The Olmec Stone Heads.

[Theowl32]

The coca wasn't completely verifiable. The only chemical from that mummy that 100% verifiable was nicotine. Egypt had nicotine. They just didn't have Tobacco.

First, it's not just one isolated, contaminated mummy. Second, it was coca AND nicotine and it was found in the lungs and stomach of the mummies. It's obvious, the Egyptians traded with the Americas.

Can I get a link for that?

There's a link from Wiki that covers this

Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact theories - Wikipedia

"A television show reported that examination of numerous Sudanese mummies undertaken by Balabanova mirrored what was found in the mummy of Henut Taui.[120] Balabanova suggested that the tobacco may be accounted for since it may have also been known in China and Europe, as indicated by analysis run on human remains from those respective regions. Balabanova proposed that such plants native to the general area may have developed independently, but have since gone extinct.[120]Other explanations include fraud, though curator Alfred Grimm of the Egyptian Museum in Munich disputes this.[120] Skeptical of Balabanova's findings, Rosalie David, Keeper of Egyptology at the Manchester Museum, had similar tests performed on samples taken from the Manchester mummy collection and reported that two of the tissue samples and one hair sample did test positive for nicotine.[120] Sources of nicotine other than tobacco and sources of cocaine in the Old World are discussed by the British biologist Duncan Edlin.[121]"

I can imagine that coca and nicotine were worth a fortune to the Egyptians.

Not on topic, but evidence of travels pre-Columbus is: 1421. The book is combination of detective story and historic novel and complies a massive amound or evidence, artifacts and DNA to back up its main thesis

New PBS Documentary, "1421: When China Discovered the World," Re-writes Global History in 2004 | PBS About

What would your theory be as to why they would not have grown such valuable crops in Egypt instead of setting off on great journeys to bring it back from the Americas?

There is no historical data that shows that those things were grown anywhere in Africa prior to 1492. Unless, there is something.

Even if there was something, then those crops would have been abundant enough that there would be NO QUESTION. Meaning, those things would have certainly been cultivated and grown on a rather mass scale.

Right?

Something about it is missing and does not make sense in regards to the notion that those things were brought to Africa from the Americas.

Also, if they did do that on a regular basis and they decided the most efficient way was to import it and not cultivate it, and those things were brought to Egypt on a rather regular basis, then how did it take so long for so many to not know about the missing continent?

There are aspects about the mummies being buried with these things that are not fitting logically. Those are just two things.

Why aren't we growing coca and tobacco everywhere?

They are both grown in plentiful abundance all over the world.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Not all Olmec Art was the Olmec Giant heads.

A lot of Olmec Art looked East Asian.

The first statue in this series is doing his best Dr Evil impression. "One hundred billion dollars".

If real evidence is found that changes dates or emigrations the scientific community puts that information out very quickly after various scientists in that field verify it. The conspiracy theories are no more valid than bigfoot sightings.

 

[Theowl32]

First, it's not just one isolated, contaminated mummy. Second, it was coca AND nicotine and it was found in the lungs and stomach of the mummies. It's obvious, the Egyptians traded with the Americas.

Can I get a link for that?

There's a link from Wiki that covers this

Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact theories - Wikipedia

"A television show reported that examination of numerous Sudanese mummies undertaken by Balabanova mirrored what was found in the mummy of Henut Taui.[120] Balabanova suggested that the tobacco may be accounted for since it may have also been known in China and Europe, as indicated by analysis run on human remains from those respective regions. Balabanova proposed that such plants native to the general area may have developed independently, but have since gone extinct.[120]Other explanations include fraud, though curator Alfred Grimm of the Egyptian Museum in Munich disputes this.[120] Skeptical of Balabanova's findings, Rosalie David, Keeper of Egyptology at the Manchester Museum, had similar tests performed on samples taken from the Manchester mummy collection and reported that two of the tissue samples and one hair sample did test positive for nicotine.[120] Sources of nicotine other than tobacco and sources of cocaine in the Old World are discussed by the British biologist Duncan Edlin.[121]"

I can imagine that coca and nicotine were worth a fortune to the Egyptians.

Not on topic, but evidence of travels pre-Columbus is: 1421. The book is combination of detective story and historic novel and complies a massive amound or evidence, artifacts and DNA to back up its main thesis

New PBS Documentary, "1421: When China Discovered the World," Re-writes Global History in 2004 | PBS About

What would your theory be as to why they would not have grown such valuable crops in Egypt instead of setting off on great journeys to bring it back from the Americas?

There is no historical data that shows that those things were grown anywhere in Africa prior to 1492. Unless, there is something.

