Are Ancient Aliens Theorists Selling Our People Short?

Friday will be the finale of Season 10 of Ancient Aliens. The show hails Erich von Daniken and Zecharia Sitchin as innovators. However, none of their ideas, nor much of what is suggested by this new pop culture paradigm, are actually original, including the works of Graham Hancock whom I discussed in previous articles. Hancock, who is a frequented guest on Ancient Aliens, often says that folklore and mythology are really remnants of humanity’s racial memory, and its what remains of a real history of a lost civilization that was destroyed at the end of the last Ice Age.

The Ancient Alien Theory, or Ancient Astronaut Theory, was first put forth in modern times by von Daniken and Sitchin. It states that an ancient and advanced extraterrestrial race came to Earth, perhaps even colonized it, and created humans through genetic manipulation, and eventually shared their technology with us and have been a constant force throughout our history. Over the past 7 years this theory has taken on a life of its own, and now people claim that multiple extraterrestrial races have visited and continue to visit the Earth, and have their own secret agenda, working undercover with the world’s governments to possibly modify, enslave or even exterminate humanity. This is hogwash. The ancient astronaut theory is nothing new. In fact, as D.M. Murdock points out “it should be noted that neither man came up with the ancient astronaut theory, which was largely developed by a German occultic society, for one, during the 19th century.” It was also a popular theme in the Edda Society, the Thule Society, the Vril Society, Himmler’s Ancestral Heritage Society, a research arm of the SS, and even leading members of the NSDAP, including Hitler himself. Murdock also points out that the idea itself goes back not just a few decades to von Daniken or the National Socialists, but rather to a very ancient time.

Although the idea of the ancient gods being aliens may seem novel, the tendency to make the gods of old into “real people” or “flesh and blood” is not at all new, dating to before the time of the Greek historian Herodotus (5th c. BCE) and developed by the Greek philosopher Euhemeros or Evemeras (c. 300 BCE). This tendency is called, in fact, “euhemerism” or “evemerism,” which claims that the numerous gods of various cultures were not “mythical” but were in reality kings, queens, warriors and assorted heroes whose lives were turned into fairytales with the addition of miraculous details to their biographies. The current Anunnaki thesis is a modern version of evemerism, although it seeks to explain the miracles as not fabulous “additions” to the tales but genuine attributes of advanced extraterrestrials.

This is basically Giorgio Tsoukalos’ usual “Its the Ancient Aliens!” story, in which he explains how all our myths are merely “misinterpreted accounts of flesh in blood aliens.” Giorgio often claims that by calling these ancient accounts myths we are robbing the ancients of their real history, which has been rather confused and misinterpreted, but true history nonetheless. The mythologist Joseph Campbell pointed out that the ancients knew they were myths, but were concerned rather with their symbolic significance. Rather than interpreting these myths in a literal extraterrestrial sense, he used them as a symbolic reference to an even greater truth.

There is concrete archaeological evidence of the advanced nature of ancient white civilization and significant evidence that the gods were in fact Ancient Aryans. Recently on In Search of Aliens, Giorgio Tsoukalos and David Childress went to investigate a series of elongated skulls found in Paracas. They were hoping to prove that the skulls were of ancient alien origin. Rather than getting that input, the curator at the museum told them the elongated skulls were determined to belong to an unknown race, an actual group of men naturally born with elongated skulls; not a deformity but an actual race. Their closest DNA match proved they were not of South American origin, but rather tested to have originated from Denmark, Sweden and Finland. The date was 3500 B.C. This was shocking to them. Since this broadcast, they have back-peddled and are now claiming that the DNA did not match any known “organism” on this planet. This is simply not the case, and they never air that show anymore. Reconstructions of the face show a very Nordic facial structure, but of course with the huge cranium. The original drawings were eventually made into a new artist representation that made them look like South American Indians. I guess showing them blonde and blue-eyed would be too Nazi or racist for them. I’m neither qualified or inclined to suggest how or why they have elongated skulls. If I did wish to speculate, I would say that this could be a separate branch of the White race the went along its own evolutionary path over 5,000 years ago or more then went extinct.

