That's not an easy question but here's my best simplified attempt:
Use these civilizations as starting points:
Take the absolute height of all their empires and convert them into the idea that they're all combined into one pre-existing "Tartarian" civilization. This empire included the Americas and none of the events were separated by any great period of time. Our school taught version of history is the infection of these remaining "Confederacies" with banking and legalism through "exploration and colonization."
In reality there was some sort of global cataclysm that got cleaned up by military contractors who were getting paid by people who wanted to enslave everyone remaining. All the meantime creating fake history that would be forced upon their grand children in the form of schools and public education.
Mabz
The problem with such timelines is they miss the truly great civilization that preceeded all of these. You can call it Atlantis or Mu or Stapler and Banana, it really does not matter the name, but it was worldwide and so far advanced to anything we have seen the last 5000 years (or whatever the 5000 year timeline really is). That heritage is so beyond our modern human comprehension as to be completely lost to modern human thinking. Only a few small pieces of it remain, of course lumped into the timeline you gave above in order to hide it from human knowledge. One of the great pieces of this study is not only to uncover what happened in the last 2-300 years (most of this forum's work) but to be uncovering that very very ancient civilization as well. That power is unsurpassed. I can say that because I have experienced it personally at a few sites worldwide. The experiences are so incredible I promised never to have them mentioned until after I have died. That is how special this ancient civilization was, and why it had to dissappear to history.
Sure, sort of mentioned it in a post yest but can retype those areas.
From why my research has shown, and you have to be on site with these places because you have to equally feel them as much as simply see the stone work, the type of cuts and carving quality, the geometry ect.
What I would say for sure is the real ancient culture would be
Tiahuanaco and Puma Punku in Bolivia
The main pyramids at Giza, Daschur, Abu Rawash. A few sites are still ancient, but most of the ruins on top were built from the 5000BC-1000AD culture such as Sakkara or Abu Sir. Those sites are ancient and you can see those remnants, but most of what is there is just the Egyptians building on top in inferior fashion. Same with Giza. Beyond the main pyramids, the Sphinx, Valley Temple, and Sphinx Temple (there a couple more of the ancient sites there that are hard to spot except right at them) beyond that the rest there is dynastic egypt half-assed building.
Teotihuacan in Mexico, at least the main structures that have the mica floors are ancient.
I have not been to Great Zimbabwe or a couple of sites in India that I think fit that bill.
Of course a problem is like what you see at say Abu Sir. Where you have maybe a 30,000 year old foundation, that has 4,000 year old construction on top of it, so there can be other sites out there that are basically hidden as to their real age because not much pokes it head out. I use the Salt Lake City Temple and its possible pyramid beneath it as a good example. I tried hard for example at Chartres to get under the Cathedral and see the original temple the church was built over...but those permisssions are very hard to get.
Another good example of that is Luxor Temple. Back in the 80's when they repaired some of the columns in the main enclosure (they removed them and did a small excavation, and they found a basically complete far older temple below. They did a short examination as I was told, then just filled the whole thing and wrote nothing about any of it. There is no idea how old the temple that Luxor is built on is, or even what it looked like- I have only got a few "a guy knows a guy who saw it and he said" kind of info...but it sounded spectacular.
Another example is Ancient Rome. I think most of the city dates to a specific time period...what that time frame is, is of course up for debate. All but one building, The Pantheon. That thing is so out of place, it almost looks like it comes not just from a different time but a different world. Inside is an energy (not like Giza) but more like a real strong buzz like Avebury or Palenque...it tells me it does not come from the same time as everything else there.
Mabz
The problem with such timelines is they miss the truly great civilization that preceeded all of these. You can call it Atlantis or Mu or Stapler and Banana, it really does not matter the name, but it was worldwide and so far advanced to anything we have seen the last 5000 years (or whatever the 5000 year timeline really is). That heritage is so beyond our modern human comprehension as to be completely lost to modern human thinking. Only a few small pieces of it remain, of course lumped into the timeline you gave above in order to hide it from human knowledge. One of the great pieces of this study is not only to uncover what happened in the last 2-300 years (most of this forum's work) but to be uncovering that very very ancient civilization as well. That power is unsurpassed. I can say that because I have experienced it personally at a few sites worldwide. The experiences are so incredible I promised never to have them mentioned until after I have died. That is how special this ancient civilization was, and why it had to dissappear to history.
Sure I get that and I used to think similarly... But what is your actual frame of reference for these dates that you're listing? Why do you think these structures are so ancient?
