The Land of Ophir and the Ancients Ones....

Just who and how did these monuments get built in North and South America?

Here is interesting article that might shed light on it. Rockwall Giants

http://www.noahsark-naxuan.com/PR/CORREX Giant Texas Skull.pdf

Pre Noah Flood times: Giants lived here on earth....some tall as 30 feet!
The Evolution of a Creationist

7 EARTH'S PRE-FLOOD WATER CANOPY

I can remember one particular lunch period sitting in my office at Baylor College of Dentistry studying Genesis 1. Those dental students had asked me to explain to them what God meant in verses 6-8a. How often we read the Bible but don't really think about what it says. As I studied these verses, I realized that I didn't know quite what they were saying. Here is what the Bible says:

"And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
And God called the firmament Heaven." (Gen.1:6-8a)

It says God divided the waters and put some water above the firmament (heaven 1:8a) and left some water under the firmament. What is this firmament? Genesis 1:20 reads:

"And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven."

The expanse or firmament of Genesis 1:7 may be the open heavens of Genesis 1:20 where the birds fly around. Now, there are several views and different interpretations in these Genesis verses, but the one that seems to make the most sense to me is this: God separated the waters that covered the earth in the beginning and left some on earth and put some up above where the birds fly. If this water was in the form of water vapor, it would have made the heaven and earth system #1 similar to a giant terrarium. There would have been no rain! And what does the Bible say? Genesis 2:6: "But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground." That is the exact effect expected if the earth was surrounded by a water vapor canopy: a morning mist would form. Genesis 2:5b is more specific: "...for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth." No rain, therefore no rainbow! Heaven and earth system #1 was obviously different from our present system, system #2.

The rainbow was the perfect object for God to use as the sign of His covenantal promise of no more global floods. Noah had never seen a rainbow in the clouds before the flood, because it had never rained. After the flood, when the canopy had collapsed during the forty days and nights of rain, Noah was in heaven and earth system #2, and was therefore experiencing our weather: rain and rainbows. He also would experience the difference between pre-flood system #1's heavy atmospheric pressure and system #2's post-flood lighter atmospheric pressure -- the latter causing rapid fermentation of alcohol and quite possibly the reason for Noah's drunkenness.

This pre-flood canopy probably consisted of water vapor. There are other theories, but we must keep in mind that the birds were flying in the expanse under this water, and one must be able to see through the water. The sun, moon and stars were visible to Adam and to Noah, in view of the fact that Genesis 1:14 states that they would serve as signs.

Water vapor is clear, unlike clouds or steam. A little experiment to prove this point can be accomplished in your kitchen by filling a tea-kettle with water and putting it on the stove to boil. When steam begins coming out of the spout, look closely at the very tip of the spout. You will see about one-half to one inch of clear 212°F. water vapor before it becomes cloudy steam. This may have been the form of the water that God put above the firmament in which the birds flew around.

THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT

With a water-vapor canopy, heaven and earth system #1 would be considerably different than our present system (#2). A greenhouse effect would be expected due to the heat generated by the sun-warmed canopy. Is there any evidence that greenhouse warmth once surrounded our globe? Palm tree fossils have been found in Alaska and broad leaf ferns in the Arctic. How could a palm tree fossil be in Alaska? Some scientists have postulated they travelled there on the tectonic plate (earth crust) movement over millions of years. But these trees are not millions of years old! A creationist would say, "No problem, palm trees grew in Alaska in the tropical world before the Flood." These trees were buried during the Flood of Noah's day resulting in their fossilization.

Scientists have found tropical forests and coal deposits in Antarctica. Ninety-foot plum trees which were quick frozen and over ninety feet in height with green leaves have been found in the New Siberian islands where, today, only one-inch high willows grow [see Charles Hapgood, The Mystery of the Frozen Mammoths; from Bassett Digby, The Mammoth and Mammoth Hunting Grounds in Northeast Siberia (N.Y.: Appleton, 1926), pp. 150-151].