Even if there was something, then those crops would have been abundant enough that there would be NO QUESTION. Meaning, those things would have certainly been cultivated and grown on a rather mass scale.

Right?

Something about it is missing and does not make sense in regards to the notion that those things were brought to Africa from the Americas.

Also, if they did do that on a regular basis and they decided the most efficient way was to import it and not cultivate it, and those things were brought to Egypt on a rather regular basis, then how did it take so long for so many to not know about the missing continent?

There are aspects about the mummies being buried with these things that are not fitting logically. Those are just two things.

Why aren't we growing coca and tobacco everywhere?

We don't have to worry about it now.. We trade.
Back then, it would seem more feasible to learn how to grow it instead of rowing for a year.
Pure opinion, of course.

Yes, that is one of the big points. Here is where we are with the mummy claims.

It is being suggested that the ancient Egyptian valued cocoa and tobacco so much that they had it buried with some mummies. That is based on the fact that some scientist did tissue samples and they found nicotine. Well, that in itself proves very little since so many vegetables contain nicotine.

The suggestion is that Egyptians were so sea worthy (none were more advanced btw than Polynesians) that they went to the Americas to get these valuable commodities. However, they did not see fit to cultivate these things themselves.

Now, the more plausible possibility is their trade relations with the ancient Chinese people etc, who also traded with Polynesian, who I do believe reached the Americas in BC era.

Now, that I can see. I also happen to think the Natives held shared relationships with those Polynesians along with Asians. That, we can clearly see in the Natives.

Now, back to the op and those statues that do clearly look negroid. I do think they also do look Polynesian and that is more than likely the shared or closer relationship and not negros from west or North Africa. That, makes no sense.

Admittedly though, those statues truly look negroid to me.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

First, it's not just one isolated, contaminated mummy. Second, it was coca AND nicotine and it was found in the lungs and stomach of the mummies. It's obvious, the Egyptians traded with the Americas.

Can I get a link for that?

There's a link from Wiki that covers this

Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact theories - Wikipedia

"A television show reported that examination of numerous Sudanese mummies undertaken by Balabanova mirrored what was found in the mummy of Henut Taui.[120] Balabanova suggested that the tobacco may be accounted for since it may have also been known in China and Europe, as indicated by analysis run on human remains from those respective regions. Balabanova proposed that such plants native to the general area may have developed independently, but have since gone extinct.[120]Other explanations include fraud, though curator Alfred Grimm of the Egyptian Museum in Munich disputes this.[120] Skeptical of Balabanova's findings, Rosalie David, Keeper of Egyptology at the Manchester Museum, had similar tests performed on samples taken from the Manchester mummy collection and reported that two of the tissue samples and one hair sample did test positive for nicotine.[120] Sources of nicotine other than tobacco and sources of cocaine in the Old World are discussed by the British biologist Duncan Edlin.[121]"

I can imagine that coca and nicotine were worth a fortune to the Egyptians.

Not on topic, but evidence of travels pre-Columbus is: 1421. The book is combination of detective story and historic novel and complies a massive amound or evidence, artifacts and DNA to back up its main thesis

New PBS Documentary, "1421: When China Discovered the World," Re-writes Global History in 2004 | PBS About

What would your theory be as to why they would not have grown such valuable crops in Egypt instead of setting off on great journeys to bring it back from the Americas?

There is no historical data that shows that those things were grown anywhere in Africa prior to 1492. Unless, there is something.

Even if there was something, then those crops would have been abundant enough that there would be NO QUESTION. Meaning, those things would have certainly been cultivated and grown on a rather mass scale.

Right?

Something about it is missing and does not make sense in regards to the notion that those things were brought to Africa from the Americas.

Also, if they did do that on a regular basis and they decided the most efficient way was to import it and not cultivate it, and those things were brought to Egypt on a rather regular basis, then how did it take so long for so many to not know about the missing continent?

There are aspects about the mummies being buried with these things that are not fitting logically. Those are just two things.

Why aren't we growing coca and tobacco everywhere?

They are both grown in plentiful abundance all over the world.

Do you have the same chart from 1200 BCE?

 

[Theowl32]

Can I get a link for that?

