Secure Da Bag
Veteran
That makes sense given how the water lead them to nearby land. Imagine being a West African and looking out at the Atlantic Ocean and going, "yep. I'm gonna sail across that, just cause". In 1200 AD.
Why the African continent fell
- Thread starter MischievousMonkey
- Start date
That makes sense given how the water lead them to nearby land. Imagine being a West African and looking out at the Atlantic Ocean and going, "yep. I'm gonna sail across that, just cause". In 1200 AD.
dora_da_destroyer
Master Baker
There is a theory that Africans sailed to the americas before Columbus, there were records of conversations with Indians in the Caribbean who spoke of being visited by black skinned people. There are also loose theories about the Olmec civilization being African. Of course none of this is proven given that Europeans have been de facto in charge of providing us with historical record, but I could see some African setting sail across the Atlantic on some YOLO shyt.That makes sense given how the water lead them to nearby land. Imagine being a West African and looking out at the Atlantic Ocean and going, "yep. I'm gonna sail across that, just cause". In 1200 AD.
The Wall Is Undefeated!
Superstar
Ironically one of the emperors of Mali, Abu Bakr II abdicated his throne to Mansa Musa I to sail across the Atlantic Ocean.That makes sense given how the water lead them to nearby land. Imagine being a West African and looking out at the Atlantic Ocean and going, "yep. I'm gonna sail across that, just cause". In 1200 AD.
The Wall Is Undefeated!
Superstar
While I have no problem with Africans trying to sail across the Atlantic Ocean to the Americas. There's no evidence that they made it.
Last edited:
dora_da_destroyer
Master Baker
there's no evidence they didn't either. unfortunately the heavy reliance on oral tradition in african and indigenous americas societies - due in part from being cutoff from the knowledge exchange of writing? - means there are a lot of blank spots in their histories. the [little] written history we have from the 14th-19th century in africa (and the americas re: indigenous people) is mostly told through the lens of europeans
The Wall Is Undefeated!
Superstar
Perhaps but that still speculation. We would need physical evidence from arcaeology like remains of the boat and other materials around certain time periods. Nothing has turned up.
dora_da_destroyer
Master Baker
there have been debated and discussed artifacts of african origin int he americas, but like most things dealing with issues thousands of years old, and whitewashing history, there isn't one final verdict
https://www.lahc.edu/studentservices/aso/bsu/knowyourhistory/10PiecesofEvidenceThatProve.pdf
Before Columbus: How Africans Brought Civilization to America - Global Research
Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact theories - Wikipedia
I haven't dug into all this deeply because I don't have the time and because there are so many conflicts/questions about varying opinions on this topic, mix that with my skepticism of whites "owning" the history of the americas, i won't go too deep. but there is some evidence out there
The Wall Is Undefeated!
Superstar
Most of those links are wild speculation without any proof. The 'Olmec is really African' theory has been debunked to death. No historian or arcaeologist worth their salt buys into this. The evidence is really weak at best. It'll take more than speculation to convince me.
dora_da_destroyer
Master Baker
i guess...i mean, it's clear africans didn't colonize or create big settlements here, so just how much stuff would be left as archaeological evidence? for every ship found, there are hundreds decomposed at the bottom of the sea. i believe in the curious nature of humans, it's not out of bound to believe a few different missions across the atlantic happened, but nothing history altering came from it so...
That some of the Olmecs or Ancient (pre-columbian) Americans were African is far from being debunked, every day the theories of Ivan Va Sertima And Dr Claude Winters are being supported more and more by the lastest science and archeological findings.
I will continue to hold to the Idea that some of the Olmecs were Africans until I see or get more evidence to the contrary.
Luzia: Paleo-Indian (South America)
watch Time Stamp 8:00 - 18:00
HIGHLAND PARK, N. J. — Last February, a Smithsonian Institution team reported finding two “Negro male skeletons”—the men died in their late 30's—in a grave in the United States Virgin Islands. This grave had been used and abandoned by native Indians long before the coming of Columbus. Soil from the earth layers in which the skeletons were found was dated to A.D. 1250.
A study of the teeth showed a type of “dental mutilation characteristic of early African cultures,” and clamped around the wrist of one of the skeletons was a clay vessel of pre‐Columbian Indian design.
This is no isolated find. Skulls that, according to the physical anthropologist Ernest Hooton, “closely resemble crania of Negro groups coming from parts of Africa” have been found in pre‐Columbian layers in the valley of the Pecos River, in northern Mexico and Texas, which empties into the Gulf of Mexico.