Go back to 1 AD. Start with 8 people and use a human population calculator with .012 growth rate. The lowest it has "ever" been as they say. Go to the year 2019 and tell me what the population on this planet should be? (227,700,623,394). Start with even 100,000 people and you end up with numbers like 284,625,779,243,480.
I'm not a bible guy but something is just too off with what we currently understand to accept dates that old.
Well one is the ancient egyptians themselves. Their kings lists, such as at Abydos, go back 36,000 years. Of course modern historians ignore that because it does not fit their timelines.
Original timeline had to be fit in a box in the mid 1800's (yes that timeframe again) when egyptology first started. All time line had to a) be within the 4004 BC start time of the earth as believed fro the bible, and b) had to prove Darwin's evolution theory that current people (then Victorians) were the most evolved humans on earth ever. Anything showing greatness in the past had to be ignored.
More for the dates. Sites like Tiahuanaco Posnansky could date by the solstice sunrises from 12,000 BC over the Kalasaysa. Of course it could be 36,000 BC or 60,000 BC- one of the 24,000 precession cycle, he just chose the most recent one as his dating timeframe.
The pyramids in Egypt are just not like anything else on the planet. They do about 100 different things, are built to a standard of mathematics and geometry that we today with modern machines have no chance of duplicating- and it is what those internal structures can do, and the amount of work required to shape and position the 70 ton granite blocks for example. And that is just the chambers in those things we are allowed to see. The others might be far more remarkable. I wrote a lot of these details in my first book.
Really until one has studied such things as the pyramids for a long time, and by study I mean having been there for months at a time, examining every part of it, almost every stone, their true magnificence can not be understood. Too many downplay these structures in their youtube video or their blog post...yet if you ask them about their own experiences or examination of them, they have never been there. They looked at some pictures on the internet.
Ancient sites, even sites maybe not that old like Rome and Florence, have to be experienced and studied up close, with lots of time at hand to...how to say it, allow yourself to become friends with the site so it opens to you. It is the same with stone circles for example. you can't just go to it and walk around for an hour and think you know about them. One example was I went to the same stone circle for 10 straight days, and either examined the stones, the area, or just sat there. It took 5 full days of nothing before things started to get clear about what the site actually was.
So my dating comes from the fact that there are certain unique places that just from the standpoint of their building perfection, what they do energetically, and what happens when you are there place them at a time that does not fit in with anything else. Mainstream history and archaeology want to hide that and bring them all into "our timeframe" I say even 2500BC is "our timeframe"
That of course and the Ancient Egyptians themselves. If they say their civilization goes back 36,000 years, then i am more inclined to believe them than what Zahi Hawass has to say about it.
Post automatically merged:
Decided actually rather than take up this thread with this discussion of ancient civilizations and Egypt, i started a new one here Ancient Egypt Discussion
I am going to re post there what I have posted here.
I can't find the article, but I have one more thing to add—that the degeneration scenario is certainly plausible. Here are some examples of not just cultural, but extreme mental degeneration of a people:
I do not use the term ABorginal as it means NOT original, which I find a bit cheeky of the Europeans to be calling the people present in Van Diemens Land (Tasmania) and all of Terra Australis Incognita (Australia) prior to their arrival.
I read the article on the Tasmania indigenous people linked above and cannot but help question the accuracy of the information and find it very narrow and skewed. Some of the most horrendous stories about the settlement of Australia come out of Tasmanian. The indigenous people were hunted like animals (literally had hunting 'parties'), slaughtered in merciless manners, and the European attempted to 'breed out' the indigenous blood. This happened all around Australia as the Europeans attempted to commit genocide but Tasmania suffered intensely. It is interesting that the linked article centred on Tasmania and how primitive the indigenous people were. I am no history buff but know enough to seriously question the interpretation of the 'white man's' perception of the indigenous as described in the narrative in the link.
I think the majority of what we are taught is b@llocks and that article comes pretty close to the top of the b@llocks list (sorry). The earlier indigenous people were very adept at surviving in extreme conditions, had developed complex social structures and spiritual beliefs/practices (and clothing, although simple, was worn in the colder climes). I know nothing of advanced tech (which doesn't mean it did not exist amongst them). There were flood narratives in their culture prior to European arrival. Apparently there are pyramid structure here in Australia but I have not researched this. Jon Levi or Flat Earth British have covered Australia re mud flood and certain historical buildings being in the same 'colonial' style found around the world.
guess not wanting to fish any more wasn't so dumb after all.....
