Another hit for the C's -- Native Americans?

[cholas]

Though possibly fascinating to read, many if not most 'oral traditions' seem to be peppered with truths and half-truths with a little new agey wishful thinking thrown in, imho.

That being said there are groups, the Shompen for example, that have been isolated for a very long time and were likely in a better position to preserve their oral stories.

It is argued that, with this return, Mexico will become the next center of power.

Huh? If it is I'm moving. ;)

 

[journey]

Here I was loosely stating that there isn't much info on the Teotihuacan people in the C's transcripts, however there is mention of Toltecs and of course Mayans.

Thanks

With respect, journey, I've read roughly the same thing on wikipedia but that doesn't necessarily make it true. Maybe just nitpicking here, but who says the Olmec are older than the Teotihuacan people?

Historian, anthropologist, archaeologist, oral tradition, etc.
What makes you think Olmec is not earlier than Teothiuacan?

I can provide other sources in Internet, but information will not be too different from wikipedia or the official version of the history, unless you have different information, I am more than glad to hear about it.

Maybe a move away from the 'just got back from history class at the university' and towards the 'thinking outside of the box' that Laura mentioned would shed light on many documented clues to/from the past.

With the right questions perhaps.

Though possibly fascinating to read, many if not most 'oral traditions' seem to be peppered with truths and half-truths with a little new agey wishful thinking thrown in, imho.

That being said there are groups, the Shompen for example, that have been isolated for a very long time and were likely in a better position to preserve their oral stories.

Oral tradition was the only option left by the spaniards, to preserve the cultures in the whole continent.

 

[journey]

It is argued that, with this return, Mexico will become the next center of power.

Huh? If it is I'm moving. ;)

Take your time, this is not going to happen on this generation or the next one. :) But......Who knows :/

 

[Laura]

Journey, I've followed this discussion a bit and my impression is that you really need to find a board where this topic is the centerpiece and considered a valid source. We, here, for a variety of reasons do NOT have an affinity for the South American traditions. You are more interested in promoting it than in reading and learning what we are interested in. So, again, my thought is that you should find a discussion forum where you will be more "at home."

 

[shijing]

Historians had documented the existence of this personage.
Here is the historic Tlacaelel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tlacaelel

OK, thanks for the link -- that grounds your previous reference much better.

The book is in Word format 928 kb size, I can send it to you if you wish.

That's fine for now, although thanks for your generosity -- I will remember it in case I do want to request it later.

I do not know what you qualify by New Age is good or bad, but is very healthy to be wary regarding spiritual matters.

Agreed -- I generally consider anything that is standard 'New Age' as something to be cautious about, since there seems to be good evidence that much of (and the core of) that movement is a Cointelpro program managed behind-the-scenes to entrain people who were otherwise not going to go for the traditional religions (a forum search on 'New Age' would probably turn up some good results on this).

I can not agree or disagree with you on this, Mexico have been the center of power many times in past.
What we see now is new race, a bastard child looking for its own identity.

When you say that 'Mexico has been the center of power many times in past', what do you mean -- do you mean of the Americas, or the world, or what? I also want to ask how one could know this, but I want to make sure I understand clearly what you are saying first.

The reason I took exception to the claim that Mexico will 'become the next center of power' is because there doesn't seem to be much hope for anywhere on the surface of the earth becoming a major center of power anytime soon if half of what we suspect is going to happen in the next several years ends up occurring. We seem to be facing the very real possibility of major natural cataclysm (both from outside the earth in the form of comets, as well as earth-internal catastrophe which in part interrelates with the first), as well as a concerted offensive by STS forces (both 3D and 4D) that may manifest in ways that humankind is generally unprepared for. There is a general idea that is inherent in the 2012 meme, that says more or less that we are going to go through a trying period on our way to a new spiritual golden age, and this is represented as kind of a given -- in other words, as long as you grit your teeth for a bit, a wonderful new world will automatically emerge which is transcendent and wonderful. Its one possibility, however remote, but the fact that it is presented as a given is, I think, so much pied-piping, meant to lull people to sleep when they need most to be awake.

But now that you have mentioned "magical thinking", it is precisely what we need in order to understand their thoughts and perception of reality.

