REMINDER THAT ANCIENT AMERICANS LOOKS LIKE AFRICANS/HAWAIIANS

THEY WERE NOT AT ALL LIKE THE MODERN IDEA OF A "NATIVE AMERICAN".

MODERN IDENTITY POLITICS ABOUT "ORIGINAL AMERICANS" IS A SHAM

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naia_(skeleton)

Naia (designated as HN5/48) is a 12,000- to 13,000-year-old human skeleton of a teenage female that was found in the Yucatán, Mexico.

(AKA: POST ICE AGE FLOOD, IN THE AREA THOSE AZTEC/MAYAN PYRAMIDS ARE)

"The original report stated that "HN5/48 is among the small group of Paleoamerican skeletons, a group that is morphologically distinct from Native Americans"

"been described as much closer to African and Australo-Melanesians populations than to the modern series of Native Americans"

ALSO DO NOT FORGET THE RED HAIRED GIANTS OF AMERICA & THE MOUND CULTURE

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solutrean_hypothesis
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinland
pantheon.org/articles/t/tuatha_de_danann.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germania_(book)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meadowcroft_Rockshelter
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cactus_Hill
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clovis_culture#Evidence_of_human_habitation_before_Clovis
newscientist.com/article/dn28687-new-species-of-human-may-have-shared-our-caves-and-beds/
sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/12/151217151544.htm
popularmechanics.com/science/news/a18596/a-recent-fossil-may-belong-to-an-old-old-human-relative/
smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/dna-reveals-new-branch-european-ancestry-180957312/?no-ist
youtu.be/SnAgOagVO2c?t=297
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Here is the skull being retrieved under water in a cave (Global Flood, 12-13k ya?)

bump

THESE 5000 YEAR OLD MOUNDS RESEMBLE THEIR COUNTERPARTS ACROSS THE ATLANTIC.

NATIVE AMERICANS SAY AMERICA WAS ONCE POPULATED BY A RACE OF RED HAIRED GIANTS (SUCH AS THE EUROPEANS WHO ALSO BUILT THE MOUNDS)

THERE ARE MANY THEORIES ABOUT PROTO EUROPEANS COMING TO STONE AGE AMERICA

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solutrean_hypothesis

IT WOULDNT BE THE FIRST TIME LARGE MOUND BUILDERS MADE IT OUT TO "VINLAND"

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinland

THE IRISH EVEN HAVE MYTHS OF ISLANDS OF RED HAIRED MAGICAL GIANTS AND MAIDENS OUT WEST

pantheon.org/articles/t/tuatha_de_danann.html

TACITUS' DESCRIPTION OF ANCIENT GERMANIC PEOPLE:

" In Chapter 4, he mentions that they all have common physical characteristics, blue eyes (truces et caerulei oculi = "sky-coloured, azure, dark blue, dark green), reddish hair ( rutilae comae = "red, golden-red, reddish yellow") and large bodies, vigorous at the first onset but not tolerant of exhausting labour, tolerant of hunger and cold but not of heat.["

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germania_(book)

IN SHORT "NATIVE AMERICANS" DO NOT OWN THE PLACE.

THEY WERE MURDERERS & SAVAGE THIEVES AS WELL

PIC RELATED IS 9000YEAR OLD AMERICAN

Humanity evolved from africans, in the earliest days of civilization.

As time passed, we evolved.
The niggers and shitskins didn't, still retaining their apelike herd mentality.
Why are you posting this?

Arent malaysians shitskins?

Depends on the Malaysian, we got plenty of everything here.
Most malays are shitskins, but there's a strong chink presence here too, so there's that.

>ancient folklore

Still haven't found any skinwalkers.

>burial mounds

People pile dirt - more at 11.

>there are distinct populations within early New World populations

There's enough doubt about the exact timeline and origin of the entire American inhabitation process that it's perfectly reasonable to suspect that there were small Polynesian and African populations, but DNA testing and material evidence has been inconclusive or weighted against Atlantic or Polynesian crossings.