In these frigid zones many trees, some fossilized and some quick-frozen, have been found with rings, signifying rapid, warm temperature growth. The Evolutionist asks, "How did they get here?" The Creationist says, "They grew there before the Flood when the earth was pole to pole greenhouse warm."

The water vapor canopy may have more than doubled atmospheric pressure on earth. In this environment of heavier atmospheric pressure, healing would be more efficient. Many hospitals have pressurized rooms called Hyperbaric Rooms. Into these rooms oxygen is pumped under pressure and healing is miraculously speeded up. Very sick people and the severely burned are treated in this high pressure environment.[1] In the pre-flood, high efficiency atmosphere, reptiles could have grown to immense sizes, giant flying creatures could have flown more easily, and gigantism would have been much more likely.[2]

THE GREAT DINOSAUR MYSTERY

Evolution has a problem called The Great Dinosaur Mystery. Where did the great dinosaurs come from; how did they grow so big; and, if it is "survival of the fittest", why did these powerful creatures become extinct?

A creationist would answer, "no problem". God created the giant reptiles and may have referred to one or two of them which existed in Job's day (see Job 40:15 - 41:34). Reptiles do not have a built-in growth inhibiting factor like other animals and man. The dinosaurs would have continued growing as long as they lived. The older they got, the bigger they grew. Reptiles function best, as cold-blooded animals, in warm temperature climates. God created large reptiles which kept growing in an efficient high pressure atmosphere with plenty of warmth and unlimited supplies of lush vegetation to eat and nothing to eat them. The Bible says,

"And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat...." (Genesis 1:30)

This indicates that all animals ate plants, not flesh, before the Flood. Plants themselves are a testimony to God's creative genius. They start as a seed and take dirt, water, air and sunshine and are converted into roses, rubber and rhubarb! And these incredible factories not only do not pollute the environment, but they silently clean the air and replenish it with life-supporting oxygen. Oh, the wonders of the God of all creation! It was only after the flood that God gave permission to eat flesh "Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things" (Genesis 9:3). Nothing ate the dinosaurs before the Flood, and they had bounteous vegetation as food. They, therefore, could grow to great size during a long lifetime of hundreds of years. Even Tyrannosaurus rex ate plants, not other dinosaurs, before the flood. The textbook pictures of this great dinosaur eating another reptile are not based on scientific method and are not supported with factual information. The three to five inch long teeth of the Tyrannosaurus rex have roots which are too short to support a meat-tearing, bone-crunching diet. Tyrannosaurus most probably was a vegetarian (at least before the flood of Noah, Genesis 1:29, 30) and used his long sharp teeth to strip leaves from plants. After the flood, these reptiles could never grow so huge. The lighter atmosphere (the weighty canopy came down as rain water at the flood), cooler average temperature and predators would prevent long life and excessive size.

By the way, did you know that there never was a dinosaur called "Brontosaurus"? Brontosaurus fooled the scientific community for many, many years. It turned out to be the head of one creature and the body of another. The evolutionary community was too embarrassed to admit this mistake for more than fifty years. Brontosaurus does not appear in most new textbooks.

In recent years some evolutionists have postulated that dinosaurs were warm-blooded, not cold-blooded creatures. Warm-blooded dinosaurs have been proposed because scientists are beginning to realize that 300,000 pound cold-blooded creatures do not and could not exist in our environment. There is not enough air pressure to enable their blood to circulate properly. Somehow an important fact has escaped the notice of these evolutionists (or they are "willingly ignorant," II Peter 3:5). The fact is these huge reptiles would have had no problem thriving in the warm, high pressure atmosphere of system #1. The big ones went into extinction after the Great Flood. It is not politically correct for an evolutionist to believe that the universal Flood of Noah's day actually happened. Belief in the Flood is grounds for dismissal from your job or cancellation of your grants. So the evolutionist is left to speculate regarding "The Great Dinosaur Mystery", whereas the creationist has a valid, scientifically testable position -- the environmental differences between system #1 and system #2.

