Religion v Archaeology

Arriving at a correct historical perspective – why is there so much mutual exclusivity? 

Every religion has its own peculiar account of history that is not only different from the others but also the current scientific understanding. For instance there is no physical evidence of any early Mormon settlement in the Americas which they claim to have happened over 2,500 years ago - well before the time of Jesus! When we consider that their version of history contains numerous anachronisms (such as horses, elephants, wheat, barley, solk, chariots, windows, steel, swords etc that were not in the Americas at the time) this is totally at odds with accepted science eg archaeology, genealogy and linguistics. Therefore - either science is wrong, the Mormons are wrong, or, possibly, both are wrong! 

Let us consider:

Australian Aborigines and the Dreamtime stories (Spiritic) 

Biblical creation stories (Abrahamic) 

Chinese creation stories (Taoic) 

Hindu creation stories (Dharmic) 

and several other (Animistic, Magic, Mystic, Siddhic, Superstitious) etcetera, such as Manichaeist, Vudun and Zoroastrian creation stories

That none agree indicates there is no one theory that fits all accounts. One or two or more may be partially right or they could all be wrong - and that includes the scientific view. Yet because of geographical isolation, cultural norms and value systems all may have 'evolved' from the one creation event (including the Big Bang, Mediocre Kerfuffle, or Tiny Little Pop.. depending on one's bent) into varying interpretations and theories. 

Non-religious philosophers argue that Man invents religion to try to make some sense out of the seemingly chaotic world and to give some purpose to the randomness of life. Religious philosophers argue that without a higher spiritual being there is no reason-to-be and life is devoid of any meaningful purpose. 

That a person may change their belief systems more than once in a lifetime illustrates that faith is an acquired facet of the personality, not something we are born with, like arms and legs. The tendency to develop faith may in itself be innate, but exactly what the object of such faith may be is left open at birth. The line that divides faith from belief may be more semantic than logical in that beliefs may be more easily changed and faith more or less fixed or fixated. Often faith is recognised by swearing an oath of allegiance to a single God or Dogma but even that is a formality rather than an actual state of consciousness. 

Indeed, one may change faiths several times, including apostasy and agnosticism – or even flip-flop between Creationism and Darwinism! However, none of that resolves the differences in history between science and religion/s. These accounts are just observations, much like history itself is a set of observations, and there are many perspectives, resulting in differing sets. 

What an oxymoron it is that what unites them all is their exclusivist nature - they all declare that they are the one true knowledge! (and mutually exclude each other) Hence the age-old paradox of life, consciousness, our capacity to feel and think (or not) and what to do with all of that. What sets humans apart from other lifeforms is the ability to act apart from the dictates of the senses and to choose rather than react automatically or instinctively as creatures do. Seagulls foraging discarded fries on the motorway do not look up at the Mack truck bearing down on them and muse, "You know what? I'm done with this life as a seagull. To hell with it."

One of the silliest, illogical and blind things about a human is that they decide that their own philosophy is superior to anyone else's - to the point of telling seagulls what to do. "No, you cannot commit suicide, Mr. Seagull; suicide is illegal in the State of Suchandsuch." Actually, seagulls follow their instincts and do not listen to humans. Probably just as well. It could even make them smarter than us. 

So what do we do with all these different histories, religions, philosophies, etcetera? I say we start a war. Isn't that what we humans do, after all? Okay, now we're like seagulls fighting over discarded fries on the motorway again, and this time some of us don't make it out, despite our best efforts. 

Is History Fake ?

                 (from a fb post 23 Feb, 2014)

It is a well-documented and albeit controversial theory of where and when the Aryans invaded India from the north. There is considerable controversy about Indo/European and Indo/Aryan ancestry and migration. Perhaps it is more accurately deemed a White Supremacist myth,  postulated by recent Christian historians to promote Caucasian superiority and discredit the indigenous people of India. There is in fact no such thing as a race of Aryans, just as there isn't a race of Accountants!  The word 'arya' denotes the quality of lightness, specifically in consciousness and certainly not the hair or skin colour of how 'Aryans' are commonly portrayed. Little is known in the West about 'The History of India' before the successive invasions of the Aryan, Muslim and British Empires. Ancient history as we now know it, is based on evidence. When there is an absence of evidence before a certain time, then that time period is called pre-history. Sounds simple enough.

