The Olmec Stone Heads.

[Theowl32]

As far as I know you can't carbon date inert stone.

Yeah, whatever or however they figure out how old a certain carving is. Yeah, that process.

 

[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.

Established fact? LOL

While it is possible that people related to Australian Aborigines arrived in the Americas, there is no real evidence that they did. Your 'evidence' is from 1999. Have they done DNA testing on those skulls? Assuming that there is some DNA still in the bone, that would answer the question very easily.

It is very likely that there were instances of contact between the New World and the Old- there isn't much evidence.

There is evidence of Polynesian contact- sweet potatoes from SA ended up in Polynesia- but pigs from Polynesia didn't make to the New World. Viking contact rather dead ended up in the North. The Chinese were certainly capable of reaching the New World as were the Japanese and the Koreans- but there is evidence that they did so.

The article I posted is from 1999, the discovery of these people was made in the 1950s. Tons of DNA testing has been done.

A DNA Search for the First Americans Links Amazon Groups to Indigenous Australians | Science | Smithsonian
Blacks Are The First True Americans You Can't Go Back To Africa - Hidden Lies in History - SoPoCo.net
Native American origins: When the DNA points two ways

BECAUSE the facts don't fit the racist narrative of the left, with the hatred of whites and everything European, you avoid them.

 

[Syriusly]

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.

Established fact? LOL

While it is possible that people related to Australian Aborigines arrived in the Americas, there is no real evidence that they did. Your 'evidence' is from 1999. Have they done DNA testing on those skulls? Assuming that there is some DNA still in the bone, that would answer the question very easily.

It is very likely that there were instances of contact between the New World and the Old- there isn't much evidence.

There is evidence of Polynesian contact- sweet potatoes from SA ended up in Polynesia- but pigs from Polynesia didn't make to the New World. Viking contact rather dead ended up in the North. The Chinese were certainly capable of reaching the New World as were the Japanese and the Koreans- but there is evidence that they did so.

The article I posted is from 1999, the discovery of these people was made in the 1950s. Tons of DNA testing has been done.

A DNA Search for the First Americans Links Amazon Groups to Indigenous Australians | Science | Smithsonian
Blacks Are The First True Americans You Can't Go Back To Africa - Hidden Lies in History - SoPoCo.net
Native American origins: When the DNA points two ways

BECAUSE the facts don't fit the racist narrative of the left, with the hatred of whites and everything European, you avoid them.

LOL...yeah because proto- Aborigines would be so very white....LOL.

The DNA that links these groups had to come from somewhere. Because the groups have about as much in common with Australians as they do with New Guineans, the researchers think that they all share a common ancestor that lived tens of thousands of years ago in Asia but that doesn’t otherwise persist today. One branch of this family tree moved north to Siberia, while the other spread south to New Guinea and Australia. The northern branch likely migrated across the land bridge in a separate surge from the Eurasian founders. The researchers have dubbed this hypothetical second group “Population y” for ypykuéra, or “ancestor” in Tupi, a language spoken by the Suruí and Karitiana.


Read more: A DNA Search for the First Americans Links Amazon Groups to Indigenous Australians | Science | Smithsonian
Give the gift of Smithsonian magazine for only $12! Give the gift of Smithsonian
Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter

And this one? Really? LOL
Blacks Are The First True Americans You Can't Go Back To Africa - Hidden Lies in History - SoPoCo.net

Frankly there is nothing that shows that there was a pre-European population of people descended from what would be called "Negroes" from Africa- ultimately all of us descend from people from Africa.

Your good links report DNA evidence that suggests that there were people who had a common ancestor with Australasians who came probably came from Asia to the New world- along with the traditional population that we know about.

And that is fascinating.

 

[whitehall]

As far as I know you can't carbon date inert stone.

Yeah, whatever or however they figure out how old a certain carving is. Yeah, that process.

Yeah but if you can't authenticate the stuff by scientific analysis you have to conclude that it's a gigantic scam .

 

[Theowl32]

As far as I know you can't carbon date inert stone.

Yeah, whatever or however they figure out how old a certain carving is. Yeah, that process.

Yeah but if you can't authenticate the stuff by scientific analysis you have to conclude that it's a gigantic scam .

What is the scam? They definitely discovered these statues or carvings in the 19th century. That is not in dispute. I think in the 20th century questions arose as a result of the apparent negroid features that it suggests Africans were here prior to Natives as we know it.

Now, they may not use carbon dating, but they are able date things like this within a millenia or so. Based on a few things. Not carbon dating like I said. When those carvings were created is also not in dispute. Around 600 to 1200 BCE.

That would predate the known ancient tribes like the Incas, the Azteca or the Mayans.

 

[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.

Established fact? LOL

While it is possible that people related to Australian Aborigines arrived in the Americas, there is no real evidence that they did. Your 'evidence' is from 1999. Have they done DNA testing on those skulls? Assuming that there is some DNA still in the bone, that would answer the question very easily.

It is very likely that there were instances of contact between the New World and the Old- there isn't much evidence.

There is evidence of Polynesian contact- sweet potatoes from SA ended up in Polynesia- but pigs from Polynesia didn't make to the New World. Viking contact rather dead ended up in the North. The Chinese were certainly capable of reaching the New World as were the Japanese and the Koreans- but there is evidence that they did so.

The article I posted is from 1999, the discovery of these people was made in the 1950s. Tons of DNA testing has been done.

A DNA Search for the First Americans Links Amazon Groups to Indigenous Australians | Science | Smithsonian
Blacks Are The First True Americans You Can't Go Back To Africa - Hidden Lies in History - SoPoCo.net
Native American origins: When the DNA points two ways

BECAUSE the facts don't fit the racist narrative of the left, with the hatred of whites and everything European, you avoid them.

LOL...yeah because proto- Aborigines would be so very white....LOL.

The DNA that links these groups had to come from somewhere. Because the groups have about as much in common with Australians as they do with New Guineans, the researchers think that they all share a common ancestor that lived tens of thousands of years ago in Asia but that doesn’t otherwise persist today. One branch of this family tree moved north to Siberia, while the other spread south to New Guinea and Australia. The northern branch likely migrated across the land bridge in a separate surge from the Eurasian founders. The researchers have dubbed this hypothetical second group “Population y” for ypykuéra, or “ancestor” in Tupi, a language spoken by the Suruí and Karitiana.


Read more: A DNA Search for the First Americans Links Amazon Groups to Indigenous Australians | Science | Smithsonian
Give the gift of Smithsonian magazine for only $12! Give the gift of Smithsonian
Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter

And this one? Really? LOL
Blacks Are The First True Americans You Can't Go Back To Africa - Hidden Lies in History - SoPoCo.net

Frankly there is nothing that shows that there was a pre-European population of people descended from what would be called "Negroes" from Africa- ultimately all of us descend from people from Africa.

Your good links report DNA evidence that suggests that there were people who had a common ancestor with Australasians who came probably came from Asia to the New world- along with the traditional population that we know about.

And that is fascinating.

Excuse your illiteracy; all sources already stated these were not African, but Austrailoid. Again, because it does not fit with your racist agenda, you ignore the facts. You think that since the Indians were in fact worse than the Europeans, it undercuts the hatred you promote of whites.

Alas, facts remain, regardless of your racism.

 

[mamooth]

These are the Olmec Stone heads

Why the faked Time magazine coves in your sig?

Sorry, a TIME Magazine Cover Did Not Predict a Coming Ice Age | TIME.com

 

[surada]

Not all Olmec Art was the Olmec Giant heads.

A lot of Olmec Art looked East Asian.

Looks Asian to me.