Evolutionists may have theorized that warm-blooded dinosaurs would solve their dilemma, but recent research indicates that the giant reptiles were cold-blooded as are all reptiles to this day. The Dallas Morning News of March 21, 1994 (p.9-D) reported that three University of Pennsylvania paleontologists have published their view (in Nature magazine) that ..."dinosaurs...were probably cold-blooded..." This is a blow to the evolutionist's dream of solving the mystery of these huge creatures! Of course if you wait a few days some other evolutionary scientists will refute his colleagues' position. Evolutionists keep batting this "warm-blooded" or "cold-blooded" idea back and forth. The Dallas Morning News of July 11, 1994 (page 7-D) published a review by science reporter Matt Crenson of a July 1994 Nature magazine article. The review is partially quoted here:

"Tyrannosaurus rex had a stable body temperature, a new study shows, suggesting that the largest terrestrial carnivore was warm-blooded.

Reese E. Barrick and William J. Showers of North Carolina State University in Raleigh studied Tyrannosaurus bones uncovered in the rocks of the Hell Creek Formation in eastern Montana...

The remarkable consistency of the oxygen isotopes in the dinosaur's bones demonstrate that its body temperature never varied by more than about 7 degrees Fahrenheit, the North Carolina researchers wrote last week in Nature. If Montana's seasons were anywhere near as variable 70 million years ago, when Tyrannosaurus lived, as they are today, a creature with such a stable body temperature would have had to be warm-blooded."

A creationist might say that a stable body temperature in a giant cold-blooded reptile is consistent with the creationist view that the earth's temperature was uniformly warm in the tropical pre-Flood heaven and earth system number one. Creationists would expect to find "...remarkable consistency of the oxygen isotopes in the dinosaur's bones...". Apparently these evolutionistic researchers would rather pretend that cold-blooded reptiles were actually warm-blooded than to consider the pre-Flood pole-to-pole greenhouse warm condition of earth (6,000 years ago, not 70 million years ago) as presented by the creationist model.

The giant flying reptiles such as the pterosaurs (pterodactyls and pteranodons) would be unable to fly in our present atmosphere. They needed a heavier atmosphere to get enough air to lift them with their 40 to 50-foot wingspans. Heaven and earth system #1 would have provided the heavier atmospheric pressure necessary for the flight of these huge creatures. Evolutionists say we don't know how these giant reptiles could have flown in our atmosphere. To a creationist, this is not a problem. Heaven and earth system #1, before the water canopy came down at the flood of Noah's day, would have provided the air density needed for these huge creatures to fly. In order to protect their jobs the evolutionists dare not even suggest the global flood of Noah's day as part of the solution to their problems, and yet the Flood supplies the explanation for what we "see". We even read in our older history books about ancient cultures which taught a global flood.

Gigantism was common in the heavy pre-flood atmosphere. Fossil dragonflies with a 32-inch wingspan have been discovered and would be a frightful bug to hit your windshield! The hornless rhinoceros grew to about "...seventeen feet high and nearly thirty feet long!" [3] Giant sabre-toothed tigers, mastodons and woolly mammoths roamed the earth side-by-side with the great dinosaurs.

Man lived during the age of the dinosaurs. In cretaceous rock strata of the Paluxy River bottom near Glen Rose, Texas, human and dinosaur footprints have been found crisscrossing each other. Much has been said about these footprints because, if authentic, they prove in solid rock that man and dinosaur lived at the same time. If accepted as genuine, they are a fatal blow in rock to evolution. They are proof that evolution is a false speculation of man! Most textbooks claim that the dinosaurs became extinct about 60 or 70 million years before man stepped onto the scene and into his footprints. Dinosaur and human footprints crisscrossing each other in the same rock strata destroys the evolutionary belief that over a period of millions of years man evolved from his ancient reptilian ancestors!