>perfectly reasonable to suspect that there were small Polynesian and African populations

YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT

& HOW IS IT REASONABLE THAT AFRICANS AND POLYNESIANS MADE IT OUT THERE WHEN THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF IT?

You can't fool me, its just Patrick Stewart.

Everyone says that and that just proves my point even more!

As in it's a reasonable theory that has been discredited. There are animal species that made it to South America to Africa, so you wouldn't be a retard for applying the same logic to humans. It just doesn't hold up to scrutiny. The Polynesian theory was very popular until DNA evidence showed most migrations came from the Bering sea crossing.

Evidence points to both a land bridge migration and a migration from the east. You have to remember that people didn't come to the Americas all at once, they came in waves over thousands of years. This is why indigenous people in Patagonia look different from Central American peoples. Yes it's true that they are related by DNA from central Asia but there were groups who broke off from each other and became different over time, known as genetic drift.

There were indeed people who came from prehistoric Europe who settled along the east coast. Sites like Cactus Hill, Meadowcroft rock shelter, and sites on along the Chesapeake bay in Maryland have shown Solutrean arrowheads, officially categorized as Pre-Clovis. These pre-clovis sites have contradicted the official land bridge theory because the oldest sites are in the East! The younger sites are further west. During the "Younger Dryas" period due to climate change these people were virtually wiped out and killed by newer tribes coming across the newly opened up passageway. These new tribes of people coming across the northwest passage probably killed the remaining Solutrean/Clovis people or likely intermingled. To say all native Americans are the same is ignorant. The tribes of today are genetically and culturally different from Americans around 10,500BC.

Let us not forget that in 10,500 bce the sea levels were about 300 feet lower than they are today. Considering most civilizations are near water it would make sense that there is a lot we don't know about ice age people. Also the Chesapeake bay is filled with these Solutrean arrowheads along with mastodon bones which means there was a huge presence along the east coast which is now under water miles off the coast. It is not racist to say that prehistoric people came from Europe to the Americas. This theory is not meant to make the modern Native Americans seem illegitimate or to promote a Euro-centric viewpoint it simply is meant to get to the truth about our past. This theory would breakdown the current establishment which is why it is getting so much resistance.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solutrean_hypothesis

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meadowcroft_Rockshelter

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cactus_Hill

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clovis_culture#Evidence_of_human_habitation_before_Clovis

I'm curious if they included Gallic peoples as Germanic as well? I have French heritage but I still find this shit interesting

>It is not racist to say that prehistoric people came from Europe to the Americas.

Everything is racist to lefties.
Nevermind that the Solutrean people were not modern Europeans in any way.

For the past 60 years, any discoveries of settlements in the Americas have been ridiculed and discarded if they were dated earlier than the "Clovis" culture. Only now, as 'Clovis First!' proponents are finally dying off, are we acknowledging and studying obviously earlier settlements.

WE europeans WE supermen WE wuz everywhere an shit

literal nigger tier wewuzing.

The problem is pre-clovis sites are all tool culture only, with no associated human remains to take a DNA analysis from. And they're finding preclovis sites all the way in Mexico and Guatemala, which doesn't exactly support a European crossing any more than an African one or just an earlier Bering crossing. I've never read any evidence that European haplotypes are present in any North American remains dated before the Viking crossings.

>I'm curious if they included Gallic peoples as Germanic as well?

Not likely, at least not as you mean it.

Solutrean culture peaked 20-24kya in the northwestern part of what is now France (likely with much more of their remains now underwater, pic related), long before the groups you're thinking of existed.

WE WUZ INJUNS

>ANCIENT AMERICANS
The term American didn't exist prior to Whites coming here.

>The problem is pre-clovis sites are all tool culture only

So far.

>with no associated human remains to take a DNA analysis from.

The 'Clovis First!' bullshit started long before DNA analysis--it actually goes back to Spanish priests creating the Beringia hypothesis because they wanted to claim the natives in the 1400s were mongoloids and therefore sub-human.
Liberals later used this to claim that 'native' Americans were the first and only people here.

Both are naive and full of shit.

Oh yeah, I know all about this and I do agree. I am not entirely sure who these people are but it's just a lot more complex than our current idea.

