Re: Amerindian navigators and Eurocentrism in scholarship

[elurio@aol.com (ELurio)]

>>What kind of real evidence would you like, eric?<<

First off, I don't like the "e-mail" only crap. You said some awfully
nasty things about me and my book, which you didn't read, which was posted
in the newsgroup.
If you can't take it in public, don't dish it out in public.

What kind of real evidence do I want? REAL real evidence. The kind that
isn't controversial. They found Sumarian seals and other artifacts in
terminal predynastic Egypt and Harrapan (Indus vally) India from around
3200-3150 BC. There's proof of contact and diffusion for you.  That kind of
stuff. No wild speculation, no newly created traditions, NO MAGIC!

Nothing less will do.

I'd want Mayan glyphs found IN CONTEXT in New Zealand, Chinese porceline
with Han decoration in Califonia, A Viking ship in Nebraska, found IN
CONTEXT and excivated by PROFESSIONALS.

They found a buddha in a viking grave in Sweden. There is no evidence of
later intrusion. That proves at least third party contact between India and
Scandinavia. 
That's what I want: a Swedish Buddha!

Nothing less will do!!!

There was Egyptian artifacts in Spain starting at around 1000BC,
undoubtably brought by Pheonician traders, since the artifacts are found
with Pheonician ruins. 
There is nothing  of that sort of thing before that. Yet lots of people,
who use the same sort of evidence as you, claim an Egyptian-Olmec
connection from at least two hundred years before.

I want an Egyptian colony in Morocco dated around 1500 BC!!!! Because if
they got to America they had to get to Morocco first, it's in the way!!!!

We know about Roman coloneys in India, not just by literary evidence, but
artifacts.

We know the Indian Indians got to Java 'CAUSE THERE'S STATUES OF VISHNU
ALL OVER THE PLACE!!! GET IT?!?!?!?!?!

I hope this answers your question.

eric l.