There's a link from Wiki that covers this

Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact theories - Wikipedia

"A television show reported that examination of numerous Sudanese mummies undertaken by Balabanova mirrored what was found in the mummy of Henut Taui.[120] Balabanova suggested that the tobacco may be accounted for since it may have also been known in China and Europe, as indicated by analysis run on human remains from those respective regions. Balabanova proposed that such plants native to the general area may have developed independently, but have since gone extinct.[120]Other explanations include fraud, though curator Alfred Grimm of the Egyptian Museum in Munich disputes this.[120] Skeptical of Balabanova's findings, Rosalie David, Keeper of Egyptology at the Manchester Museum, had similar tests performed on samples taken from the Manchester mummy collection and reported that two of the tissue samples and one hair sample did test positive for nicotine.[120] Sources of nicotine other than tobacco and sources of cocaine in the Old World are discussed by the British biologist Duncan Edlin.[121]"

I can imagine that coca and nicotine were worth a fortune to the Egyptians.

Not on topic, but evidence of travels pre-Columbus is: 1421. The book is combination of detective story and historic novel and complies a massive amound or evidence, artifacts and DNA to back up its main thesis

New PBS Documentary, "1421: When China Discovered the World," Re-writes Global History in 2004 | PBS About

What would your theory be as to why they would not have grown such valuable crops in Egypt instead of setting off on great journeys to bring it back from the Americas?

There is no historical data that shows that those things were grown anywhere in Africa prior to 1492. Unless, there is something.

Even if there was something, then those crops would have been abundant enough that there would be NO QUESTION. Meaning, those things would have certainly been cultivated and grown on a rather mass scale.

Right?

Something about it is missing and does not make sense in regards to the notion that those things were brought to Africa from the Americas.

Also, if they did do that on a regular basis and they decided the most efficient way was to import it and not cultivate it, and those things were brought to Egypt on a rather regular basis, then how did it take so long for so many to not know about the missing continent?

There are aspects about the mummies being buried with these things that are not fitting logically. Those are just two things.

Why aren't we growing coca and tobacco everywhere?

They are both grown in plentiful abundance all over the world.

Do you have the same chart from 1200 BCE?

No..none exist prior to 1492.

However, I am sure we would have A LOT more evidence than a handful of mummies having tissue that may have contained trace amounts of nicotine according to one or two scientists.

If it was that valuable, we would indeed have a lot more information about tobacco and cocoa being traded and cultivated in those regions during ancient times.

As of now, there is nothing prior to the 1400s. The same goes for potatoes and maze.

 

[TNHarley]

Can I get a link for that?

There's a link from Wiki that covers this

Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact theories - Wikipedia

"A television show reported that examination of numerous Sudanese mummies undertaken by Balabanova mirrored what was found in the mummy of Henut Taui.[120] Balabanova suggested that the tobacco may be accounted for since it may have also been known in China and Europe, as indicated by analysis run on human remains from those respective regions. Balabanova proposed that such plants native to the general area may have developed independently, but have since gone extinct.[120]Other explanations include fraud, though curator Alfred Grimm of the Egyptian Museum in Munich disputes this.[120] Skeptical of Balabanova's findings, Rosalie David, Keeper of Egyptology at the Manchester Museum, had similar tests performed on samples taken from the Manchester mummy collection and reported that two of the tissue samples and one hair sample did test positive for nicotine.[120] Sources of nicotine other than tobacco and sources of cocaine in the Old World are discussed by the British biologist Duncan Edlin.[121]"

I can imagine that coca and nicotine were worth a fortune to the Egyptians.

Not on topic, but evidence of travels pre-Columbus is: 1421. The book is combination of detective story and historic novel and complies a massive amound or evidence, artifacts and DNA to back up its main thesis

New PBS Documentary, "1421: When China Discovered the World," Re-writes Global History in 2004 | PBS About

What would your theory be as to why they would not have grown such valuable crops in Egypt instead of setting off on great journeys to bring it back from the Americas?

There is no historical data that shows that those things were grown anywhere in Africa prior to 1492. Unless, there is something.

Even if there was something, then those crops would have been abundant enough that there would be NO QUESTION. Meaning, those things would have certainly been cultivated and grown on a rather mass scale.

Right?

Something about it is missing and does not make sense in regards to the notion that those things were brought to Africa from the Americas.

Also, if they did do that on a regular basis and they decided the most efficient way was to import it and not cultivate it, and those things were brought to Egypt on a rather regular basis, then how did it take so long for so many to not know about the missing continent?

There are aspects about the mummies being buried with these things that are not fitting logically. Those are just two things.

Why aren't we growing coca and tobacco everywhere?

We don't have to worry about it now.. We trade.
Back then, it would seem more feasible to learn how to grow it instead of rowing for a year.
Pure opinion, of course.

Yes, that is one of the big points. Here is where we are with the mummy claims.

It is being suggested that the ancient Egyptian valued cocoa and tobacco so much that they had it buried with some mummies. That is based on the fact that some scientist did tissue samples and they found nicotine. Well, that in itself proves very little since so many vegetables contain nicotine.