The fact is that these skulls, all testing to be of Scandinavian or Nordic origin, is hard evidence for my theory that in distant times, that a lost civilization 12,000 years ago or more had traveled the globe and been the founders of ancient cultures, and the Paracas skulls were the remains of a long-standing Ancient Aryan population that once existed in South America. Many Old European sites, including those on Malta and Sardinia, plus in Egyptian tombs, were scattered with burials of men with elongated skulls. This is not going to be solved quickly, as the academics do not wish to press the issue, not only for the ancient alien implication, but also not to awaken any facts about our Ancient Aryan past. The Jews are using such authors, as well as the ancient alien camp, to confound our race to the point that we deny our own accomplishments as a race. The White race did not need ancient aliens to build our ancient civilizations, or to found other civilizations in remote corners of the Earth. Our race is capable of so much more. Ancient Alien theorists are selling our people short. As stated last year in an article entitled “Aryan Genesis,” the location of the original Aryan homeland remains an unsolvable riddle. In Aryan Genesis I wrote:

For almost three centuries, European linguists, anthropologists and geneticists have been searching for the true origins of the Indo-European, or Aryan, peoples. Many of us identify the term Aryan with German National Socialism, while some Jewish and liberal academics propose that Aryans are a non-existent people invented by Hitler to enhance a feeling of Germanic supremacy. This is of course false.”

We know, from both the Hindu Vedas and ancient Zoroastrian texts from Persia, that a northern race of powerful warriors invaded the areas of present Iran, northern India, Pakistan and Afghanistan around 3500 B.C. and established an empire known as Aryas.  Over 300 words in the Indo-European languages are derived from these people, including the name Iran. Archaeologists of the 19th century referred to the Aryans as Indo-European or Indo-Germanic tribes. However, in Hinduism and in Iran the term Aryan means “noble,” and this race is often called the “Shining Ones” who were pitted against the forces of darkness, often called the Dasyus or the ”Dark Ones.”

The ancient symbol of the Aryan was the swastika. But where did the Aryans start using this controversial symbol? Hindu legend says that civilization dates back to an incredibly distant time, hundreds of thousands, if not millions of years, and that the ancestors of the Aryans were blond, oftentimes bearded, light-skinned people led by their Lord Indra. The earliest record of the swastika in India dates back to the Indus Valley civilization around 3500 B.C. This time period coincides with the Aryan invasion theory.

Recently, an even more ancient civilization, the Danubian civilization, was found which dates roughly to 5,000 years B.C., about the time a huge freshwater lake north of the Bosporus flooded from water pouring in from the Mediterranean that transformed it into the Black Sea. This body of water increased greatly in size and submerged hundreds of square miles of dry land.

In Bulgaria, dating to this time, a pottery shard from the Danubian civilization dating back to 5300 B.C. was discovered bearing the sign of the swastika. In Kiev’s Natural History Museum, an ivory sculpture made from mammoth tusks dating back to the Paleolithic era (Old Stone Age), some 25,000 years ago, bears this symbol. The idea that a group of Europeans known as the Solutreans migrated across the northern ice-shelf to North America 6,000 years before the Mongoloids arrived in 18,000 B.C might indicate why American Indians, including the Mayas and Aztecs, also use swastikas in their art.

Authors Graham Hancock and Andrew Collins believe that an ancient site called Gobekli Tepe, a vast ceremonial complex with gigantic pillars and altars that dates to before the flooding of the Black Sea, were created by an advanced unknown culture. They are quick to assume Atlanteans or aliens created it. This is hogwash. Our white ancestors had been watching the stars for thousands of years and were quite advanced.  Scholars also have never quite found the location of the Urheimat (or primordial homeland) of the Proto-Aryans. The fact that they watched the sky and were the first true astronomers may be the origin of ancient references to sky-people, not aliens.

