>>10148445

(Please read from the start)

"The presence of Uncle Sam inspired Thor Heyerdahl, the Norwegian explorer and author of Kon Tiki, among others to claim a Nordic ancestry for at least some of the Olmec leadership… [However], it is extremely misleading to use the testimony of artistic representations to prove ethnic theories. The Olmec were American Indians, not Negroes (as Melgar had thought) or Nordic supermen.”

>> This MIGHT turn out to be true. It just MIGHT be like the rest. What if the Olmec were a mixture of ALL the above? (Apart the Mormons theory)

For further reading about the “African origin” of the Olmec, anons can read about Mr. Ian Van Sertima. Please do compare how he was “attacked” to how Professor Finkel’s work was “promoted”.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Van_Sertima

“Ivan Gladstone Van Sertima (26 January 1935 – 25 May 2009) was a Guyanese-born associate professor of Africana Studies at Rutgers University in the United States.

He was best known for his Olmec alternative origin speculations, a brand of pre-Columbian contact theory, which he proposed in his book They Came Before Columbus (1976). While his Olmec theory has "spread widely in African American community, both lay and scholarly", it was mostly ignored in Mesoamericanist scholarship, and dismissed as Afrocentric pseudoarchaeology[2] and pseudohistory to the effect of "robbing native American cultures".

“He published his They Came Before Columbus in 1976, as a Rutgers graduate student. The book deals mostly with his arguments for an African origin of Mesoamerican culture in the Western Hemisphere.[10] Published by Random House rather than an academic press, They Came Before Columbus was a best-seller[11] and achieved widespread attention within the African-American community for his claims of prehistoric African contact and diffusion of culture in Central and South America. It was generally "ignored or dismissed" by academic experts at the time and strongly criticised in detail in an academic journal, Current Anthropology, in 1997.”

>> See how (((they))) treat the ones whom don’t fall in line?

“On 7 July 1987, Van Sertima testified before a United States Congressional committee to oppose recognition of the 500th anniversary of Christopher Columbus's "discovery" of the Americas. He said, "You cannot really conceive of how insulting it is to Native Americans … to be told they were 'discovered'”

>> I half way agree with Mr, Van Sertima because he was half correct in his theory (my opinion). And we shouldn’t go to extremes about Columbus because for the time of Columbus, he did “discover” something they ignored. We cannot judge “yesterday’s” knowledge with the one we have today. Each day we learn new things and evolve in more than one way, including our understanding of things. It’s a process that an individual goes through with time but it’s also a LONG process civilizations and humanity in general also evolves in slowly. As an example : Look where we were before Qteam showed up and look where we are now.

• Page 235 –

>>10160017

(Please read from the start)

“Van Sertima's work on Olmec civilization has been criticised by Mesoamerican academics,[15] who describe his claims to be ill-founded and false. Van Sertima's Journal of African Civilizations was not considered for inclusion in Journals of the Century.[16] In 1997 academics in a Journal of Current Anthropology article criticised in detail many elements of They Came Before Columbus (1976).[5] Except for a brief mention, the book had not previously been reviewed in an academic journal. The researchers wrote a systematic rebuttal of Van Sertima's claims, stating that Van Sertima's "proposal was without foundation" in claiming African diffusion as responsible for prehistoric Olmec culture (in present-day Mexico). They noted that no "genuine African artifact had been found in a controlled archaeological excavation in the New World." They noted that Olmec stone heads were carved hundreds of years prior to the claimed contact and only superficially appear to be African; the Nubians whom Van Sertima had claimed as their originators do not resemble these "portraits".[5] They further noted that in the 1980s, Van Sertima had changed his timeline of African influence, suggesting that Africans made their way to the New World in the 10th century B.C., to account for more recent independent scholarship in the dating of Olmec culture.[5]

They further called "fallacious" his claims that Africans had diffused the practices of pyramid building and mummification, and noted the independent rise of these in the Americas. Additionally, they wrote that Van Sertima "diminishe[d] the real achievements of Native American culture" by his claims of African origin for them.