The suggestion is that Egyptians were so sea worthy (none were more advanced btw than Polynesians) that they went to the Americas to get these valuable commodities. However, they did not see fit to cultivate these things themselves.

Now, the more plausible possibility is their trade relations with the ancient Chinese people etc, who also traded with Polynesian, who I do believe reached the Americas in BC era.

Now, that I can see. I also happen to think the Natives held shared relationships with those Polynesians along with Asians. That, we can clearly see in the Natives.

Now, back to the op and those statues that do clearly look negroid. I do think they also do look Polynesian and that is more than likely the shared or closer relationship and not negros from west or North Africa. That, makes no sense.

Admittedly though, those statues truly look negroid to me.

Our Natives are Asian. That's why you see it. They supposedly crossed over around 20K years ago over a land bridge.
Beringia - Wikipedia
I have never heard the Chinese got here BC

 

[TNHarley]

I think they look Negroid because of the nose. Asians are close to blacks. Asians can have big noses.
In fact, there is a guy trying to prove Africans settled China first. He claims Asians are closer to Africans than anyone.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

There's a link from Wiki that covers this

Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact theories - Wikipedia

"A television show reported that examination of numerous Sudanese mummies undertaken by Balabanova mirrored what was found in the mummy of Henut Taui.[120] Balabanova suggested that the tobacco may be accounted for since it may have also been known in China and Europe, as indicated by analysis run on human remains from those respective regions. Balabanova proposed that such plants native to the general area may have developed independently, but have since gone extinct.[120]Other explanations include fraud, though curator Alfred Grimm of the Egyptian Museum in Munich disputes this.[120] Skeptical of Balabanova's findings, Rosalie David, Keeper of Egyptology at the Manchester Museum, had similar tests performed on samples taken from the Manchester mummy collection and reported that two of the tissue samples and one hair sample did test positive for nicotine.[120] Sources of nicotine other than tobacco and sources of cocaine in the Old World are discussed by the British biologist Duncan Edlin.[121]"

I can imagine that coca and nicotine were worth a fortune to the Egyptians.

Not on topic, but evidence of travels pre-Columbus is: 1421. The book is combination of detective story and historic novel and complies a massive amound or evidence, artifacts and DNA to back up its main thesis

New PBS Documentary, "1421: When China Discovered the World," Re-writes Global History in 2004 | PBS About

What would your theory be as to why they would not have grown such valuable crops in Egypt instead of setting off on great journeys to bring it back from the Americas?

There is no historical data that shows that those things were grown anywhere in Africa prior to 1492. Unless, there is something.

Even if there was something, then those crops would have been abundant enough that there would be NO QUESTION. Meaning, those things would have certainly been cultivated and grown on a rather mass scale.

Right?

Something about it is missing and does not make sense in regards to the notion that those things were brought to Africa from the Americas.

Also, if they did do that on a regular basis and they decided the most efficient way was to import it and not cultivate it, and those things were brought to Egypt on a rather regular basis, then how did it take so long for so many to not know about the missing continent?

There are aspects about the mummies being buried with these things that are not fitting logically. Those are just two things.

Why aren't we growing coca and tobacco everywhere?

They are both grown in plentiful abundance all over the world.

Do you have the same chart from 1200 BCE?

No..none exist prior to 1492.

However, I am sure we would have A LOT more evidence than a handful of mummies having tissue that may have contained trace amounts of nicotine according to one or two scientists.

If it was that valuable, we would indeed have a lot more information about tobacco and cocoa being traded and cultivated in those regions during ancient times.

As of now, there is nothing prior to the 1400s. The same goes for potatoes and maze.

Oh?

How did Maize wind up in the stonework at Rosslyn Chappel in Scotland in the mid 1400's?

 

[TNHarley]

Of course, blacks settling china makes perfect sense. If the out of Africa theory is correct, that is. And as far as we know, that is what happened.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So, its just bad science that coca AND nicotine are in Egyptian mummies? Was the scientist himself snorting coke while conducting the test?

 

[Marion Morrison]

Not all Olmec Art was the Olmec Giant heads.

A lot of Olmec Art looked East Asian.

¡Oye Chino mang! ¿Que paso en el barrio, Holmes?

 

[TNHarley]

What would your theory be as to why they would not have grown such valuable crops in Egypt instead of setting off on great journeys to bring it back from the Americas?

There is no historical data that shows that those things were grown anywhere in Africa prior to 1492. Unless, there is something.

Even if there was something, then those crops would have been abundant enough that there would be NO QUESTION. Meaning, those things would have certainly been cultivated and grown on a rather mass scale.