There is also the Mal'ta boy from 24,000 years ago found in Siberia that has DNA not at all related to Asians, mostly related to Western Eurasians, and they also partially share some genome that is unique to Native Americans today.

He was found buried with various items including a venus figure- which seems to be a huge part of whatever this culture is.

That's why the Polynesian hypothesis was so popular, it had a neat premise of intrepid sailors striking out across open seas and finding new land, instead of just cold mongols following mammoths across a big steppe.

Unfortunately, the tundranigger theory has the most weight behind it.

who said mexicans can't have nigger lips andd noses?

All of the people like the Aztecs also say that they came from a land in the north called Atlan and that they were pushed out by a flood. Maybe they were talking about Beringia?

Oops I mean Aztlan

Or this.

>That's why the Polynesian hypothesis was so popular, it had a neat premise of intrepid sailors striking out across open seas and finding new land

It also has a lot of evidence behind it, from New Zealand all the way to Easter Island.

Humans, and possibly proto-Humans migrated across the Bering Strait from Asia to the Americas. Horses migrated the other way.

Why is it so difficult to think that Polynesians migrated to South America on their boats, or Solutreans migrated along the North Atlantic ice sheets in theirs?

No one (sane) is claiming they survived, or even heavily influenced what we now call 'native' Americans.

Hell, even though horses originated in the Americas, they went extinct here 10-12,000 years ago and were only re-introduced by the Spanish 500 years ago.

That's Atlantis, that might not be Aztlan though.

>That's Atlantis, that might not be Aztlan though.

That's not real.
At least, not as far as honest, current science goes.
Look a little farther east to the Azores for land, and to Santorini for colors and political influence on Plato.

The sunken lands around Cuba and Florida are interesting as well.

Africa and southern America used to be conjoined along with Australia, India, and Antarctica. There is very strong geological evidence supporting this. I don't know about humans crossing but quite a few of animals made the crossing.

Those are Olmecs/Toltes you uneducated pleb.

>Africa and southern America used to be conjoined along with Australia, India, and Antarctica. There is very strong geological evidence supporting this.

Yeah.
Dozens of Millions of years ago.
Long before even proto-Humans existed.

What are you talking about? I know that already.

Then you should consider suicide.

It's pretty obvious that before the end of the ice age, the mid Atlantic ridge would have been way more above water. There are tons of pieces of mythology and other pieces of evidence that point to this land mass being Atlantis. The Azores are just what is left.

I agree about the area around Florida, you can definitely see a huge shelf of land and knowing that people would have lived on the coastlines I can only imagine what there is hidden under the water there.

>ISLANDS OF RED HAIRED MAGICAL GIANTS AND MAIDENS OUT WEST

Nigga never heard of the Beothuk. The Solutreans were as likely Native Americans paddling to Europe as vice-versa.

The Mound Builder culture is a relatively recent evolution of Mississipian culture with direct, heavy influence of the Mesoamerican cultural complex. It has nothing to do with Europe but has a lot to do with a cult of organized sports called Chunkey and modified Mesoamerican ritual practices.

I knew native Hawaiians were secretly niggers. I knew it! Niggers! All of them.

>It has nothing to do with Europe
> even though the same type of mounds are found all over Europe and also in Russia

Some Polynesian legends claim to have come from the North or Northeast continent... ie. America. The currents and their art make this very likely, along with Chumash legends of being the Guardians of the Western Gate.

WE

That's clearly a mongoloid skull

>Das rite! MAYAS AZTECS AND SHIT WUZ BLACK!

>Polynesians migrated to South America on their boats

The timeframes are reversed. Polynesian culture was spreading around 1000 AD, the Americas were initially populated 10-40,000 years earlier. Even that is assuming that H. Erectus didn't beat us over the land bridge.

>same type of mounds are found all over Europe and also in Russia

Subtly different mounds. If you've looked at enough mounds and earthworks, you can tell which cultures built them and when. Also, people pile dirt up, surprise surprise.

>It's pretty obvious that before the end of the ice age, the mid Atlantic ridge would have been way more above water.

Absolutely.
Just not in any way that picture suggests.

