Are North Americans Spanish ?

[diggummup]

The Anse aux Meadows is the only known site for an European contact prior to the Spanish:

http://www.pc.gc.ca/lhn-nhs/nl/meadows/natcul/hist.aspx

Archaeologists just haven't "discovered" it yet. Too worried about nonsense like metal detectorists disturbing a 200 year old coin laying in the middle of a field or in 20 feet of water 50 yards off the beach.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[seeker41]

The Anse aux Meadows is the only known site for an European contact prior to the Spanish:

http://www.pc.gc.ca/lhn-nhs/nl/meadows/natcul/hist.aspx

Archaeologists just haven't "discovered" it yet. Too worried about nonsense like metal detectorists disturbing a 200 year old coin laying in the middle of a field or in 20 feet of water 50 yards off the beach.

 

[hobbit]

If you are really into the outre', check out Barry Fell's books, "America B.C." and "Saga America", as well as Michael Cremo's, "Forbidden Archaeology". I personally believe that most of the claims in these books are pure nonsense, but who knows? PBS had a great documentary on NOVA a few years back about the possible link between Clovis points and Solutrean points called: "America's Stone Age Explorers". Fascinating stuff. It is becoming increasingly difficult for mainstream archaeologists to cling to the Clovis first dogma. Too many of the very few who actually dig are finding pre Clovis sites. At one time, the possibility of pre Columbian Norse contact with the New World was ridiculed by "mainstream" archaeologists. It is proven fact now, of course, as Alexandre has mentioned.

I don't know what all this really has to do with shipwrecks per se, but I guess it is fun to talk about...

 

[Bum Luck]

The Anse aux Meadows is the only known site for an European contact prior to the Spanish:

http://www.pc.gc.ca/lhn-nhs/nl/meadows/natcul/hist.aspx

So?

Well, so one thing is ARCHAEOLOGICAL FACT. Another, is a LEAP OF FAITH aka NEW AGE MUMBO JUMBO.

I could go to the USA right now, "salt" some Iowa cornfields with some 2,000 year old Roman (or Chinese) coins - that would prove only a thing: that some Roman coins were found in Iowa. It's not the "what"; it's the "how" that matters.

Some people believe in astrology, some in astronomy - but only the later ones need fact to believe. And, in archaeology, you need context in order to prove a fact - if you dont have a context, you end up with a fairy tale. All those "phonecian" wrecks in the Carribean are fairy tales until someone comes up with hard evidence.

That's the problem with you guys. You name call every thing and need 'proof' to even look. No wonder you never come up with anything on your own.

Then you elevate it to a dogma. I've even seen good archeologists attacked by lazy ones.

 

[Alexandre]

That's the problem with you guys. You name call every thing and need 'proof' to even look. No wonder you never come up with anything on your own.

Then you elevate it to a dogma. I've even seen good archeologists attacked by lazy ones.

Archaeology is science made over artefacts, real stuff made by real people.

If you want nice stories that get away without the burden of proof, you'de better stick with historical novels. Clive Cussler write some fine stuff on that tune - he's even found Atlantis.

 

[Jones Indiana]

There are exceptions to the rule. Troy was found by the amateur archaeologist Heinrich Schliemann who read Homer's lliad.

Howard Carter found Tut's tomb by logical deduction. Point being it seems the great discoveries where done by faith.

How did Columbus find the New World? He stated it was by the Holy Spirit of God and NO other means.

Columbus said it was Providence. As he wrote to Ferdinand and Isabella late in his life, “I spent six years here at your royal court, disputing the case with so many people of great authority, learned in all the arts. And finally they concluded that it all was in vain, and they lost interest. In spite of that it later came to pass as Jesus Christ our Savior had predicted and as he had previously announced through the mouths of His holy prophets.… I have already said that reason, mathematics, and maps of the world were of no use to me in the execution of the enterprise of the Indies. What Isaiah said was completely fulfilled.

Source: http://www.chinstitute.org/index.php/chm/fifteenth-century/why-did-columbus-sail/2/

I feel the future great discoveries will be done by faith. Not always by the hand of God. But if he's helping I'll take it.



Best

Indy

 

[Alexandre]

There are exceptions to the rule. Troy was found by the amateur archaeologist Heinrich Schliemann who read Homer's lliad.

That was research based on an historical document.

Howard Carter found Tut's tomb by logical deduction. Point being it seems the great discoveries where done by faith.

He was excavating the Valley of Kings. I have been there: every square inch of that place has tombs. He just pressed on and used commom sense - not faith. Try to find an Egyptian tomb in any US State (all but Nevada... by using faith and you will see the diference..

How did Columbus find the New World? He stated it was by the Holy Spirit of God and NO other means.

For crying out loud... the guy was looking for Japan! If he had really relied on maps and in the Portuguese, he would have not gone there. What would have been really extraordinary would be for him to go West and to find Japan in place of the US of A.

 

[Jones Indiana]

That was research based on an historical document.


At the time they called it a book about a "fairy tale" After Schliemann it was called a historical document.


He was excavating the Valley of Kings. I have been there: every square inch of that place has tombs. He just pressed on and used commom sense - not faith. Try to find an Egyptian tomb in any US State (all but Nevada... by using faith and you will see the diference..

Was presenting a case for common sense. I have done several projects in Egypt.
I'm not looking for any Egyptian tomb in the US. I know and understand context. You beat me to the punch on that.


For crying out loud... the guy was looking for Japan! If he had really relied on maps and in the Portuguese, he would have not gone there. What would have been really extraordinary would be for him to go West and to find Japan in place of the US of A.

In a investigation you should gather information and draw no conclusions. Columbus to my knowledge stated that God helped him-not me. He states he never used maps reason or math. See above posting with cited source. I guess you have made your conclusions? Your investigation is over?


I have to believe you are open or receptive to outside influences. Otherwise why are you here?

Best

Indy