Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.


Expand Messages
  • mike white
    even facts that should confirm a thing can be distorted and misunderstood. for example when fossil human skulls are found, that display an anomaly, like the
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 20, 2013
         even facts that should confirm a thing can be distorted and misunderstood.  for example when fossil human skulls are found, that display an anomaly, like the elongated or dolichocephalic skulls found all over the world, usually among the remains of royalty or the priesthood. 
         our mainstream lads, even those who write from an alternative viewpoint, can get it all wrong.  almost without exception, they claim that all elongated skulls are the result of cradle binding.  they base this upon the fact that in early historical times, in the americas only, certain tribes did practice skull binding, that i contend was in imitation of early rulers who had such skulls naturally from birth. 
         its as if they failed to read the works of mid 19th c respected scientist, dr tschudi.  i cover this again, because the experts continue to publish their fallacy, and continue to add new thoughts.  this expert in anatomy, examined hundreds of skulls during his long research in the andes.  he noted the more recent examples of skull binding, but also much older skulls that had the deformity naturally, they were born with it.  this is indisputable, he found a foetus in the womb of a mummy, that had an extremely elongated skull.  the photo of it was seen on the internet, and given on this forum years ago.  he kept it in his office for years, showing it to other scientists.  it must be admitted that an ancient race, perhaps circa 10,000 bce, differed from modern anatomy.  not only in their skull shape, but in the knitting at the rear of the skull, and in their teeth.  'ancient american' magazine should adjust their thinking, and what they publish on this issue. 
         i offer the opinion that these long headed people were the sages that spread globally, the arts and sciences of atlantis before it sank, about 10,000 bce.  their skull features are likely natural.  the race probably died out not long after that date. 
         nefertiti bore a near perfect example of this anatomy, near the end of that era.  instead of using this find as a reliable marker to date the dynasties of egypt - they plugged in the date of about 1400 bce for akhenaten.  go figure! 
         on a similar line, lets speak of cro magnon man.  our texts has him first appear in the pyrenees, circa 35,000 bce.  cayce has a race of atlanteans migrating to the pyrenees circa 50,000 bce.  the relics of cro magnon man are mainly found in the same region that these early atlantean-basque lived.  it seems likely to me that they are all one and the same people.  the neanderthal were indigenous to europe, and preceded cro magnon in western europe. 
         cayce told that some of these basque left the pyrenees circa 40,000 bce, and settled briefly in sardinia, before going to egypt.  if my hypothesis is true on their identity, we might get lucky and find fossil cro magnon skulls in these latter locations.  the giza area may yield such remains.  we should date them about 40,000 bce. 
         by 10,000 bce, the antediluvian cro magnon anatomy of atlanteans had evolved to the dolichocephalic skulls discussed above.  these could be found at amarna and cities of its era.  remains should be dated appropriately.  records of the basque were stored at giza.  we may need to adjust our opinion on how primitive were the cro magnon.  so far our lads only admit that they were great artists, and had some religious beliefs.  modern thinking judges ancient races more primitive by the degree that their skull shape differed from that of moderns.  just because the relics found were from caves, doesnt mean they all lived that way.  stone tools, and relics left in caves tend to survive far longer than other finer materials, and housing.  we must not be hasty with our conclusions.  for them to leave records, they must have had writing by 40,000 bce.  our lads deny that there was writing before 3000 bce.  since it hasnt yet been found, they assume it never existed.  it can be found everywhere in egypt, but they misdated it.  the appearance of hieratic in egypt can be dated circa 10,000 bce said cayce.  it was an atlantean shorthand of the old hieroglyphs. 
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.