Atlantis is a myth, created by Plato, based on other myths.

I'm not saying it didn't exist, just that it didn't exist the way he described it.

It's obvious that he took the red/black/white visuals from Santorini and the Minoan culture.
That's not to say that they didn't adopt that from somewhere else.

Look at the common 'Atl' root usage in several languages.
Atlantis and Aztlan being the most well known.

Many things lead you toward a pre-historic culture that influenced recorded history.
From measurement, to language.

Everyone disparages Imperial measurements, because Metric system, but those ancient measures were more accurate and useful than the current forced system.

he looks just like my native American grandfather.

Picard time travelled on the USS Enterprise and was left marooned in 9000 BC.

>The timeframes are reversed. Polynesian culture was spreading around 1000 AD, the Americas were initially populated 10-40,000 years earlier.

Interesting.
Do you have any links/info to point me towards?
I'll look it up if not.

I haven't heard of this before now, but it makes as much sense as the other way 'round.

>Picard time travelled on the USS Enterprise and was left marooned in 9000 BC.

That was Commander Adama, asshole.

Yes, but that doesnt explain what caused them to spread all over the place.

If you notice in the link in OP, it says that these people came from Berengia, which was a huge, lush and very populated subcontinent.

This would explain all of the myths from the Pacific and Native Americans & Aztecs talking about coming from a land in the north that was flooded, pushing the survivors south to America.

This same flood would explain the "Motherland" in Polynesian mythology like Eastern Island & Hawaii

except the tools and things which are similar to the ancient indeginous europeans who were different from modern ones

Why because youre an idiot? lmao fuck off

>as likely Native Americans paddling to Europe

Except those people were not living in America near the time of the solutreans

The experts say african/polynesian

>Subtly different mounds.

How?

Atlantis was not created by Plato, he said that it was passed down to him from another "philosopher" ancestor of his.

can you guys recommend me some good reading on this subject?

some hispanics with mixed native blood come out looking like olmec statues. its not a common phenotype but when its expressed its dead on, and theyre usually huge 350lbs+ people.

Maybe in their minds, but I have never seen a mexican look so "black" or "hawaiian". Post pics if you have any

besides, some natives should have residual traits from this ancient race if it was there

WE WUZ

>AFRICANS/HAWAIIANS
Which is it?
These two groups aren't exactly related.
And neither of them have red hair.

>Atlantis was not created by Plato, he said that it was passed down to him from another "philosopher" ancestor of his.

Solon. Who claimed he got the stories from the Egyptians.

Still, Santorini and Crete were close enough to his story, especially the Red/Black/White motif, to make them suspect.

I'm interested in what might have influenced them.

The whole "anatomically modern humans are over 200,000 years old' story is bullshit; our big jump was intermixing with Neanderthals which happened 36-40,000 years ago according to current evidence.

But, a lot can happen in 40,000 years.

Toss in Denisovans, and a recently discovered third ancient ancestor, and things start to get really interesting.

newscientist.com/article/dn28687-new-species-of-human-may-have-shared-our-caves-and-beds/

sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/12/151217151544.htm

popularmechanics.com/science/news/a18596/a-recent-fossil-may-belong-to-an-old-old-human-relative/

smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/dna-reveals-new-branch-european-ancestry-180957312/?no-ist

Read the link fucking retard

...

The santorini thing is BS, they talk about island hopping to the opposite continent beyond the pillars of hercules in the egyptian story told to solon, 9000 years, not 9000 lunar years(Plato himself argues against critics and specified this) which doesnt perfectly coincide with santorini's time the way the 9000 years before solon does with the end of the younger dryas.

Plato himself also talks about the Atlantean flood being THE ogygian flood of primeval greece, where cecrops founded athens..

Oh and I meant to say, the Neanderthal/Denisovan thing is a part of it

However the early humans such as erectus and heidelbergensis are way underrated in terms of their role in human history and their possibility of being advanced, there are good theories supporting the idea that erectus for example had small boats.

Denosvan are especially underrated given how little we know about them

We know they had advanced jewelry making skills about 40,000 years ago and seem to have populated most of the world at their time.