In September 1974, a Polish craniologist, Andrzej Wiercinski, disclosed to the Congress of Americanists that skulls from Olmec and other preChristian sites in Mexico (Tlatilco, Cerro de las Mesas and Monte Albán “show a clear prevalence of the total Negroid pattern.”
In 1957, three professors released radiocarbon datings for an Olmec ceremonial center at La yenta, Mexico. Within this center, near the Atlantic, stood four colossal stone heads, with military‐type helmets, weighing 30 to 40 tons each. They were described by their discoverer, the archeologist Matthew Stirling, as “amazingly negroid.” Samples of wood charcoal taken from the first construction phase of the center associated with the heads gave an average reading of 814 B.C., plus or minus 134 years.
Prof. Alexander von Wuthenau, an art historian, has brought to public attention numerous Negroid portraits in clay, gold, copper and copal from ancient and medieval Central and South America.
These portraits capture not only the dense close curl and kink of Negroid hair, the occasional goatee beard (unknown to the American‐Indian chin), projecting jaws, coloration, broad noses and full‐fleshed lips, but also African ear pendants, headdresses, coiffures, facial tattoos and scarification.
These discoveries have posed riddles to many anthropologists. They ask, how could Africans who knew nothing of the sea cross the 1,500 Atlantic miles to America?
Africans, however, were no strangers to the sea. Irish pre‐Christian history records how the Firbourges were “disturbed in their possession of Ireland by the descent and depredations of African sea‐rovers, the Fomorians, who had a main stronghold on Torrey Island.”
A division of Negroid sea captains and mariners are reported to have been in the Egyptian navy of the 19th dynasty.
Central Africans from Lake Chad built, along ancient Egyptian lines, the papyrus boat Ra I, which Thor Heyerdahl sailed from North Africa to the vicinity of Barbados in 1969.
Bad News for Columbus, Perhaps
I will continue to hold to the Idea that some of the Olmecs were Africans until I see or get more evidence to the contrary.
Luzia: Paleo-Indian (South America)
watch Time Stamp 8:00 - 18:00
HIGHLAND PARK, N. J. — Last February, a Smithsonian Institution team reported finding two “Negro male skeletons”—the men died in their late 30's—in a grave in the United States Virgin Islands. This grave had been used and abandoned by native Indians long before the coming of Columbus. Soil from the earth layers in which the skeletons were found was dated to A.D. 1250.
A study of the teeth showed a type of “dental mutilation characteristic of early African cultures,” and clamped around the wrist of one of the skeletons was a clay vessel of pre‐Columbian Indian design.
This is no isolated find. Skulls that, according to the physical anthropologist Ernest Hooton, “closely resemble crania of Negro groups coming from parts of Africa” have been found in pre‐Columbian layers in the valley of the Pecos River, in northern Mexico and Texas, which empties into the Gulf of Mexico.
In September 1974, a Polish craniologist, Andrzej Wiercinski, disclosed to the Congress of Americanists that skulls from Olmec and other preChristian sites in Mexico (Tlatilco, Cerro de las Mesas and Monte Albán “show a clear prevalence of the total Negroid pattern.”
In 1957, three professors released radiocarbon datings for an Olmec ceremonial center at La yenta, Mexico. Within this center, near the Atlantic, stood four colossal stone heads, with military‐type helmets, weighing 30 to 40 tons each. They were described by their discoverer, the archeologist Matthew Stirling, as “amazingly negroid.” Samples of wood charcoal taken from the first construction phase of the center associated with the heads gave an average reading of 814 B.C., plus or minus 134 years.
Prof. Alexander von Wuthenau, an art historian, has brought to public attention numerous Negroid portraits in clay, gold, copper and copal from ancient and medieval Central and South America.
These portraits capture not only the dense close curl and kink of Negroid hair, the occasional goatee beard (unknown to the American‐Indian chin), projecting jaws, coloration, broad noses and full‐fleshed lips, but also African ear pendants, headdresses, coiffures, facial tattoos and scarification.
These discoveries have posed riddles to many anthropologists. They ask, how could Africans who knew nothing of the sea cross the 1,500 Atlantic miles to America?
Africans, however, were no strangers to the sea. Irish pre‐Christian history records how the Firbourges were “disturbed in their possession of Ireland by the descent and depredations of African sea‐rovers, the Fomorians, who had a main stronghold on Torrey Island.”