Two Texas scientists have sectioned (cut into slices of rock) one of these human footprints. Carl Baugh and Don Patton discovered that the rock under the footprints shows pressure structures (called laminations). These pressure structures are exactly what a scientist would expect to find surrounding a human footprint! The human prints (and there are many) are not "carved" into the river-bed and neither arethe dinosaur prints.[4]

In the summer of 1993 Drs. Patton and Baugh noticed eleven and one-half inch long human footprints (people have feet that big today) stepping along - left, right, left, right - inside giant three-toed dinosaur prints. Someone was walking in the soft mud of fresh dinosaur tracks! One of the tracks shows in rock the human footprint beside the dinosaur track. Apparently the person got "side-tracked" and missed one dinosaur print, but got back "on track" for his next step. These footprints are conclusive, hard, observable evidence that man and dinosaurs walked the earth simultaneously. For a while The Humanist magazine had discredited these Paluxy River footprints to the extent that creationists withdrew their articles and films (a good film documenting the footprints is entitled Footprints in Stone). The summer of 1993 work by Drs. Baugh and Patton should put the shoe back on the other foot! Contact Dr. Don Patton for the incredible account of how several of the footprints (but not all) were destroyed by an overly threatened evolutionist attempting to "...suppress the truth...".

Proverbs 14:12 tells us that "There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." Evolutionists travel to Glen Rose, Texas and examine the human and dinosaur footprints side by side or overlapped with each other in cretaceous rock, and they concoct foolish speculations rather than bow their knees and heads before their Creator who told us all that dinosaurs and humans existed together on the sixth day of the creation week. The Bible teaches that man and dinosaur shared the same earth at the same time (Genesis 1). This presents no difficulty since those giant creatures ate only plants before the Flood! In the early days of His creation, God prevented animals from eating each other or man, since He purposed to fill the earth with His creatures.

Another evidence to support the fact that people and dinosaurs lived at the same time in history is the cave paintings of dinosaurs. How could a "pre-historic" man or woman paint a picture of a dinosaur if he or she had never seen one? The Institute for Creation Research (ICR) circulates an excellent video documenting the cave drawings of dinosaurs.

LONGEVITY OF LIFE

Another result of the water (vapor?) being above the firmament in which the birds fly would be the shielding effect from cosmic radiation. Scientists have studied how much solar radiation is filtered by water. Their conclusions are reported by Dr. Joseph Dillow in his book, The Waters Above: Earth's Pre-Flood Water Vapor Canopy. In heaven and earth system #1, people could live to be very old. One of the primary aging factors is solar radiation. By filtering out the harmful radiation (as a water canopy would do) humans might be able to live close to l,000 years.

The Bible reports that Adam died at 930 years of age and Methuselah lived almost l,000 years. After the flood, the ages of people dropped off drastically to an average of 70 to 80 years. A lot of people think that you cannot believe the Bible when it says people lived to be 800 or 900 years old -- that it must be a different kind of year or the writer did not know quite what he was talking about. Those old ages are 360-day years just like the Bible says (compare Genesis 7:11 and 8:3,4).[5] You can believe the Bible as it is written. Some present-day researchers who study longevity of life believe that humans could live that long again if we were sheltered from the harmful effects of the sun and the now polluted air.

Solar shielding by the water canopy above the atmosphere where the birds fly would also affect dating techniques. Negligible amounts of carbon 14 would have formed before the flood.[6] That means that carbon 14 dating techniques would be totally worthless after 5,000 years or so. More about dating techniques later.
 

Attachments

  • giantschart.gif
    giantschart.gif
    39.4 KB · Views: 1,286
  • giants-3.jpg
    giants-3.jpg
    40.8 KB · Views: 1,371
goverton said:
Just who and how did these monuments get built in North and South America?.....

I suppose a study of the Sumerian tablets would be the oldest record we're aware of that describes the advanced folks who first came to our planet. They were looking for gold as a catalyst for their technology to help regenerate their failing atmosphere back home, and earth has gold. They needed worker bees to mine the gold and created humans as a sort of dna splice with native critters. The experiments failed a few times, but then they finally got it right, and now here we are. Or so the stories go. The Stritchin book, 12th Planet, sort of popularized these legends. Keep in mind this is a mass market work.

Whoever has been in charge all these years had the technology from the start to build the old buildings we occasionally find. All the religions that followed were updates of the original truths, whatever those were. These religions were, and still are, solar based and have served as crowd control over the humans. I guess there's seven billion of us now. Hope it's not time for another purge.
 