I believe all of this

experts say that the early americans just didnt know how to tell size by skeleton very well but i dont buy it


there were lots of giant human species

heidelbergensis, our ancestor, for example, regularly grew over 7 ft tall

plus, we find ancient gigantic bones 2x the size of ours all the time, like here:
(i recommend watching)

youtu.be/SnAgOagVO2c?t=297

>The santorini thing is BS

Not entirely. Their architecture matches his story.
I'm just curious as to if his story is a mishmosh of things, or if they got their inspiration from the Atlantis he wrote about. Both are plausible.

>they talk about island hopping to the opposite continent beyond the pillars of hercules in the egyptian story told to solon, 9000 years, not 9000 lunar years (Plato himself argues against critics and specified this) which doesnt perfectly coincide with santorini's time the way the 9000 years before solon does with the end of the younger dryas.

I agree. The 9000 years is too specific.
I'm more interested in where the story originated.

>Plato himself also talks about the Atlantean flood being THE ogygian flood of primeval greece, where cecrops founded athens..

THE Flood is obviously referencing the rise in waters at the end of the Younger Dryas. Whether it be the Black Sea flood, the Persian Gulf flood, or any of the others.

Santorini is only interesting because it combines vulcanism with flooding.

Too many myths and stories to be otherwise.

There are what you call abos there, the asli who are austronesian.
Melayu themselves are similar to flips/southern chinks with some arab admixture.

>>Subtly different mounds.
>How?

The ways they were measured, built, used, preserved, reused. The strongest connections are between some South American temple platforms and temples in India that use the same system of measures, and the iconography between Mesoamerican and Indonesian temples, see Tlaloc and Balinese dragon temples, also Tibetan water dieties and Tlaloc.

What aren't similar in time, use, etc: Maya/any Native mounds and Egypt, Central Asian or European mounds.

>The ways they were measured

This is another clue, often ignored.
The inch, foot, yard, and pole are geometrical measures, not the random length of some British mong's appendage.

The Imperial system is a human relatable measurement system; plus, work involving measurement and number is always more convenient if everything can be expressed in whole numbers and lengths that can be readily visualized, especially when dealing with uneducated workmen.

One mile is 63360 inches. A half mile is 31680 inches. A quarter mile is 15840 inches. 1/8th of a mile is 7920 inches. 1/16th of a mile is 3960 inches. 1/32nd of a mile is 1980 inches. 1/64th of a mile is 990 inches. 1/128th of a mile is 495 inches.

The brilliance of the design becomes even more apparent when dealing with thirds: 495 can be divided into three equal whole-number parts—165, which can again be divided into three equal whole-number parts—55. 55 is then divisible by 5 and 11.

A major disadvantage of the metric system in the real world is that thirds and elevenths cannot be expressed as whole numbers.

The number 63360 is practical as it is composed of the factors 2, 3, 5, and 11.
A mile is 2x2x2x2x2x2x2x3x3x5x11 inches.

These factors are the basis of other units of Imperial measurement as well:
There are 2x2x2x2x2x3x5x11 feet in a mile.
There are 2x2x2x2x2x5x11 yards in a mile.
There are 2x3x3x11 inches in a pole.
There are 2x2x2x2x2x2x5 poles in a mile.
There are 2x2x2x2x3x5x11 yards in a domesday league.

NONE of this is coincidence.

11 is an extremely important number in real world calculations, because Pi.

For example, if you want to construct a circle with a circumference of one mile, the radius will be 280 yards, or 840 feet, or 10080 inches.

If the circumference is to be one third of a mile, the radius is 280 feet.

A circumference of one thirtieth of a mile would have a radius of 28 feet.

1/36th of a mile, a radius of 280 inches.

Facial reconstruction is absolute bullshit. Bones can't tell you about skin tone, hair texture, wrinkles, lip shape, or accurate shape/fat content of the nose and eye area. Sure general features but not the details we use to determine race.

WE WUZ XENOMORPHS N SHEEIT

Evolution is a lie. Whites were created. Keep thinkin the matrix has no basis in reality...