And this is the crux. I assume you are probably using 'magical thinking' in a way different than what Anart intended, but what 'magical thinking' means here is basically 'wishful thinking' -- which is an inherently STS mode of thinking (search on 'YCYOR' if you want to explore this in more detail). In this specific case, the wishful thinking is the assumption that the post-2012 era will be the golden age mentioned above. I get the impression that you engage in this assumption, although you haven't said so directly so I could be wrong.

Note: Laura just posted the above response, which I think is also valid. At the very least, this part of the thread has moved quite a bit off-topic of what the original post was about, so it could use its own thread.

 

[cholas]

Thanks for interjecting here Laura and shijing. We could probably carry on here with journey for a few more pages. Not that what you write is offensive journey, just that reading more of the work here on this site and SHotW would obvoiusly get you up to speed on some important information/concepts. As Laura said, it's not for eveybody. For example you would understand why Laura wrote what she did in her post(below).

We, here, for a variety of reasons do NOT have an affinity for the South American traditions.

At the very least, this part of the thread has moved quite a bit off-topic of what the original post was about, so it could use its own thread.

Yeah I agree. Maybe a brief summary is in order:

There seems to be evidence showing that Native Americans have more than one point of origin. Of course the information from the c's supports this as well.

We have, on the one hand, a group of Pyramid People whose ancestors hypothetically were part of the Atlantean civilization. They obviously understood a technology that has been lost today but possibly handed down to them at that time. Most of their older stone structures are located in S.America(pre-Incan). In more recent times we have had similar groups in Central America and Mexico as well as limited parts of the U.S.(Maya, Toltec, Aztec, Hopi, etc.). These groups traditionally had created large empires and were involved in agriculture.

On the other hand there are groups, especially in the Western U.S and Canada, but even as far south as Chile who appear to have traveled/were rescued from parts of Asia. They apparently didn't build pyramid structures out of stone or have a powerful long-lasting empire. Known as being hunter/gatherers.

Then of course there is an admixture of both variations as well. Also groups in the Eastern U.S especially, seem to be more related to the Circle People of Europe/Asia as far as their stone building is concerned.

Another piece to throw into the puzzle is the theoretic 'genetic tweaking' of the 4DSTS variety. Tolten, Aztec, Incan and Mayan groups might have been a part of this.

As an aside, where I lived as a child there is a earth/stone structure known today as Serpent Mound. Not much is known of it's builders(see quote below), but we can theorize that they were of the pyramid/atlantean variety. Yet within an 30minute drive to the north there are remnants of giant stone circular structures with nearby towns such as Circleville. Definitely more of the European circle type.

Q: (L) Who constructed the great serpent mound in Adams
County, Ohio?
A: Armonan sect.
Q: (T) Who are the Armonans?
A: Atlantean descendants.
Q: (T) So, this was a long time ago? (L) Is there anything
about them we would be advised to know or learn?
A: "Puzzle pieces."

 

[cholas]

As usual, in writing the above I was left with many questions in my noggin.

One of which had to do with blood type.

It certainly does look like it(blood type O) has an American origin, doesn't it -- quite in conflict with the out-of-Africa hypothesis since, as you say, it is a recessive trait.

In S.America at least, the history seems to be of agriculture-based empire(s). Yet many groups, in Peru in particular the native tribes are 100% type O blood(Mayans also) which I associated with hunter-gatherers.

However, in N.America, type A is more prevailant which is supposed to be related to agricultural peoples. I had thought of these peoples as being more hunter-gatherers.

Also, in terms of body size, the people of native S.American tribes are very small in stature. Most of the ancient stone structures though were obviously designed for very large-stature people. Many groups in N. America were/are also quite a bit taller.

Any chance this is related to the more recent(post-Atlantean era)genetic-tweaking factors?

 

[shijing]

Cholas -- thanks for your summary in the first of your two recent posts. I don't see anything that I could add to it at this point, and it makes me want to go digging in the ethnographic and archaeological literature, as there does seem to be reason to distinguish older, in situ Atlantean populations of the Americas responsible for the various structures you mention, and more recent populations that have either moved or been moved into at least North America.

In S.America at least, the history seems to be of agriculture-based empire(s). Yet many groups, in Peru in particular the native tribes are 100% type O blood (Mayans also) which I associated with hunter-gatherers.

However, in N.America, type A is more prevailant which is supposed to be related to agricultural peoples. I had thought of these peoples as being more hunter-gatherers.