I suggest that these Proto-Aryans evolved in the lands now submerged beneath the Black Sea. The typically accepted map of Aryan DNA distributions indicates the strongest concentrations of these people in and around the Black Sea then emanating outward to Europe, India and central Asia. The Danubian civilization originated shortly after the deluge, known as the Great Flood.

An article printed by National Vanguard in the December 2005 edition states:

In June 2005, archeologists found Europe’s oldest formalized civilization, a network of dozens of temples, 2,000 years older than Stonehenge and the Egyptian pyramids. More than 150 gigantic monuments were found underneath fields and cities in Germany, Austria, and Slovakia built more than 7,000 years ago, in 4800 B.C. and 4600 B.C.”

These cities post-dated Gobekli Tepe; that complex still remains the oldest structure, dating back some 12,000 years. But these discoveries show that civilized white people have been in existence for a very long time.

National Vanguard also says that a discovery in Slovakia of 35,000-year-old skeletons of clearly Nordic skull dimensions proves that the idea we were very African-like at this point is false. In the 1990s, an ancient primate was discovered in what is now northern Germany. Also around this time, younger fossils dating to around 2.5 million years and resembling upright walking hominids found in Africa were found in the Republic of Georgia. This only intensifies Alan Thornes’ argument of independent evolution of modern races.

The Ancient Aliens theorists have no real evidence, but raw speculation. So far not one genuine shred of evidence has surfaced that clearly says the ancient gods of the Sumerian and Babylonian tradition came from beyond the stars. Because an ancient god had wings or strange, bulky apparel doesn’t mean he was an extraterrestrial.  In my opinion, it is very possible that visitations from extraterrestrials did happen in ancient times. It is even possible that we were seeded here by a higher authority, but I will not conclude that the majority of our accomplishments as a race can be attributed to extraterrestrials. And if they could be, I believe there is evidence of advanced Caucasian-like beings that could be our White Aryan ancestors.

Restricting Voting Rights, Race, and Future Time Orientation

Restricting Voting Rights, Race, and Future Time Orientation

 http://onestdv.blogspot.com/2011/11/restricting-voting-rights-race-and.html

The left may actually have a grasp of race and politics than conservatives. In an article at NYTimes.com entitled The White Party, Columbia journalism professor Thomas Edsall writes the millionth article I’ve read summarizing racial voting trends. Seriously, I read this same article about once a week, basically just a list of statistics on what race votes for what party. Here’s an excerpt to show what I’m talking about:

Another way of looking at it is this: fully 88.8 percent of all ballots cast in 2010 for House Republicans were cast by whites, compared to 63.9 percent for Democrats.

The degree to which the Republican Party has become a white party is also reflected in the composition of primary voters. For example, on March 4, 2008, in Ohio — where non-Hispanic whites are 81.1 percent of the population, blacks 12.2 percent, and Hispanics 3.1 percent — the Republican primary turnout was 97 percent white. Hispanics were 2 percent and the black turnout was so low it was zero percent, statistically speaking. One percent was described as “other.”

In the Jan. 19, 2008, South Carolina primary, 96 percent of the Republican turnout was white, 2 percent black, 1 percent Latino and 1 percent other. The population of the state is 64.1 percent white, 27.9 percent black and 5.1 percent Hispanic.

Oh wait, I forgot the other part of this formulaic sort of article – castigate Republicans as racist merely on the basis of support amongst whites.

Now, moving toward what has all the markings of a historic ideological and demographic collision on Nov. 6, 2012, Republicans are doubling down on this racially fraught strategy.

But even Dr. Edsall admits Republican never make any explicit appeals to white voters, with this presumably the most basic justification of his characterization above:

While the subject of race and of the overwhelmingly white Republican primary electorate are never explicitly discussed by Republican candidates, the issue is subsumed in blatant anti-immigration rhetoric.

