sac beh
Member
for the rest i like the thread's general idea very close to the idea i've developed...what i don't like is all the insults going on...since historians can't get together on one account how arrogant are we to think we can, with internet LINKS???
the past is sooo far and obscure we can't possibly be able to find truth at once.
it will take mankind a lot longer to unveil the truth of our descendants.
I generally agree with your sentiments here. Just note that most of my comments here have been backed by serious archaeological evidence that I've read about from books in the fields of archaeology and anthropology. Now just because its in a book doesn't mean its correct, of course. But the bar is a bit higher to publish theories on pseudohistory in a book in one of these fields than on a web page.
So for example the fact that archaeologists have uncovered evidence of shamanic practices at least as early as 30,000 years ago does not take away from the aspects of other civilizations, but it does prove that similar cultural phenomena CAN appear in different civilizations in different time periods and in different places without there being direct contact between them. The similarities can be due to similar experiences of the natural world, genetically determined capacities of human learning, and the very structure of human cognition which is shared among, of course, all humans. To ignore these developments in the fields in order to promote a hypothesis of unilinear evolution of human culture from a single, rather late (in terms of human history) source doesn't help us in the search for the truth.