I know that D'adamo (of blood-type diet fame) makes the correlation between type O-hunter gatherer, and type A-agriculturalist, but things may be more complicated than that. The big assumption that he is resting on is the out-of-Africa hypothesis, and as far as that goes he makes some reasonable inferences. However, since we have reason to believe that out-of-Africa is ultimately incorrect because it assumes a single genetic origin for all humans, and therefore fails to take into account multiple seedings of racial populations across time as the C's (and others) have described, we may have to take it with a grain of salt. It may very well be the case that type O was merely the default 'Atlantean' blood type (and maybe they lived a lifestyle that is consistent to an extent with D'adamo's analysis, having moved to an agricultural economy in the post-Atlantean world), and that type A was the default 'Kantekkian' blood type which they brought with them when they were evacuated to Earth. This hypothesis itself is overly simplistic -- it doesn't account for the relatively robust existence of type A in Australia for example:

Distribution of type A: _http://anthro.palomar.edu/vary/vary_3.htm

Nevertheless, we should probably consider this angle as well.

Also, in terms of body size, the people of native S.American tribes are very small in stature. Most of the ancient stone structures though were obviously designed for very large-stature people. Many groups in N. America were/are also quite a bit taller.

Any chance this is related to the more recent(post-Atlantean era)genetic-tweaking factors?

That's a possibility, although I think it is possible for the average physical size of a population to either grow or shrink when there is a marked change in nutrition, so the fact that South Americans are presently smaller in modern times doesn't mean that they were necessarily so at the time of the construction of the ancient stone structures. I don't know if this is the explanation, but its one more possibility.

 

[journey]

Journey, I've followed this discussion a bit and my impression is that you really need to find a board where this topic is the centerpiece and considered a valid source. We, here, for a variety of reasons do NOT have an affinity for the South American traditions. You are more interested in promoting it than in reading and learning what we are interested in. So, again, my thought is that you should find a discussion forum where you will be more "at home."

Excuse me Laura, I am not promoting anything here, the dynamics of the thread have turned aside to this conversation.
My intention was to provide information to validate the topic only.
Interesting you mention have no affinity for South American traditions, because we have not been talking about South American traditions at all.
Laura, is this how you treat new forum members when topic is not of your interest?

 

[shijing]

Hi Journey --

I'm not going to step in and answer Laura's question for her (I will say quickly that when she said 'South American', it should probably be read more correctly as 'Central American'), but I just wanted to offer a suggestion. I think a main concern up until now has been that you seem to be very invested in the material by Antonio Velasco Piña. That is not to say there is no truth in his writings (which I am not familiar with), or that the events described in Mexico in the 80s and 90s were false -- there just seems to be a lack of objectivity on your part about this, and one suspects that it may be a sacred cow for you, despite your caveats about being wary regarding spiritual material (an attitude which I very much agree with).

I would suggest that maybe you put the Antonio Velasco Piña material on the back-burner for now, and start investigating other parts of the forum site -- you seem to have a lot going on, and there is a lot of really useful material here to make use of if you expand your horizons and relax a bit re: asking the C's about validating the guardians' information. Just my two cents.

 

[John G]

Tiahuanaco may be where South America comes in and it's also quite ancient, closer to Atlantis. Also today South America is considered to be a place where some not so good things may still occur as in John Keel Eighth Tower hyperdimensional influences.

Q: (L) Who and what were the Mayans?
A: The Mayans were a transitory people who still exist in the lands that you refer to as Central America. And who have
certain physical features that are not consistent with the rest of human beings on 3rd density Earth environment, due to
their interactions, in the past, as you measure time, with beings of other density levels.
Q: (L) What beings would those be?
A: Well, we have described 4th density STS beings on many occasions.
Q: (L) The Lizard Beings?
A: Indeed.
Q: (L) Who was Arajuna of Tiahuanaco?
A: Well, we believe that you are referring to one of approximately eight hybrids that ruled the area currently referred to as
Central America. Hybrids being a 4th density to 3rd density transfer experiment from the Lizard race to the human race,
which was abandoned after approximately 240 years of experimentation by the Lizard Beings, due to the lack of success
for sustaining physical duplication, or reproduction of the race. It was one of several attempts by the Lizard Beings to
directly transmit their souls into 3rd density environment for permanent placement there. And, of course it is no longer
perceived as necessary by them because their intention is to rule 3rd density beings in 4th density when they arrive there.
Q: (L) Who built the city of Tiahuanaco?
A: The Lizard Beings in cooperation with humans.
Q: (L) When was it built?
A: Varying time frames since it seems to have been destroyed at two points. We have to estimate an average of 8,000
years prior to the current time, as you measure it.