Right?

Something about it is missing and does not make sense in regards to the notion that those things were brought to Africa from the Americas.

Also, if they did do that on a regular basis and they decided the most efficient way was to import it and not cultivate it, and those things were brought to Egypt on a rather regular basis, then how did it take so long for so many to not know about the missing continent?

There are aspects about the mummies being buried with these things that are not fitting logically. Those are just two things.

Why aren't we growing coca and tobacco everywhere?

They are both grown in plentiful abundance all over the world.

Do you have the same chart from 1200 BCE?

No..none exist prior to 1492.

However, I am sure we would have A LOT more evidence than a handful of mummies having tissue that may have contained trace amounts of nicotine according to one or two scientists.

If it was that valuable, we would indeed have a lot more information about tobacco and cocoa being traded and cultivated in those regions during ancient times.

As of now, there is nothing prior to the 1400s. The same goes for potatoes and maze.

Oh?

How did Maize wind up in the stonework at Rosslyn Chappel in Scotland in the mid 1400's?

BBC - Religions - Christianity: Rosslyn Chapel
Dr Adrian Dyer, a professional botanist and husband of the Revd Janet Dyer, former Priest in Charge at Rosslyn Chapel, meticulously examined the botanical carvings in the Chapel. He looked at carvings of leaves that are claimed to be curly kale, oak leaves, cactus leaves, sunflowers and three-leaved botanical forms (trefoils).

Broadly speaking, Dr Dyer found the botanical forms in the Chapel to be stylised or conventionalised, not meant to be identifiable plants, with one exception. Hart's-tongue fern, an ancient fronded plant, was growing in Roslin Glen in the fourteenth century and is still found today under Rosslyn Castle. It can be seen, approximately life-size, carved on the Apprentice Pillar.

With respect to the fruits and flowers and their possible symbolism, the three-leaved flowers may be seen as references to the Trinity. However, the flowers in the roof which early guides described as 'daisies' are not true representations of that flower. There are some carvings which are reminiscent of the Madonna lily and may therefore have religious significance.

The Rosslyn 'corn' carvings. Photo: Kjetil Bjornsrud ©
One window in the Chapel is surrounded by carved plants that are claimed to be maize and aloe, two species that are native to North America and had not yet reached Europe by the 15th century, when Rosslyn was built. They have been used to support theories that William Sinclair's grandfather, the explorer Henry I Sinclair, Earl of Orkney, had secretly travelled to the Americas before Columbus.

This idea does not bear scrutiny. Dr Dyer found that there was no attempt to represent a species accurately: the 'maize' and 'aloe' carvings are almost certainly derived from stylized wooden patterns, whose resemblance to recognisable botanical forms is fortuitous.

Much the same conclusion was reached by archaeo-botanist Dr Brian Moffat, who also noted that the carvings of botanical forms are not naturalistic nor accurate. He found a highly stylised Arum Lily the most likely candidate for what has been identified as American maize.

As for the 'aloes', Dr Moffat points out that the consumer would never have seen the plant, only the sap which was used medicinally. There is no citation of either 'maize' or 'aloe' in the Oxford English Dictionary before the mid-sixteenth century; aloe was not imported to Spain until 1561. Moffat adds that "In common with the majority of Rosslyn's foliage, little life is on display and precious little nature."

 

[TNHarley]

So, its just bad science that coca AND nicotine are in Egyptian mummies? Was the scientist himself snorting coke while conducting the test?

Do you not find it the least bit curious that he is the only one to have found that in mummies and when another scientist tried to test it, they weren't even there for her to?

 

[Uncensored2008]

These are the Olmec Stone heads (there are others) found in the central Mexico region in the 19th century. They were carbon dated to 1200-600BCE.

That means the Olmecs were there long before the Incas or Aztecs or Mayan cultures began. At least according to all accepted history as to when those dynasties began.

I know a guy (biggest black supremacist I know) claims that these heads prove Africans were in the Americas even before the Natives. However, that fact has been written out of history.

Obviously I think he is ridiculous. I mean you have to hear him. He believes Africans began the Buddhist religion etc and ALL of Asia was settled by Africans.

Anyway, I have admit. Those stone heads sure look African (clear negroid features) to me. Anyone know anything about this? I Googled it and many seem to agree that it proves Africans were indeed in the Americas long before Columbus obviously. However, if they are indeed Africans, that would possibly mean they were indeed here before Natives.

Which I know must be impossible.

Actually, this is all well known.

The original Americans, here 10,000 years before the Indians are related to Australian Aborigines, not Africans. The rout traveled is from the South Pacific to South America.