3,500 BP
Scale fish called wrasse or parrot fish, which constituted no more than 5-10% of the diet, developed a disease which made the fish fatally toxic for humans; wrasse were dropped from the diet
Brighton Beach, New York. Basalt. Few links plus some pics from google earth. Look at the shape and size. They are strewn out along the shore. How many more out there under the New York buildings, or part of them?
Drawing are clearly of an old Russian origin. Here is another example to compare.
This is German Rugen former Russian Ruyan which is depicted in Sagas and fairy tales.
In the viking sagas when they interact with "skrællingerne" (ancient american inhabitants) the americans had warslings and/or catapults with shots that made hideous noise once hitting the ground.
It's not exactly what I think of when I think of american indians but maybe you guys know better. Is this common knowledge?
I'm more curious as to why the "first reference" to the people before the Cherokee in your third source is from 1797... What were they doing for the 300 years prior? So, no one even bothered to talk to the Cherokee before the American Revolutionary War?
I'm more curious as to why the "first reference" to the people before the Cherokee in your third source is from 1797... What were they doing for the 300 years prior? So, no one even bothered to talk to the Cherokee before the American Revolutionary War?
There is a link on here somewhere for peopleofonefire.com which is a site about pre-Columbian southeast USA.
The person who writes it says the Cherokee are relative newcomers in the areas where we now find them. He has a map in one post that appears to show the Cherokees way up near Montreal in the early 1600s I think. You may be interested to have a look at his stuff. I haven't seen that book referenced there, but he does say that the people living there were of quite mixed heritage, including people of ancient European lineages.
I'm more curious as to why the "first reference" to the people before the Cherokee in your third source is from 1797... What were they doing for the 300 years prior? So, no one even bothered to talk to the Cherokee before the American Revolutionary War?
Traditions of the Ancient White People, the fact that the Native Americans have tales written down long ago which corroborate some of the Biblical account is truly amazing. What a strange place we inhabit.
To read the accounts here on stolen history and see how much deception has been imposed upon the population, who can doubt that we are up against a foe which seeks to hide, distort and destroy the devine spark humanity?
My God, Jon Levi is my favorite youtuber right now. He reads an article from Clearfield, PA in 1858 that describes an old world American civilization with amazing architecture in ruins and covered with vegetation.
Good catch, Ice. I believe we've made this connection before—the Scythians (Tartarians) being warlike nomads who specialized in horse archery and were the first-known wearers of pants. But these were not primitive nomads, as their goldwork alone reveals a level of artistry approaching perfection.
The unnamed correspondent from the previous month's issue has a theory in which he is so confident as to claim it a certainty, that the Native Americans are the degenerated stock of Tartarians who were forced to flee their cities by invaders. The columnist proceeds to waste the rest of the article attacking the correspondent because he dared use the term "white people" to describe the Tartarians, who we know, quite frankly, were white in general. The first thing to do is locate the June, 1816 article from the NY Evening Post...if possible.
From Jon Levi's video evidence is presented that these ancient American ruins were some ~1600 years abandoned as of the 1800's, indicating that something happened around the year 200 AD.
![[Recueil_]_Bavière_Autriche_Pologne_[...]Kral_Wilhelm_btv1b8432946m_46.jpg](https://data.stolenhistory.net/kotk_attachments/25398/recueil_-_bavière_autriche_pologne_-kral_wilhelm_btv1b8432946m_46.jpg "[Recueil_]_Bavière_Autriche_Pologne_[...]Kral_Wilhelm_btv1b8432946m_46.jpg")
![[115_phot_des_Etats-Unis_(Texas_[...]Hill_S_btv1b530846959_47.jpeg](https://data.stolenhistory.net/kotk_attachments/25400/115_phot_des_etats-unis_-texas_-hill_s_btv1b530846959_47.jpeg "[115_phot_des_Etats-Unis_(Texas_[...]Hill_S_btv1b530846959_47.jpeg")
![[115_phot_des_Etats-Unis_(Texas_[...]Hill_S_btv1b530846959_151.jpeg](https://data.stolenhistory.net/kotk_attachments/25401/115_phot_des_etats-unis_-texas_-hill_s_btv1b530846959_151.jpeg "[115_phot_des_Etats-Unis_(Texas_[...]Hill_S_btv1b530846959_151.jpeg")