At the humourous risk of sounding like I'm talking about Cavemen, I'm going to make the assertion that Vedic knowledge is prehistoric. I'm suggesting that the model I was taught in High School - that Mesopotamia was the 'Cradle of Civilisation' -  and indeed was taught in educational institutions around the world at that time, was based on a flawed assumption. Current thinking is that there was no single 'cradle', but several civilisations that developed independently of which the Near Eastern Neolithic was the first. Some of the other known independent 'cradles' are the Indus River of the Indian Subcontinent, Yellow River in China, and the Peruvian and Mesoamerican cultures. Scholars and historians have commonly used writing (amongst various criteria) as a definition of 'civilisation', which is arguably a flawed categorisation as it presumes that earlier cultures lacked sophistication- rather than having no need for writing!

Modern science proposes that various civilisations invented writing as they 'developed'. Consider this widely accepted idea though: prior to this, the tradition in ancient cultures all around the world was to pass on knowledge orally (because they all possessed powerful memories). However, apart from Quarrel and Hypocrisy, another one of the symptoms of the current age Kali Yuga, which began roughly 5,000 years ago, is poor memory. As the faculty of memory diminished, the need arose to write things down so that they wouldn't forget. We all know what that's like.

Furiously disputed by the indigenous peoples of India (as they have 'inside information', where folk-lore has it that the Veda were in existence from at least 6000BC and not the 1500BC that the West guesses they were compiled) the current Western viewpoint of the History of India credits the 'Aryan Invasion' with the development of the Vedas and Hinduism as we know it today, because THEY WERE THE FIRST to write it all down... but it wasn't just an isolated incident. It was happening everywhere out of necessity.

All over the globe, civilisations everywhere that previously relied on the established oral tradition had to find a way to record their knowledge as their memories faltered. From the ancient hieroglyphics of the Egyptians, and the separately developed South American Incas; to the multi-character glyphs of the Orient; and the (no caveman jokes please!) Early European and Australian Aborigine cave paintings - all these cultures independently developed pictorial/written recordings at around the same period, roughly five thousand years ago. I'm suggesting that things were going BACKWARD, not FORWARD, as modern materialistic society would have us believe.

(Curiously this 'advent of writing'  coincides with the astrological Great Age of Gemini which ended about six thousand years ago (c.6000 - 4000BC) which rules the hands and communication. No-one knows how long the Chinese existed before records were kept. The Australian Aborigines, as far as we can tell, migrated in at least two or three waves, from at least forty thousand years ago to eighty or a hundred and twenty thousand depending on your leaning.)

This FORWARD PROGRESSION concept of human development is fabricated to fit in with the Darwinian theory. Well, I'll be a monkey's uncle if I'm gonna fall for that theoretical pseudo-science. Hang on a sec - no I won't (insert your own caveman joke HERE). Sure, we've made wonderful advances in medicine, technology, the arts etc yet at the same time millions of  people in society are becoming increasingly alienated from natural lifestyles,  billions of people are still suffering all over the world, and we've managed to wipe out a huge fraction of species of life in our relentless pursuit of PROGRESS.

Time for ... (?)

[ although I can claim authorship for this (it took me quite a while cos I get a bit OCD about spelling and grammar) I must confess that the ideas aren't really mine. I've just taken bits I've read from various sources and tried to correlate it into one congruous piece. I'll try to add more later ]

Indology schmology

https://controversialhistory.blogspot.com.au/2014/03/is-gautama-buddha-avatar-of-vishnu.html

This has to be one of the jewels in the lotus on the Internet. It exposes, among other things, the fabricated history of India and how it has been systematically re-written, altered and corrupted by European Historians, mostly British and German Christians. This false 'knowledge' is taught in educational institutions around the world to this day and is only now being challenged thanks largely to the internet spreading this exposure. Racist Eurocentric White Supremacist Indologists - they even created a whole new branch of 'science' to deal with the task - have moved forward the dates of the Vedas by centuries, sometimes millenia, so that they post-date the Biblical Flood in an attempt to maintain their superior roost on the Perch of Spiritual Hierarchy. Not only do they mess with the ancient Sanskrit texts  they also misinterpret them and change what they say – spectacularly capping that off with the whole meaning being lost in translation.

