|
|
|
| GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother & Ernest_at_the_Beach | |
|
|
Thanks . |
|
|
|
|
No, it is not refuted, it is in question. Is refuting the theory the goal here? It might be yours, considering the evident BIAS in your post. I would say that there is broad PHYSICAL AND LEXICOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE for a THOERY, which is all you've got for ANY such theory.
A stone in a dry creek bed in New Mexico, discovered by early settlers in the region contains engraved on its flank the entire Ten Commandments in an ancient Hebrew dialect.
Was ancient Hebrew known to the discoverers?
Savoy, Inca city of Vilcabamba in 1964: three tablets each weigh several tons (sounds physical to me) hieroglyphs include one identical to that always on the ships sent to Ophir,
Dr. Joe Mahan a small tablet containing ancient cuneiform writing of the Babylonians found not long ago by a woman digging in her flower bed, here in Georgia
stone, found at Fort Benning, Georgia, Professor Stanislav Segert, professor of Semitic languages at the University of Prague, has identified the markings as a script of the second millennium before Christ, from the Minoan civilization on the island of Crete!
Not "proof" but certainly a strong indication.
1968 Manfred Metcalf a large flat piece of sandstone about nine inches long. Gordon reported: the affinities of the script were with the Aegean syllabary, whose two best known forms are Minoan Linear A, and Mycenaean Linear B. "We therefore have American inscriptional contacts with the Aegean of the Bronze Age, near the south, west and north shores of the Gulf of Mexico around the middle of the second millennium B.C."
Gordon "The Aegean analogues to Mayan writing, to the Aztec glyphs, and to the Metcalf Stone, inspire the hope that the deciphered scripts of the Mediterranean may provide keys for unlocking the forgotten systems of writing in the New World.
If it does prove useful, look out.
Over a period of 50 years, four men, including two who were scientists, uncovered inscriptions which they independently concluded were Phoenician in origin.
Another data point.
Francisco Pinto, in 1872 found over 20 caves deep in the Brazilian jungle and uncovered about 250 strange inscriptions upon the rocks. He thought they were Phoenician, and Brazil's Director of History and Geography corroborated his suspicions. A German philologist who studied the markings in 1911 felt they were genuine.
How many 19th Century forgers of Phoenician writing were crawling through the Brazilian jungle?
In the 1880s, Ernest Ronan, found several more inscribed stones. In the 1920s a scholar by the name of Bernardo da Silva discovered many more inscriptions along the Amazon.
a white skinned, red-bearded tribe the Lower Assurinis have ear lobes (which is uncharacteristic of other tribes), and their language differs from traditional dialects in the region.
Anybody done a DNA study yet?
The Phoenicians had already sailed out beyond the "Pillars of Hercules" (Straits of Gibralter) by 1200 B.C. They developed the keel, streamlined their ships, covered the decks, and improved the sail. Their ships were from 80-100 feet long and used a single square sail besides oars. Their ships could average 100 miles in a day's time (24 hours). They were busy traders. Commerce was their principal aim. Tyre and Sidon, their home ports, were cities of immense wealth.
Those are facts few will dispute.
What I said is that there were a lot of data indicating an interesting theory. They didn't mention the cocaine found in mummy hair in Egyptian tombs. How did it get there?
You are trying to say that a supposed failure (if there is one) to prove the theory in one instance disproves that theory. That is a stupid scientific conclusion (sorry, but that's all I can call it). What I am saying is that the breadth of EVIDENCE suggests that this is an extant THEORY and strongly indicates reason to question the Columbian demarcation (which has already been disproved insofar as the Vikings were concerned).
So you post this:
While I'm at it, why don't I refute the Mormon belief that Jesus appeared in South America. Or Mary Baker Eddy's belief that disease is a result of sin? Be sure that Plain Truth slants and distorts what little evidence they find in a very professional manner.
This is a salacious comment unworthy of this forum and the data, NONE of which you have refuted. It imputes a bias on my part for which you had no evidence. To say that it isn't proven is not to refute it. Not to refute considering the data IS proof that there is an extant THEORY or at least a very strong hypothesis. That is more than I can say for the THEORY that the Americas were isolated until Columbus.
|
|
|
| GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother & Ernest_at_the_Beach | |
|
|
|
Thanks . |
|
|
|
|