First Americans were Black according to BBC documentary – Originalpeople.org

Because facts don't fit with the hate memes of the left, they ignore them. But the FACT that there were a black people in America before the Indians is established fact, as is the fact that the Indians engaged in total genocide of them.

 

[Theowl32]

What would your theory be as to why they would not have grown such valuable crops in Egypt instead of setting off on great journeys to bring it back from the Americas?

There is no historical data that shows that those things were grown anywhere in Africa prior to 1492. Unless, there is something.

Even if there was something, then those crops would have been abundant enough that there would be NO QUESTION. Meaning, those things would have certainly been cultivated and grown on a rather mass scale.

Right?

Something about it is missing and does not make sense in regards to the notion that those things were brought to Africa from the Americas.

Also, if they did do that on a regular basis and they decided the most efficient way was to import it and not cultivate it, and those things were brought to Egypt on a rather regular basis, then how did it take so long for so many to not know about the missing continent?

There are aspects about the mummies being buried with these things that are not fitting logically. Those are just two things.

Why aren't we growing coca and tobacco everywhere?

They are both grown in plentiful abundance all over the world.

Do you have the same chart from 1200 BCE?

No..none exist prior to 1492.

However, I am sure we would have A LOT more evidence than a handful of mummies having tissue that may have contained trace amounts of nicotine according to one or two scientists.

If it was that valuable, we would indeed have a lot more information about tobacco and cocoa being traded and cultivated in those regions during ancient times.

As of now, there is nothing prior to the 1400s. The same goes for potatoes and maze.

Oh?

How did Maize wind up in the stonework at Rosslyn Chappel in Scotland in the mid 1400's?

Yeah, I know about that. Very little explanation about that. It is not that clear that those carvings is actual maize. Oh, it perpetuates certain mythology that is not proven. This fanciful claim, however, has been countered by the argument that these ‘American plants’ were actually common motifs in medieval art, and that they are not as unique as commonly made out to be.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Why aren't we growing coca and tobacco everywhere?

They are both grown in plentiful abundance all over the world.

Do you have the same chart from 1200 BCE?

No..none exist prior to 1492.

However, I am sure we would have A LOT more evidence than a handful of mummies having tissue that may have contained trace amounts of nicotine according to one or two scientists.

If it was that valuable, we would indeed have a lot more information about tobacco and cocoa being traded and cultivated in those regions during ancient times.

As of now, there is nothing prior to the 1400s. The same goes for potatoes and maze.

Oh?

How did Maize wind up in the stonework at Rosslyn Chappel in Scotland in the mid 1400's?

BBC - Religions - Christianity: Rosslyn Chapel
Dr Adrian Dyer, a professional botanist and husband of the Revd Janet Dyer, former Priest in Charge at Rosslyn Chapel, meticulously examined the botanical carvings in the Chapel. He looked at carvings of leaves that are claimed to be curly kale, oak leaves, cactus leaves, sunflowers and three-leaved botanical forms (trefoils).

Broadly speaking, Dr Dyer found the botanical forms in the Chapel to be stylised or conventionalised, not meant to be identifiable plants, with one exception. Hart's-tongue fern, an ancient fronded plant, was growing in Roslin Glen in the fourteenth century and is still found today under Rosslyn Castle. It can be seen, approximately life-size, carved on the Apprentice Pillar.

With respect to the fruits and flowers and their possible symbolism, the three-leaved flowers may be seen as references to the Trinity. However, the flowers in the roof which early guides described as 'daisies' are not true representations of that flower. There are some carvings which are reminiscent of the Madonna lily and may therefore have religious significance.

The Rosslyn 'corn' carvings. Photo: Kjetil Bjornsrud ©
One window in the Chapel is surrounded by carved plants that are claimed to be maize and aloe, two species that are native to North America and had not yet reached Europe by the 15th century, when Rosslyn was built. They have been used to support theories that William Sinclair's grandfather, the explorer Henry I Sinclair, Earl of Orkney, had secretly travelled to the Americas before Columbus.

This idea does not bear scrutiny. Dr Dyer found that there was no attempt to represent a species accurately: the 'maize' and 'aloe' carvings are almost certainly derived from stylized wooden patterns, whose resemblance to recognisable botanical forms is fortuitous.

Much the same conclusion was reached by archaeo-botanist Dr Brian Moffat, who also noted that the carvings of botanical forms are not naturalistic nor accurate. He found a highly stylised Arum Lily the most likely candidate for what has been identified as American maize.

