actually three versions of their heirogliphics. Then when they started to simplify their language there were at least two (possibly three) versions of Heiretics. The problem is that since they were slaughtered and almost destroyed completely by the Romans (the survivors had to hide out in other cultures) the language was lost, and all forms of it as well. We have barely started to understand some of it, we can only theorize about pronunciation using Arabic as the basis for that. Again, myth is based on fact but is not fact.

 

[Truthspeaker]

The embalming in Ancient Egypt was not exclusive nor is it a stretch to think that other cultures could not have come up with the same techniques.

As for the writing, there is a serious debate on where the Hebrew tribes traveled and how they got there. While many of the Mormon myths are not proven or even sound, all myth is based in part on fact. Many Hebrew tribes were just lost to history, their paths became untraceable for various reasons.

There is however the logic that languages evolving from the heiroglyphs which all language started from could likely have come to something like Hebrew. Remember, all languages started as pictographs, most evolved into heiroglyphs, but they are not the same as those Ancient Egypt used, heiroglpyhs are pictographs simplified in reality.

When the gold plates were translated, one of the authors, Moroni, said "If the plates were sufficiently large we should have written in hebrew, but the hebrew hath been altered by us also. Wherefore, we write in the characters which we call the reformed Egyptian, which hath been altered by us also, so that none other people knoweth our language."

You have to admit that is a fascinating statement.

No, it's not. This is where you lose logic and begin to stray from the logic while sounding like you agree. Ancient Egyptian language evolved faster than most people realize. There are actually three versions of their heirogliphics. Then when they started to simplify their language there were at least two (possibly three) versions of Heiretics. The problem is that since they were slaughtered and almost destroyed completely by the Romans (the survivors had to hide out in other cultures) the language was lost, and all forms of it as well. We have barely started to understand some of it, we can only theorize about pronunciation using Arabic as the basis for that. Again, myth is based on fact but is not fact.

Not fact yet.... But it may yet be proven in our lifetime. You never know what will be unearthed next.
And what do the Romans have to do with Mayan Heiroglyphics. The claim is they took the basic tenets of egyptian across the sea in 600 BC, long before the Romans ever invaded Egypt.

 

[Diuretic]

Have you read any Jared Diamond? Very interesting on stuff like this.

 

[KittenKoder]

When the gold plates were translated, one of the authors, Moroni, said "If the plates were sufficiently large we should have written in hebrew, but the hebrew hath been altered by us also. Wherefore, we write in the characters which we call the reformed Egyptian, which hath been altered by us also, so that none other people knoweth our language."

You have to admit that is a fascinating statement.

No, it's not. This is where you lose logic and begin to stray from the logic while sounding like you agree. Ancient Egyptian language evolved faster than most people realize. There are actually three versions of their heirogliphics. Then when they started to simplify their language there were at least two (possibly three) versions of Heiretics. The problem is that since they were slaughtered and almost destroyed completely by the Romans (the survivors had to hide out in other cultures) the language was lost, and all forms of it as well. We have barely started to understand some of it, we can only theorize about pronunciation using Arabic as the basis for that. Again, myth is based on fact but is not fact.

Not fact yet.... But it may yet be proven in our lifetime. You never know what will be unearthed next.
And what do the Romans have to do with Mayan Heiroglyphics. The claim is they took the basic tenets of egyptian across the sea in 600 BC, long before the Romans ever invaded Egypt.

The Romans destroying Ancient Egypt has a lot to do with how much we know of their language. Because of their destruction (due to a lack of military power) the language they used and all of it's variations were completely lost. This is why it's so easy for people to make false connections to other myths or even invent whole new ones. But each time the myths are eventually proven wrong. One such myth that has been proven inaccurate, for example, was the myth of Jews in Egypt at the time of the great Pharoahs (using the incorrect English word for clarity). There is no evidence to support that there were any, to the contrary there are also no records found in the tombs they would have been recorded mentioning any wandering tribes. One thing about the ancients that makes learning of them so easy is that they stored almost everything in the tombs, once we understand the language written at the time of the tomb being sealed we can find out quite a bit. Then there is no other evidence to support the claim either, archealogical or otherwise.