Van Sertima wrote a response to be included in the article (as is standard academic practice) but withdrew it. The journal required that reprints must include the entire article and would have had to include the original authors' response (written but not published) to his response.[5] Instead, Van Sertima replied to his critics in "his" journal volume published as Early America Revisited (1998).

In a New York Times 1977 review of Van Sertima's 1976 book They Came Before Columbus, the archaeologist Glyn Daniel labelled Van Sertima's work as "ignorant rubbish", and concluded that the works of Van Sertima, and Barry Fell, whom he was also reviewing, "give us badly argued theories based on fantasies". In response to Daniel's review Clarence Weiant, who had worked as an assistant archaeologist specialising in ceramics at Tres Zapotes and later pursued a career as a chiropractor, wrote a letter to the New York Times supporting Van Sertima's work. Weiant wrote: "Van Sertima's work is a summary of six or seven years of meticulous research based upon archaeology, egyptology, African history, oceanography, astronomy, botany, rare Arabic and Chinese manuscripts, the letters and journals of early American explorers, and the observations of physical anthropologists…. As one who has been immersed in Mexican archaeology for some forty years, and who participated in the excavation of the first giant heads, I must confess, I am thoroughly convinced of the soundness of Van Sertima's conclusions."

In 1981 Dean R. Snow, a professor of anthropology, wrote that Van Sertima "uses the now familiar technique of stringing together bits of carefully selected evidence, each surgically removed from the context that would give it a rational explanation". Snow continued, "The findings of professional archaeologists and physical anthropologists are misrepresented so that they seem to support the [Van Sertima] hypothesis".

In 1981, They Came Before Columbus received the "Clarence L. Holte Literary Prize".[21] Sertima was inducted into the "Rutgers African-American Alumni Hall of Fame" in 2004.”

>> Mr Van Sertima was half way right in claiming an African “connection” to the Olmec. If he had pushed further, he would have probably found something amazing.

I know I didn’t find any Flood myths/stories in the Olmec civilization but the “other origin of the Olmecs”, will be useful for us later on in this thread. I’m not doing all of this for nothing anons. With this, I conclude the findings about the Olmec.

• Page 236 –

>>10152832

Well, I don’t know where to direct you anon. It is not written in one place, all in one go. It’s something I’ve been gathering for some time. I have it all in my head and I’m trying to put it in here in an organized way, as much as I possibly can. I’m working on daily basis on it. It’s interlinked with other subjects. I’ve already put some pieces of it in this thread, like when I talked about the Armenian Genocide, the movie called the Fifth element with Leeloo and the tattooed oracle/priestess statuette page 131 – maybe even the Jackal in the Dogon culture. What all of these have in common is what is in their blood or should I say the power within their blood.

In their sacrificial rituals, isn’t that what the bloodlines try to have = the power within the blood? It’s not just the power of the blood, it’s more like the power within the blood. I’m going to eventually talk about it in this thread when I reach that point but unfortunately it’s going to take me some time to get there as I need to gather and display all the evidence and pieces of the puzzle first. I cannot just come out and say: “hey! I think I figured out what is so important about the blood”.

It’s been a few months that I fully understand why Qteam took the approach they did about the awakening and dripping things to the public; they simply couldn’t come out and say it all in one go. It’s frustrating but I kinda understand them better now and unfortunately I will have to do the same. And when I reach there, it will be up to the persons reading this thread to verify what I’m saying and to make up their own mind. I’m no Einstein; I’m just TRYING to unravel this mystery, just like the rest of the anons. I don’t know if I will be successful or not. What you believe and think about it will be up to you. Personally I’m convinced I’m on the right track because of personal “experience” and witnessing some stuff. I’ve always been like St Thomas: I need to put my hand on it and see it with my own eyes to believe it. So there is personal conviction from my part because of what I witnessed.