As for the 'aloes', Dr Moffat points out that the consumer would never have seen the plant, only the sap which was used medicinally. There is no citation of either 'maize' or 'aloe' in the Oxford English Dictionary before the mid-sixteenth century; aloe was not imported to Spain until 1561. Moffat adds that "In common with the majority of Rosslyn's foliage, little life is on display and precious little nature."

Riiiiiiiigght.

 

[TNHarley]

These are the Olmec Stone heads (there are others) found in the central Mexico region in the 19th century. They were carbon dated to 1200-600BCE.

That means the Olmecs were there long before the Incas or Aztecs or Mayan cultures began. At least according to all accepted history as to when those dynasties began.

I know a guy (biggest black supremacist I know) claims that these heads prove Africans were in the Americas even before the Natives. However, that fact has been written out of history.

Obviously I think he is ridiculous. I mean you have to hear him. He believes Africans began the Buddhist religion etc and ALL of Asia was settled by Africans.

Anyway, I have admit. Those stone heads sure look African (clear negroid features) to me. Anyone know anything about this? I Googled it and many seem to agree that it proves Africans were indeed in the Americas long before Columbus obviously. However, if they are indeed Africans, that would possibly mean they were indeed here before Natives.

Which I know must be impossible.

Actually, this is all well known.

The original Americans, here 10,000 years before the Indians are related to Australian Aborigines, not Africans. The rout traveled is from the South Pacific to South America.

First Americans were Black according to BBC documentary – Originalpeople.org

Because facts don't fit with the hate memes of the left, they ignore them. But the FACT that there were a black people in America before the Indians is established fact, as is the fact that the Indians engaged in total genocide of them.

That's awesome!
But one thing.. it doesn't disprove the Bering land bridge theory. It just suggests it happened earlier than estimated. A cave painting is their proof they came by ocean....

 

[TNHarley]

They are both grown in plentiful abundance all over the world.

Do you have the same chart from 1200 BCE?

No..none exist prior to 1492.

However, I am sure we would have A LOT more evidence than a handful of mummies having tissue that may have contained trace amounts of nicotine according to one or two scientists.

If it was that valuable, we would indeed have a lot more information about tobacco and cocoa being traded and cultivated in those regions during ancient times.

As of now, there is nothing prior to the 1400s. The same goes for potatoes and maze.

Oh?

How did Maize wind up in the stonework at Rosslyn Chappel in Scotland in the mid 1400's?

BBC - Religions - Christianity: Rosslyn Chapel
Dr Adrian Dyer, a professional botanist and husband of the Revd Janet Dyer, former Priest in Charge at Rosslyn Chapel, meticulously examined the botanical carvings in the Chapel. He looked at carvings of leaves that are claimed to be curly kale, oak leaves, cactus leaves, sunflowers and three-leaved botanical forms (trefoils).

Broadly speaking, Dr Dyer found the botanical forms in the Chapel to be stylised or conventionalised, not meant to be identifiable plants, with one exception. Hart's-tongue fern, an ancient fronded plant, was growing in Roslin Glen in the fourteenth century and is still found today under Rosslyn Castle. It can be seen, approximately life-size, carved on the Apprentice Pillar.

With respect to the fruits and flowers and their possible symbolism, the three-leaved flowers may be seen as references to the Trinity. However, the flowers in the roof which early guides described as 'daisies' are not true representations of that flower. There are some carvings which are reminiscent of the Madonna lily and may therefore have religious significance.

The Rosslyn 'corn' carvings. Photo: Kjetil Bjornsrud ©
One window in the Chapel is surrounded by carved plants that are claimed to be maize and aloe, two species that are native to North America and had not yet reached Europe by the 15th century, when Rosslyn was built. They have been used to support theories that William Sinclair's grandfather, the explorer Henry I Sinclair, Earl of Orkney, had secretly travelled to the Americas before Columbus.

This idea does not bear scrutiny. Dr Dyer found that there was no attempt to represent a species accurately: the 'maize' and 'aloe' carvings are almost certainly derived from stylized wooden patterns, whose resemblance to recognisable botanical forms is fortuitous.

Much the same conclusion was reached by archaeo-botanist Dr Brian Moffat, who also noted that the carvings of botanical forms are not naturalistic nor accurate. He found a highly stylised Arum Lily the most likely candidate for what has been identified as American maize.

As for the 'aloes', Dr Moffat points out that the consumer would never have seen the plant, only the sap which was used medicinally. There is no citation of either 'maize' or 'aloe' in the Oxford English Dictionary before the mid-sixteenth century; aloe was not imported to Spain until 1561. Moffat adds that "In common with the majority of Rosslyn's foliage, little life is on display and precious little nature."