A division of Negroid sea captains and mariners are reported to have been in the Egyptian navy of the 19th dynasty.
Central Africans from Lake Chad built, along ancient Egyptian lines, the papyrus boat Ra I, which Thor Heyerdahl sailed from North Africa to the vicinity of Barbados in 1969.
Bad News for Columbus, Perhaps
Last edited:
The video was on point but I think you're 2. is also quite valid.
The Wall Is Undefeated!
Superstar
Skull morphology isn't a good measure of where people come especially when it comes to ancient populations. You also need to read studies on Ancient DNA of populations. A relatively recent study on the DNA of early Amerindians that had so called 'negroid' skulls have found that they aren't related to African populations. In fact they are very much Amerindian genetically despite their skull shapes.
We (black people) need to stop bogarting and claiming other peoples. We weren't/aren't Jews, Amerindians, Arabs, Indians or any other peoples. We are our own people with our own histories.
I do not like to argue over DNA and genetic ancestry for three reasons...
1. It is agree that all Humans are of African descent, and that the differences we see are attributed to climate diet and culture and some minor intermixing with other hominids.....so it becomes a non-issue or one of splitting hairs(DNA). In other words if you are a human beings you are African regardless of color.
2. Racism is predominantly based on our phenotype not our genotype in practice.
3. DNA studies are predominantly done by organization funded and operated by Europeans, the technology and the science is not readily available to all peoples....so forgive me if i still believe that much of it may suffers from racial and confirmation bias.
Around the world, tissue and blood banks have sprung up to catalog human DNA’s many mysteries. But not in Africa. About 80 percent of the human DNA used in genetic studies comes from people of European descent
The Massive, Overlooked Potential of African DNA
Despite efforts to include diversity in research, people of European ancestry continue to be vastly overrepresented and ethnically diverse populations largely excluded from human genomics research, according to the authors of a new commentary. This lack of diversity in studies has serious consequences for science and medicine.
Western bias in human genetic studies is 'both scientifically damaging and unfair'
It is a very good way to tell what the individual look like physically.
True.... but does it tell how they looked?
Maybe it is that they had African features instead of the typical an expected Amerindian features.
Are all black people African?
Are all white people European?
Its seems we are all just differing hues of brown.
If all of us are of African descent....then all peoples are African - hence we not "bogarting"
1. It is agree that all Humans are of African descent, and that the differences we see are attributed to climate diet and culture and some minor intermixing with other hominids.....so it becomes a non-issue or one of splitting hairs(DNA). In other words if you are a human beings you are African regardless of color.
2. Racism is predominantly based on our phenotype not our genotype in practice.
3. DNA studies are predominantly done by organization funded and operated by Europeans, the technology and the science is not readily available to all peoples....so forgive me if i still believe that much of it may suffers from racial and confirmation bias.
Around the world, tissue and blood banks have sprung up to catalog human DNA’s many mysteries. But not in Africa. About 80 percent of the human DNA used in genetic studies comes from people of European descent
The Massive, Overlooked Potential of African DNA
Despite efforts to include diversity in research, people of European ancestry continue to be vastly overrepresented and ethnically diverse populations largely excluded from human genomics research, according to the authors of a new commentary. This lack of diversity in studies has serious consequences for science and medicine.
Western bias in human genetic studies is 'both scientifically damaging and unfair'
It is a very good way to tell what the individual look like physically.
True.... but does it tell how they looked?
Maybe it is that they had African features instead of the typical an expected Amerindian features.
Are all black people African?
Are all white people European?
Its seems we are all just differing hues of brown.
If all of us are of African descent....then all peoples are African - hence we not "bogarting"
The Wall Is Undefeated!
Superstar
1. You forgot a couple of important attributes. Time and isolation.
2. So what?
3. This just sounds like "I don't like the data thus It's not true." They have studied and compared loads of populations around the world. Unless you've got any credible evidence to the contrary about DNA studies then you're just arguing against the data available. The fact that you are conflating genotype with phenotype makes your 2nd and 3rd statements contradict each other.
Simple as this. Phenotype =/= Genotype. Especially when it comes to skulls further back in the past.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/03/190321130447.htm
i agree with this. However it still doesn't change the facts
Yes. However, it doesn't tell us anything culturally or who that individual was related to.
What a person looks like doesn't matter when it comes to who they relate to genetically, Or culturally.
Just because humans originate in Africa and are all of African descent doesn't mean all histories and cultures are African.