link between Africa and South America?

[The Adventurer]

...from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thor_Heyerdahl

"There has been much confusion about the purpose of these voyages. They were not, as it is often stated, an attempt to prove that Egyptians visited the New World in ancient times, something that Heyerdahl himself found unlikely. Instead, they were meant to test the possibility that vessels made of buoyant reeds were seaworthy. Such boats of various sizes were in use in a number of culture areas around the world in ancient times."

I want to say that ...maybe...this is a posibility found by Heyerdalh in this atempt...most unlikely...but not imposible.

Originally Posted by ClintonHammond

IF there had been 'trade', where's the evidence?

Imagine a few scholars with curiosity...what is beyond the great sea???...a expedition formed...then only few boats succeded to the Americs...now, it is no trade...but the foreign reveal many aspects of their culture...the expeditioners never came back...but the knowledge are passed...
...ohhh this is pure fantasy...but I like to imagine things...

[ClintonHammond]

"ohhh this is pure fantasy"

Yes... yes it is....

[Aino]

It originated in Africa a super spanking long time ago. Then in waves it seems it left africa and made it's way and evolved mildly differently in different places for a super spanking loooong time. (And i don't give a good god damn what those pseudo scientist Dr. Coon or more recently Dr. Rushton have to say about it.) The fact is genetic research has actually proven race doesn't exist. Sooo How could the non existant races have developed at different times in different places one after the other... The cosmic lottery involved in that multiple winning streak would be the equivalent of the ability to count cards for the drawing of the mega bucks. It is crap.)

Anyway, ultimately likely in smallish groups we left africa a very looong time ago. So it seems some core truths filtered in to each culture that ultimately evolved and is easy to find in religion. Also there is a genetic component. For example there is actually a gene that drives us to be close to other humans. As a result religion does tend to support no matter what religion it is, the 'be nice to eachother' bit.

Another factor though is that we all lived in the same world. We all saw the effects of the sun and the moon no matter where we were. Most ancient beliefs are based on survival as part of nature and therefore are based on archetypal pricipals that are easily tied to various natural forces. In some places some things are more important and in others other things. For the reason that the effect isn't quite the same everywhere.... But we are still all more or less effected by the same forces still just to varying degrees in varying places. Also, religion was a guide it was supposed to be a sort of survival support. It is even considered by some anyway that late neanderthals also had religion due to a grave yard or 2 that was found filled with them all buried int he same position etc.... But even early man had some sort of religion.... Since more or less the beginning of time... So it may not exactly be related to a ummm 'master race' it may be related to observations more of nature than anything else. (that is the different things that arose within various religions thats similar)

[Aino]

Sorry your issue with eachother around that stupid argument about Vinland and a map.... It is now finding it's way into other issues couldn't you 2 try to stay mildly more academic than that and shred eachother based on the issue of discussion of the present?

It seems to me that you are both silly because i can just picture what you are imagining the vikings looked like. Were you aware that about 30 percent of them were from Asia? Yes this is known courtesy of Gotland. They were not tall and blond and blue eyed as you wish to think of them. But short and asian.

It seems ridiculous to me to be argueing about this when there are far more interesting viking issues to argue about for example, there is no evidence of how the dead kings were 'buried' (the raft and the firey arrow.) Also, the burials uncovered are rather interesting in that it seems the men are buried beneath the women with no grave goods and the women are decked in jewels and grave goods when buried. Therefore a more interesting argument would be, Was the ancient society of Scandinavia matrifocal? After all, grave goods are an indication of status and if only the women were buried with such status symbols... Well i''ll let you all do the math. Then there is also the issue of what Vinland actually even means. No one actually knows for a certainty. Why not argue a bit about those issues rather than over the existance of a silly map and using a fictional hammer as an argument reference?