Riiiiiiiigght.

Right? Botanists wouldn't know shit about corn!
Dictionaries aren't good references either!
LOL

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So, its just bad science that coca AND nicotine are in Egyptian mummies? Was the scientist himself snorting coke while conducting the test?

Do you not find it the least bit curious that he is the only one to have found that in mummies and when another scientist tried to test it, they weren't even there for her to?

"Abstract Data are presented on the biochemical findings in several intermal organs from an Egyptian mummy with a 14C-dating of approximately 950 B.C. By use of radio immunoassay systems and gas chromatography/mass spectrometry, significant amounts of various drugs were detected in internal organs (lung, liver, stomach, intestines) as well as in hair, bone, skin/muscle and tendon. These analyses revealed a significant deposition of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), nicotine (and its metabolite cotinine) and cocaine in the tissue from the mummy. The concentration profiles additionally provide evidence for the preferential ways of consumption: Thus, the highest levels of THC in lung specimens point to an inhalation of this drug -- as it has been assumed from known ritual smoking ceremonies --, while nicotine and cocaine containing drugs showed their highest concentrations in the intestines and liver, so that they seem to have been consumed perorally. Furthermore, a histopathological examination of the internal organ tissues revealed some evidence for the underlying disease and the probable cause of death. Thus, a severe and presumably recurrent intravital pulmonary bleeding, most obviously due to a parasitosis affecting the lung, was observed."

Presence of drugs in different tissues of an egyptian mummy

From a journal of analytical chemistry.

BTW, the scientific community especially the Smithsonian is notorious for destroying "anomalous" artifacts

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Do you have the same chart from 1200 BCE?

No..none exist prior to 1492.

However, I am sure we would have A LOT more evidence than a handful of mummies having tissue that may have contained trace amounts of nicotine according to one or two scientists.

If it was that valuable, we would indeed have a lot more information about tobacco and cocoa being traded and cultivated in those regions during ancient times.

As of now, there is nothing prior to the 1400s. The same goes for potatoes and maze.

Oh?

How did Maize wind up in the stonework at Rosslyn Chappel in Scotland in the mid 1400's?

BBC - Religions - Christianity: Rosslyn Chapel
Dr Adrian Dyer, a professional botanist and husband of the Revd Janet Dyer, former Priest in Charge at Rosslyn Chapel, meticulously examined the botanical carvings in the Chapel. He looked at carvings of leaves that are claimed to be curly kale, oak leaves, cactus leaves, sunflowers and three-leaved botanical forms (trefoils).

Broadly speaking, Dr Dyer found the botanical forms in the Chapel to be stylised or conventionalised, not meant to be identifiable plants, with one exception. Hart's-tongue fern, an ancient fronded plant, was growing in Roslin Glen in the fourteenth century and is still found today under Rosslyn Castle. It can be seen, approximately life-size, carved on the Apprentice Pillar.

With respect to the fruits and flowers and their possible symbolism, the three-leaved flowers may be seen as references to the Trinity. However, the flowers in the roof which early guides described as 'daisies' are not true representations of that flower. There are some carvings which are reminiscent of the Madonna lily and may therefore have religious significance.

The Rosslyn 'corn' carvings. Photo: Kjetil Bjornsrud ©
One window in the Chapel is surrounded by carved plants that are claimed to be maize and aloe, two species that are native to North America and had not yet reached Europe by the 15th century, when Rosslyn was built. They have been used to support theories that William Sinclair's grandfather, the explorer Henry I Sinclair, Earl of Orkney, had secretly travelled to the Americas before Columbus.

This idea does not bear scrutiny. Dr Dyer found that there was no attempt to represent a species accurately: the 'maize' and 'aloe' carvings are almost certainly derived from stylized wooden patterns, whose resemblance to recognisable botanical forms is fortuitous.

Much the same conclusion was reached by archaeo-botanist Dr Brian Moffat, who also noted that the carvings of botanical forms are not naturalistic nor accurate. He found a highly stylised Arum Lily the most likely candidate for what has been identified as American maize.

As for the 'aloes', Dr Moffat points out that the consumer would never have seen the plant, only the sap which was used medicinally. There is no citation of either 'maize' or 'aloe' in the Oxford English Dictionary before the mid-sixteenth century; aloe was not imported to Spain until 1561. Moffat adds that "In common with the majority of Rosslyn's foliage, little life is on display and precious little nature."

Riiiiiiiigght.

Right? Botanists wouldn't know shit about corn!
Dictionaries aren't good references either!
LOL

Who to believe, a random botanist or your lying eyes?