Kama Sutra - a sex manual, right? That's exactly what they would have you believe. Nothing could be further from the truth. It's actually about how to NOT achieve orgasm. Instead it describes in detail, complete with illustrations (I know what you're thinking!) how to develop higher spiritual awareness using the yogic technique of avoiding temptation to raise the kundalini up through the chakras by not succumbing to the urge to gratify the senses. Tantra Yoga or something (don't know much about it). So these "expert" Indologists twist the meaning and make it look like some sort of perverted orgiastic ritual. Far from it!

Oh, let's not forget yogis flying around on magic carpets, snake charmers playing their pungis (an oboe-like wind instrument) and the famous Indian Rope Trick where a rope is magically made to rise up vertically, the Magi's assistant then to climb up it and subsequently disappear into the heavens. Harems, hookahs and hashish! And don't forget that the idiot Hindus are all vegetarians! And they worship inanimate stone statues as being God! Fools and idolaters! Superstitious morons! Their Gods are really Satan in disguise!  We'll show them who is superior - us with our One and Only True God!

I may sound irreverent, having a go at Chritianity. I'm not. I'm criticising the Eurocentric Christian White Supremacists, otherwise known as Historians, who blasphemously create a false account of India and its history because it challenges their dubious religious superiority.

As with everything on the net, please read it with due skepticism. Skepticism is a good thing, a mark of intelligence where gullibility will falter. And of course I don't endorse all of the views expressed by all of the authors on this or any other blog. I hope you enjoy your reading.

Quincunctial map of Earth. (Notice Antarctica cut up into 4 quarters in the corners.)

Folklore Pre-dates History

Attempts (lies) by Europeans to Compile (fabricate) the History of the World vs Folklore of Ancient Civilisations; which is closer to the Truth?

Have you ever wondered why folklore and 'scientific' history are so at loggerheads? Why it is that traditional knowledge passed on by Elders and held as sacred is written off as 'mythology' and disregarded as inherently 'unscientific'? Because it challenges the Modern Christian View – that until the "Advent of Our Lord Jesus Christ", all humans were 'hopelessly drifting in an ignorant world of chaos devoid of sophistication and spiritual meaning'. Nothing could be further from the truth! People were much more tuned-in prior to 5,000 years ago, or at least 'in harmony with nature'.

To get a perspective of the difference between accounts we must compare the folklore handed down through generations with modern observations by outsiders who are completely removed from any first-hand experience – a prerequisite known as 'independent objective analysis', deemed as compulsory by Western 'experts' in any valid assessment.

Several cultures have histories that go so far back that their origins cannot be traced or determined, making them for want of a better word 'pre-historic'. India and China and to some extent Egypt and Meso-America have no known beginning, at least according to outside observers. Yet these and many other Ancient Civilisations, cultures and tribes have their own version of history at odds with the so-called 'experts'. Some do not put an exact figure to it, in that the origins are so lost in time that it is pointless to even try to callibrate dates. Others are more precise, using age-old complex calenders to record the passing of Time.

White Christian Europeans proselytise a version of history that fits in neatly with the Biblical account of The Flood ie 4,000 years ago, even to the point where non-Creationist Evolution theories are almost secretly tolerated because they aid in denying the concept of intelligent, civilised peoples inhabiting the Earth long before and independently of the Coming of Jesus - merely as a bunch of primitive, ape-like subhumans grunting and behaving like animals, incapable of higher thought.

Actually, these lost-in-time modern nations still survive today by virtue of their innate moral refinement, developed social structure, and highly advanced survival skills - the most important technical advancement necessary to thrive. Technology has up until now been unimportant, simply because it wasn't needed for survival, and actually made life unnecessarily complicated, being largely at the expense of Mother Nature.

Many 'facts' are misunderstood by modern historians. Take writing, for example. Older cultures are painted as being undeveloped, dumb cavemen hardly capable of anything requiring such expertise as language let alone calligraphy. Yet these Ancient Civilisations all attest to not needing to write anything down, as their highly developed memory removed any need of such tiresome practices as recording in writing pictograms, hieroglyphics, calligraphy, etc. Only due to the deterioration of memory (a symptom of Kali-Yuga as the Hindus call it, beginning c. 3012 BC) did writing etc simultaneously emerge all over the globe in many remote cultures independently around the same time, ie the last couple of thousand years. Strange thing, that. Progress - my foot!  