Dr. Baugh, as mentioned in goverton's article, is also the founder and curator of the Creation Evidence Museum in Glen Rose, TX. If you go to the museum's website www.creationevidence.org you can see the info about some of the objects on display there. He is the one who has the western boot with the fossilize human foot inside. Also a fossilized human finger, human sandal prints in stone that crushed a trilobite (that's misspelled I know). On the website you can read several briefs of scientific papers concerning many very interesting subjects that prove a young earth and one in particular that lends proof that the earth is the result of an INSTANTIOUS creation. If you want to read about THAT, look for the paper about Polonium 214 halos in granite.
 

Springfield said:
goverton said:
Just who and how did these monuments get built in North and South America?.....

I suppose a study of the Sumerian tablets would be the oldest record we're aware of that describes the advanced folks who first came to our planet. They were looking for gold as a catalyst for their technology to help regenerate their failing atmosphere back home, and earth has gold. They needed worker bees to mine the gold and created humans as a sort of dna splice with native critters. The experiments failed a few times, but then they finally got it right, and now here we are. Or so the stories go. The Stritchin book, 12th Planet, sort of popularized these legends. Keep in mind this is a mass market work.

Whoever has been in charge all these years had the technology from the start to build the old buildings we occasionally find. All the religions that followed were updates of the original truths, whatever those were. These religions were, and still are, solar based and have served as crowd control over the humans. I guess there's seven billion of us now. Hope it's not time for another purge.

hi Steve ,
i don't have all that much faith in Z.S's translations , might be different if he were not the only one coming up with the alien control translation ,but who knows . the truth could be even weirder i guess .
probably not the first time man has advanced , the ooparts list really makes me scratch my head .
even if not all of them are genuine ,
you would think that a gold chain embedded in a coal vein or something would really turn heads.
but the planet keeps spinning , and someone does seem to be in control . go figure .
been meaning to tell whoever i don't mind very well, don't like to feel like a puppet , ya know?
just not sure who is behind the curtain, not sure just who to tell.....
 

Gaints notwithstanding lets get back the the subject of Ophir...
some evidence shows that perhaps the Philippines may have been 'one' of the Lands of Ophir as I do believe that Ophir is the code word, coined my Solomon himself to mean "where we get the gold now"

so in that light lets look at first what wiki says....

Ophir in Genesis 10 (the Table of Nations) is said to be the name of one of the sons of Joktan. Biblical references to the land of Ophir are also found in 1 Kings 9:28; 10:11; 22:48; 1 Chronicles 29:4; 2
Chronicles 8:18; Book of Job 22:24; 28:16; Psalms 45:9; Isaiah 13:12
.
—John Masefield, "Cargoes"
Quinquireme of Nineveh from distant Ophir,
Rowing home to haven in sunny Palestine,
With a cargo of ivory,
And apes and peacocks,
Sandalwood, cedarwood, and sweet white wine.

The Kitab al-Magall states that in the days of Reu, a king of Saba (Sheba) named "Pharoah" annexed Ophir and Havilah to his kingdom, and "built Ophir with stones of gold, for the stones of its mountains are pure gold."
In the Cave of Treasures, this appears as: "And the children of Ophir, that is, Send, appointed to be their king Lophoron, who built Ophir with stones of gold; now, all the stones that are in Ophir are of gold."
The version in the Conflict of Adam and Eve says: "Phar’an reigned over the children of Saphir [Ophir], and built the city of Saphir with stones of gold; and that is the land of Sarania, and because of these stones of gold, they say that the mountains of that country and the stones thereof are all of gold."
[edit]Theorized or conjectural locations

Africa
Biblical scholars, archaeologists and others have tried to determine the exact location of Ophir. Vasco da Gama's companion Tomé Lopes reasoned that Ophir would have been the ancient name for Great Zimbabwe in Zimbabwe, the main center of sub-African trade in gold in the Renaissance period — though the ruins at Great Zimbabwe are now dated to the medieval era, long after Solomon is said to have lived. The identification of Ophir with Sofala in Mozambique was mentioned by Milton in Paradise Lost (11:399-401), among many other works of literature and science.
Another possibility is the African shore of the Red Sea, with the name perhaps being derived from the Afar people of Ethiopia, Eritrea, and Djibouti.
Americas
On the other hand, the theologian Benito Arias Montano (1571) proposed finding Ophir in the name of Peru, reasoning that the native Peruvians were thus descendants of Ophir and Shem.