 

[journey]

Hi Journey --

I'm not going to step in and answer Laura's question for her (I will say quickly that when she said 'South American', it should probably be read more correctly as 'Central American'), but I just wanted to offer a suggestion. I think a main concern up until now has been that you seem to be very invested in the material by Antonio Velasco Piña. That is not to say there is no truth in his writings (which I am not familiar with), or that the events described in Mexico in the 80s and 90s were false -- there just seems to be a lack of objectivity on your part about this, and one suspects that it may be a sacred cow for you, despite your caveats about being wary regarding spiritual material (an attitude which I very much agree with).

I would suggest that maybe you put the Antonio Velasco Piña material on the back-burner for now, and start investigating other parts of the forum site -- you seem to have a lot going on, and there is a lot of really useful material here to make use of if you expand your horizons and relax a bit re: asking the C's about validating the guardians' information. Just my two cents.

How come you and Cholas come out in defense of Laura? Is there something here I should know? Why did you both changed your attitude after Laura´s rude post ?

You will surprise to know that I am not invested in the material by Antonio Velasco Piña. I gave away the books several years ago and I haven´t had contact with Mr. Piña for almost twenty years and I do not have connections with the Mexicaneidad movement either.
About the events in Teotihuacan, I can testify they did happen as described, because I was a witness and a participant by chance.
I had a point when I brought Mr. Velazco Piña material into the conversation, but now it is irrelevant.
Incidentally, Mexico is not in Central America either

 

[cholas]

Tiahuanaco may be where South America comes in and it's also quite ancient, closer to Atlantis.

You might very well be correct here Bluelamp. There is more than a little evidence pointing towards a possible 'pre-flood' origin.

The similarities in the statues at Tiahuanaco and the Idols at Tula in north-central Mexico can't be overlooked. And the latter apparently created at a much later time.

If you haven't checked out the Cassiopeaen Timeline thread, there is some recent mention to be found there as well.

In SHothW, Tiahuanaco is mentioned numerous times and Laura provides a much greater in-depth and documented look at these ruins.

Incidentally, Mexico is not in Central America either.

When I read the same part of this transcript relating to Tiahuanaco journey it didn't seem very clear. But it's the additional research also that provides the clues.

If you are interested in ancient history, I would highly recommend having a look at Secret History.

 

[cholas]

journey,

It is of the utmost importance, imo, to recognize that when we join forums, we are essentially being invited into someone elses house/space/domain.

With this in mind, there is nothing wrong whatsoever with good discussion. And it doesn't always have to be in agreement, though in the end it usually is if all care to stay.

There have been a few hints dropped to you that becoming more familiar with the work/writings here will greatly improve on the level of noise that seems to come from being uninformed. We've all been there. There is very little you will be able to 'teach' this forum, however ideas/input is welcome.

No point in being defensive. Rather go back and reread this thread. Read the links provided. (and check out SHotW). You might decide you are in agreement and stick around or on the other hand it might not 'jive' with you and you venture on. No biggie.

FWIW.

 

[shijing]

Hi journey --

How come you and Cholas come out in defense of Laura? Is there something here I should know? Why did you both changed your attitude after Laura´s rude post ?

If you look at the continuity of our dialogue before and after Laura's post, I don't think there is really a change in attitude -- I did agree with Laura that this had gone somewhat off-topic, but suggested an alternative (that a new thread be created if you wanted to continue to discuss the topic you are interested in, that being the prehistory and future of the Latin American area, if I may summarize it that way).

About the events in Teotihuacan, I can testify they did happen as described, because I was a witness and a participant by chance.

I don't think anyone ever questioned the veracity of these events, but I'm sorry if it came across this way.

Incidentally, Mexico is not in Central America either

True, it is not.

A large part of participation in this forum involves being part of a network, and that includes giving each other feedback in areas where we perceive a need for mirroring, which is meant to help each other see our true belief systems objectively. I think Cholas's advice in the above post is good, and it wouldn't hurt to take a bird's-eye view of the forum and go exploring -- I also agree that you would probably like Secret History of the World if you haven't already read it.