It is not unreasonable from this perspective to say that the Human Race is actually devolving, systematically jeopardising our own survival by bit by bit destroying the very substance of our existance - Planet Earth - all in the name of 'Progress'! Up until the Industrial Revolution of the Middle Ages, every corner of the globe was relatively safe from wanton 'development'. With colonisation by White Christian Europeans of each and every yet unexploited nook and cranny of the Third World, came genocide of the indigenous population, rape of the countyside and mass extinction of multitudes of species, irreversibly altering the face of the Earth forever.

Progress it certainly ain't. The intellectual elite responsible is preoccupied with sensual pleasures, all at the cost of natural instinct. In fact these 'refined' barbarians are so twisted that they try to pretend that it is the only way 'forward' when we smarter folk know that getting back to our roots is the only key for a meaningful existence and successful survival. Far from being a regression, it is a necessity in terms of Quality Of Life.

Take for example, 2012 of the Mayan Calendar. Anyone in the know was aware that this date represents the beginning of a new calendar cycle upon the completion of the outgoing measurement cycle. Yet this was widely publicised by Western propagandists, in an attempt to discredit the Ancient Civilisations, falsely as a 'Doomsday Event', thereby inviting mockery in its inevitable failure to materialise due to it being a complete falsification.

Or, take the Boden Chair, Oxford University, 1832. It was created to 'translate' (with alteration; to weaken and discredit) the Vedas into English with the sole purpose of converting Hindus into Christians. To this day Monier Monier-Williams is regarded by Western Scholars as the most influential in the formation of the Sanskrit-to-English dictionary. Yet its inception was maligned right from the very beginning. Who knows how much has been meddled with, deliberately lost - even the 'original' Devanagari script may have been tampered with! There is one classic questionable incidence in the Garuda Purana where it supposedly 'says', "Two things improve with beating - a drum, and a woman". I kid you not. This is decidedly 'un-Vedic', totally against the tone of the vast body of work, the Veda.

There is much controversy as to the dating of the Vedas, conveniently  contrived by Western scholars to be post-Flood, contrary to indications and references contained within the texts. There are astronomical constellations and transits, configurations, etc mentioned throughout, that over and over again place the dates many thousands of years earlier than The Flood. Yet these twisted Christians won't allow it. Ask the indigenous Hindus, and they will all tell you that The Veda are anywhere from 4-6,000 BC to 10,000 even 20,000 BC, not 1500 BC!

As for the Chinese - well, good luck with that, especially considering their record for censoring sensitive information from public scrutiny. Even if they had a solid handle on their history, it's unlikely they would make it available for scholarly disection. All those dynasties, Ming, Tang, whatever, dates are a bit muddled, but we get the general picture - prebiblical, same as the Indian dynasties well recorded in detail as far as names of families go, just not so hot on the dates due to conflicting use of different calendars.

End of Part 1.

Part 2: Giants, Ogres, Fairies and other Little Folk 
(to be continued...) 

History of Mankind

I still remember my first history lesson in Secondary School over 40 years ago. The teacher's name was Miss Blount – an eloquent, tall, slim young woman with short mouse-blonde hair. We were taught that the "Cradle of Civilisation" was Mesopotamia, the area around the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers, which equates to modern day Iraq, or the biblical Babylon, or something like that. 

Not that she was deliberately lying or anything, she was just doing her job. Somehow, either instinctively or intuitively, I 'knew' this information was wrong.  I don't know why or how I knew this, I just knew. It turns out that European scholars had connected the dots as if using chinese whispers to come up with a 'version' of history that promoted their Eurocentric 'Christian' view of the World. They purposely advanced by several millennia the dating of the Vedas and fabricated a mythical 'Aryan Invasion' to make everything synchronize with The Flood to fit in with their narrow-minded theology...  to quote:

 “The Aryan invasion theory thus turned the "Vedas", the original scriptures of ancient India and the Indo-Aryans, into little more than primitive poems of uncivilized plunderers. This idea - totally foreign to the history of India, whether north or south - has become almost an unquestioned truth in the interpretation of ancient history. Today, after nearly all the reasons for its supposed validity have been refuted, even major Western scholars are at last beginning to call it in question.”   http://controversialhistory.blogspot.com.au/2007/04/myth-of-aryan-invasion-of-india.html

The familiar saying "a little learning is a dangerous thing" could never be more applicable in this instance. 

Protoplasmic Crud by Michael Cassidy https://youtu.be/7VaE33TTgZ4