Proponents of pre-Columbian connections between Eurasia and the Americas have suggested even more distant locations such as modern-day Peru or Brazil.
[edit]Asia
[color=blue[color=blue]]In the 19th century Max Müller and other scholars identified Ophir with Abhira, at the mouth of the Indus River in modern-day Pakistan.A[/color]ccording to Benjamin Walker Ophir is said to have been a town of the Abhira tribe.[1][2] Most modern scholars still place Ophir either on the coast of either Pakistan or India, in what is now Poovar, or somewhere in southwest Arabia in the region of modern Yemen. This is also the assumed location of Sheba. Saudi Arabia's cradle of gold, Mahd adh Dhahab.
A more specific p[/color]ossibility is Southern India or Northern Sri Lanka, where the Dravidians were well known for their gold, ivory and peacocks. A dictionary of the Bible by Sir William Smith published in 1863,[3] notes the Hebrew word for peacock Thukki, derived from the Classical Tamil for peacock Thogkai joins other Classical Tamil words for ivory, cotton-cloth and apes preserved in the Hebrew Bible. This theory of Ophir's location in Tamilakkam is further supported by other historians.[4][5][6] Ophir, referring to the country of the port Tarshish may well refer to the nation of the Tamil VelirNaga tribe Oviyar in ancient Jaffna, who lived around the famous port towns of Mantai and Kudiramalai, home to the historic Thiruketheeswaram temple.
Other assumptions vary as widely as the theorized locations of Atlantis. Portuguese mythology locates it in Ofir, a place in Fão, Esposende. Easton's Bible Dictionary (1897) adds a connection to "Sofir," the Coptic name for India. Josephus connected it with "Cophen, an Indian river, and in part of Asia adjoining to it," (Antiquities of the Jews I:6), sometimes associated with a part of Afghanistan.

In the medieval and early colonial period, commentators on classical Greco-Roman literature first began hinting that the Cinnamon Route might trace eventually from Africa to the east in Asia. Many of the terms used for spices in early works are obscure and can be difficult to identify. The commentators interpreted these terms into the contemporary language at a time when the knowledge of the world had greatly increased. In most cases, we can confidently associate these latter spice names with species that we know today.

Thus, when the ancient writer Pliny mentions tarum as a product of East Africa we understand it as aloeswood because later commentators translate tarum with a word that is no longer obscure: lignum aloe “aloeswood.” By the time of the commentators, the source of the aloeswood was already well-known. Pliny mentions tarum as coming from the land that produced cinnamon and cassia in Africa. But the commentators give it an identity which clearly indicates a tropical Asian origin in their time.

So why were these Asian products turning up in African markets? Pliny is the only writer who attempts an explanation and the related passages have been the source of much scholarly controversy. The details will be discussed later in this book, but the historian James Innes Miller was possibly the first modern scholar to put on his glasses and use Pliny and other evidence to suggest that Austronesian traders had brought spices to African markets via a southern maritime route. Miller connected the spice route with the prehistoric settlement of Madagascar by Austronesian seafarers. spices from southern China and both mainland and insular Southeast Asia were brought by Austronesian merchants whom he associates with the people known to the Chinese by the names Kunlun and Po-sse.

Miller’s book was the defining work of his time and it still has a profound influence on historians of trade and seafaring. However, classical historians, philologists even casual graduates of online universities and other scholars had mixed views on Miller’s thesis. A number of alternative theories sprung up and Miller was criticized, sometimes rightfully so, with using too many loosely-established ideas to support his argument. One of our main goals will be to use newer evidence along with some apparently missed by Miller to show that, for the most part, his idea of a southern transoceanic route was correct.