Ahh once again, the liberal mind-reading ability arises. Funny that liberals can so adeptly parse the hidden motivations of conservatives, including those of racist whites, institutionally racist businesses, women-hating men, and so on. Right after the above, Dr. Edsall notes a parallel strategy amongst Democrats, though the accusations of bias are conspicuously absent:

The major threat to the Republican “white” strategy is a revival of the high turnout among minorities that carried Democrats to victory in 2008.

But our intrepid Dr. Edsall does not stop there – he notes how those evil Republicans have enacted laws with the specific (though unstated) intention of reducing minority turnout:

Republicans, however, are taking advantage of their newly won control of state governments across the country to enact laws designed to suppress minority turnout. Republican legislators and governors are reversing decades of liberalized access to the ballot by passing laws restricting or eliminating election day registration, early voting, the broader use of absentee ballots and voting by mail…Liberal groups, including the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University Law School, estimate that as many as five million men and women will be unable to vote because of these laws, which disproportionately affect minority voters.

OK, maybe we’re not supposed to question the premises of leftist academics writing for the NYbetaT. But may I ask why exactly, in the liberal paradigm of racial behavioral egalitarianism, would “restricting election day registration and early voting” disproportionately affect minority voters? I presume it does (see next paragraph), but these laws don’t disenfranchise felons, a class whose racial disparities liberals can at least blame on our racist society. These laws merely demand that people put a little effort into voting, undoubtedly an act of great importance and one that should be granted to those who can exhibit the most trivial amount of responsibility. What exactly about racist judges, racist schools, and racist police officers would make minorities less able to register ahead of time? One presumes that someone who has the ability and information to vote on voting day also has the ability to register prior to that day. Liberals can’t resolve this “conundrum” and it’s why articles such as Dr. Edsall’s rely on invective rather than analysis.

So why do blacks and Hispanics suffer disproportionately from these measures? (Let me just add that I love these laws.) They lack “future time orientation,” a concept well known amongst the HBD-osphere but surprisingly absent from academic discourse on intelligence. Two of the top Google results are from HalfSigma and Mangan. HalfSigma provides a great definition:

What is “future time orientation”? Presumably this refers to planning for a better future and placing future benefits over immediate gratification…The prisons are full of people lacking in “future time orientation,” because committing a crime to get some quick cash or get revenge at someone who pissed you off is an example of enjoying immediate gratification at the expense of one’s future.

One of the most well-known stereotypes about blacks, one that can’t be blamed on racist whites, is that they never show up on time. “Future time orientation” largely explains this as blacks lack the ability to analyze how present decisions will manifest as consequences for future situations. Blacks and Hispanics, due to their lower intelligence, have difficulty in planning, delaying gratification, and, most fundamentally, foreseeing future outcomes based on a perhaps complicated set of current data. Clearly then, blacks and Hispanics want to vote right when they’re able to, they don’t want to wait or plan ahead for something that won’t occur until a later date. Children think this way too, as evinced by the famous marshmallow study – they can’t temper their impulses in order to make rational decisions. As HalfSigma says, “the black man would rather hang out” than get off the stoop to do something for something else that won’t even occur for awhile later. (Do liberals get around this by having ACORN and other community organizers round up NAMs in the ghetto on voting day?)

However, even if this didn’t have the fortunate consequence of reducing minority turnout, I’d still support the measures. While I view democracy as an OK system, I still don’t want the listless classes having their say. I also don’t want a monopolized system of power, one largely confined to elitists living in the social Ivory Tower. I want a happy medium where the productive masses vote because they know what’s best and fair, not because they want a piece of the pie without working for it. By requiring a little bit of foresight in gaining voting rights, we ensure that the proper class of individual, non-criminal, mature, informed, and responsible, comprises the largest portion of the voting public. How can Dr. Edsall disagree with that? Oh wait, that’s waayyyccist.

Crayola

image

In a generation from now, when your kids ask why America had to fall, show them your multicultural crayons.