In addition to Miller’s Cinnamon Route, there also existed a “Clove Route” to China and India.

The evidence for these early spice routes comes from every available field including history, archaeology, linguistics, genetics and anthropology. For example, we can show by a process of elimination that a southern route for tropical Asian spices into Africa is historical. The exact details of this route are not known to us from history but the route itself is the only reasonable conclusion given the historical sources at our disposal. We can then bolster the testimony of history by bringing in supporting evidence from other fields.

One way we do this is to show that certain cultural items that came from Southeast Asia, or at least tropical Asia, were diffused first to the southeastern coast of Africa before moving northward at dates that are supportive of our thesis. One example is the diffusion of the domestic chicken (Galllus gallus) to Africa. The oldest archaeological remains of this species may date back to 2,800 BCE from Tanzania.4 The earliest similar evidence in Egypt is not earlier than the New Kingdom period about 1,000 years later. To support this finding, there is additional evidence provided by the presence of the double outrigger5, barkcloth, various types of musical instruments6 and other cultural items present on the southeastern African coast. Possibly also the distribution of the coconut crab7, the world’s largest land-based invertebrate also provides evidence for this early southern contact.

An important factor in ascertaining the old spice routes from Southeast Asia is the trail of cloves from Maluku and the southern Philippines north to South China and Indochina and then south again along the coast to the Strait of Malacca. From there the cloves went to India spice markets and points further west. This north-south direction of commerce through the Philippines has recently been recognized by UNESCO as part of the ancient maritime spice route. The Philippine-Maluku hub persisted into Muslim times and is chronicled in Arabic historical and geographic writings.

While the clove route started in the south, cinnamon trade began in the north. The cinnamon route started in the cinnamon and cassia-producing regions of northern Indochina and southern China and then likely proceeded from South China spice ports southward during the winter monsoon down the Philippine corridor. The route likely turned southeast at that point to Sumatra and/or Java to pick up different varieties of cinnamon and cassia along with aloeswood and benzoin. From southwestern Indonesia the voyage then took the Austronesian merchants across the great expanse of the Indian Ocean to Africa.

Linguistically the clove route is supported by the distribution of names for ginger in the Malay Archipelago. These appear to have followed the clove route from China through the Philippines to the rest of insular Southeast Asia.
 

:hello:

why rangler , what excellent cut and paste skills you have ! :wav:.


I'm your huckleberry :blob1: :laughing9:
 

I think a link would have been sufficient. Much easier than typing all that. If it is published work, I want to know the author. This is a controversial topic and no sense getting trouble started. If its not your own work, go gentle on the cut and paste please. I dont know where the article ends and the explanation starts.

I wont talk you all to death. I took the article and put out there my own work, with pictures. I dont extraploate, I leave it for you to believe or not believe. What a way to kill a thread.
 

Casca said:
I think a link would have been sufficient. Much easier than typing all that. If it is published work, I want to know the author. This is a controversial topic and no sense getting trouble started. If its not your own work, go gentle on the cut and paste please. I don't know where the article ends and the explanation starts.

I wont talk you all to death. I took the article and put out there my own work, with pictures. I dint extrapolate, I leave it for you to believe or not believe. What a way to kill a thread.

John, this thread is to big to hurt with a simple opinion, based on revenge.

You screwed up royally and you know it. Do not go to the dark side, because of it. Or what ever.

I have enjoyed your pictures and I believe you have some good stuff.

Please do not burn bridges that you will need in the future. :coffee2:
 

Casca:
You AIN'T been aburning any bridges that I can see. If someone can't stand open questions about their declarations, that would be THEIR problem; not yours. :coffee2:
 

Very Interesting Thread, and still alive for over two years (started April 12, 2009).

This entire debate, as intelligent as it is - proves only one irrefutable fact!

We (that is, Mankind collectively) do not Know our true origins. Quite simply...We may have opinions, gut feelings, strong intellectual leanings, religious convictions (beliefs), or educated guesses derived by scientific observation - but we Do Not Know our own "prehistory."

That we don't know, is evidenced by our desire to know, which is evidenced by this intelligent and insightful discussion.

Now here I offer something for consideration ... rather than looking backwards on the timeline of human history, we may wish to start at the beginning and "look forward."
I should preface the following comments by restating the title of this thread; "The Land of Ophir and the Ancient Ones..."

The theory of "Pangaea" (and the expanding Earth theory) may solve this riddle, as it allows for human occupation over all land masses in our distant prehistory. Just an idea to contemplate. In this way, the many anomalies and contradictions which have been brought to light regarding our "past" may be rectified. All human diversity reducing to a common cultural heritage. The roots, so to speak, of the human family tree.

Much more to say in favor of this theory...all for now though, just something to think about. :sign13:

Sincerely,
Voice of Reason
 

Actually, we have a history book that tells us about our past, as well as our present and future.
Many choose to not believe it, but that doesn't change the truth.
 

Kentucky Kache said:
Actually, we have a history book that tells us about our past, as well as our present and future.
Many choose to not believe it, but that doesn't change the truth.

Which book would that be Kentucky Kache?
 

CanadianTrout said:
Kentucky Kache said:
Actually, we have a history book that tells us about our past, as well as our present and future.
Many choose to not believe it, but that doesn't change the truth.

Which book would that be Kentucky Kache?

Do you have to ask? :)
Yeah, I'm speaking of the Bible. It's the only book that covers every inch of our existence, from beginning to end, and everything in between. We can believe that Washington crossed the Delaware, and we should. We can believe the ancient texts that we've dug up in Mesopotamia, and we should. Why can't we believe THIS book? BTW, those ancient texts from Mesopotamia agree with the Bible.
 

Gotta remember that all of the 'history' books were written by the 'winners', and NONE of them remotely resembles THE TRUTH.
 

gord said:
Gotta remember that all of the 'history' books were written by the 'winners', and NONE of them remotely resembles THE TRUTH.

Not the one I'm talking about. Think about it. The human race was destroyed, not because they were winners, but because they were losers. Why would they want to write about that? Because it's the truth.
 

Kentucky Kache said:
Actually, we have a history book that tells us about our past, as well as our present and future.
Many choose to not believe it, but that doesn't change the truth.

Strong point Kentucky Kache. And it is in the very first pages of that history book that we learn of our own inability to know the whole truth. Presently, and owing to what is described in the book, we are inherently in the dark when it comes to truth. Such is the human condition...my avatar is a simple expression of this idea and represents our predicament...as is described in the book.

I love that book, and hold it above all others - but let us be reasonable here.
Simple semantics - "belief" is not proof, as I pointed out above. The Truth is not subject to change in accordance with mankind's beliefs. In other words, though there may be (Is) Truth, our interpretation, translation, and understanding of such Truth is ever changing. Therefore, we are after the truth but have yet to Know It. Just because "it is there" does not imply "we have found it," even if it is in the book.

IMHO anyway.

Sincerely,
Voice of Reason
 

Voice of Reason said:
Strong point Kentucky Kache. And it is in the very first pages of that history book that we learn of our own inability to know the whole truth. Presently, and owing to what is described in the book, we are inherently in the dark when it comes to truth. Such is the human condition...my avatar is a simple expression of this idea and represents our predicament...as is described in the book.

I love that book, and hold it above all others - but let us be reasonable here.
Simple semantics - "belief" is not proof, as I pointed out above. The Truth is not subject to change in accordance with mankind's beliefs. In other words, though there may be (Is) Truth, our interpretation, translation, and understanding of such Truth is ever changing. Therefore, we are after the truth but have yet to Know It. Just because "it is there" does not imply "we have found it," even if it is in the book.

IMHO anyway.

Sincerely,
Voice of Reason

We do have such inability. But why is truth in the book if we had no way of understanding it? We have the inability that you speak of, and that is why it is required that one be sent to lead us into all truth. That one has been sent.
When you know the author, it's easier to understand His book.
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top