American Indian's lack of gold

originally posted by: Harte
a reply to: Solvedit
Why would there be a dock on an island with no village?
Take a moment to use your brain. People don't just "have docks" on islands without living there.

Harte

How do you know there was never a village?

Or, they could have stayed on their ships while trading with the natives who brought goods by dugout canoe from their villages.

originally posted by: HansluneThat part of the island has no natural water supply - so a suckie place to anchorage ship escpecially one that has come from the old world.

But, on the plus side, they didn't have to conquer any territory which was good for building villages on.

originally posted by: Harte
a reply to: SolveditTake a moment to use your brain. People don't just "have docks" on islands without living there.

Do you remember how my whole point was that the old world may have been trading with the Americas?

Why would pirates or whoever need more than a tent to greet and trade with the locals?

If they wanted to trade, why would they first go to war against the locals in order to displace them from the good village building sites, if they didn't need a village to do a little trading?

Why would they need a village if they could stay on and protect their ships and the cargo?

originally posted by: HansluneThat part of the island has no natural water supply - so a suckie place to anchorage ship escpecially one that has come from the old world.

Maybe that's why that one dock survived until the present day.

Maybe there was no rainwater and the ship ran out of water.

Maybe all the other docks they built to trade with the islanders for gold were disassembled long before the fill mineralized.

originally posted by: Solvedit

originally posted by: HansluneThat part of the island has no natural water supply - so a suckie place to anchorage ship escpecially one that has come from the old world.

Maybe that's why that one dock survived until the present day.

Maybe there was no rainwater and the ship ran out of water.

Maybe all the other docks they built to trade with the islanders for gold were disassembled long before the fill mineralized.

If trade had occurred you'd find items from the old world in the new and vice versa - there aren't any from that time period plus such trade would have triggered the Columbian Exchange and no such thing occurred either. What time period are you setting your idea in?

The rocks are natural. en.wikipedia.org...

n 1978, the radiocarbon laboratory operated by the Department of Geology at the University of Miami dated samples from a core collected by E. A. Shinn in 1977 from the Bimini Road. In 1979, Calvert and others[8] reported dates of 2780±70 14 C yr BP (UM-1359),[9] 3500±80 14 C yr BP (UM-1360), and 3350±90 14 C yr BP (UM-1361) from whole-rock samples; a date of 3510±70 14 C yr BP (UM-1362), from shells extracted from the beachrock core; and dates of 2770±80 14 C yr BP (UM-1364) and 2840±70 14 C yr BP (UM-1365) from carbonate cementing the beachrock core. These dates are temporally consistent in that the shells composing the beachrock core from the Bimini Road dated older than the cement holding them together as beachrock.

Calvert, P.M., D.S. Introne, J.J. Stipp, 1979, University of Miami radiocarbon dates XIV. Radiocarbon. v. 21, no. 1, pp. 107-112.

originally posted by: Solvedit

originally posted by: Harte
a reply to: SolveditTake a moment to use your brain. People don't just "have docks" on islands without living there.

Do you remember how my whole point was that the old world may have been trading with the Americas?

Why would pirates or whoever need more than a tent to greet and trade with the locals?

If they wanted to trade, why would they first go to war against the locals in order to displace them from the good village building sites, if they didn't need a village to do a little trading?

Why would they need a village if they could stay on and protect their ships and the cargo?

What is a dock for?

Harte

originally posted by: HansluneIf trade had occurred you'd find items from the old world in the new and vice versa - there aren't any from that time period...

They wanted to keep the natives from obtaining iron weapons.

The ships of the time were smaller and less capable, so it would have been hard to make money hauling bulky, expensive-to-produce goods which brought a low return, because the natives had their own slightly less effective implements.

The large number of old world craftsmen, teamsters, stevedores, and sailors involved in shipping the goods would have dramatically increased the chances of the secret getting out.

A nation or company conducting transatlantic trade would have needed a secure distribution network in the new world which would be expensive to maintain and defend. The leaders of whatever nation it was would have been afraid that if they did create a strong enough colony, it might rebel and do the people at home very little good.

They probably traded compact, very high value goods which were easy to ship and which made the natives come running after spending all their time panning riverbeds for gold. My guess is opium.

plus such trade would have triggered the Columbian Exchange and no such thing occurred either. What time period are you setting your idea in?

If the pirates managed to drop a tool or weapon or two, it probably would have been used until broken, then repurposed until unrecognizable.

Plus, how many times could some archaeologist have leaped to a conclusion that a given artifact was post-Columbian or had spent the pre-Columbian part of its existence in the Old World before somehow coming across with the early explorers?

The rocks are natural. en.wikipedia.org...

Yes, they are mineralized sand, which is why I said they were beach rock.

In case you missed it, my theory is that they got their shape, which is exactly like a Phoenecian dock, by being built like the Aztec causeways across Lake Texcoco. In fact, maybe the Aztecs learned the technology from the pirates.

Let me explain it again. They build two side by side walls of pilings and fill the middle with sand and rocks, then build a wooden platform for traffic on top of it all. The idea is to be able to take the dock or causeway apart in case of enemy attack. However, if built in an ocean lagoon, the fill may start to mineralize in a few decades.

Suppose the pirates had various islands they traded from and left no trace by taking their docks apart when trading was concluded.

Suppose something happened on Bimini which kept them from disassembling their dock until it mineralized and the wood rotted away. Perhaps an epidemic or a mutiny or maybe it was the last dock they built before the Spanish came.

This small, secret trade might have been funding the Ottoman empire because their invasion of Europe stopped expanding when the Spanish had confiscated the New World's main gold sources.

It is not implausible that the Spanish could have swept them from the New World despite lacking an equivalent funding source because they clearly relied on secrecy rather than naval strength to protect the endeavor.

originally posted by: HarteWhat is a dock for?

Harte

Tying up ships, offloading trade goods, loading goods obtained in trade.

Plus, if they used a collapsible dock, why wouldn't they use a collapsible village? I think Bimini is warm enough that you don't need much more than a tent.

But if they were dealing in high value goods with a small contingent of men, their only security probably came from being able to sail away at a moment's notice, and that means they probably continued to use their ships for living quarters.

I just thought of another reason for a dock. They wanted their cannon to not be on a ship because it is unsteady and bad for marksmanship.

Landing cannon via small boat would be difficult.

Early cannon were developed long before Columbus.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
Ahem.

Indigenous Americans is the term for tribal communities also referred to as first nations.

Thank you for the PC-speak contrib.

Do you know what indigenous means? All USA/American Citizens born and raised in America are 'indigenous americans'.

originally posted by: tanstaaflThank you for the PC-speak contrib.

Do you know what indigenous means? All USA/American Citizens born and raised in America are 'indigenous americans'.

IMHO there's a strong chance the so-called indigenous people, people whose ancestors arrived on the land bridge, may have been partially replaced before Columbian contact. Only the natives of the Northwest look very Mongolian.

Of course, the mixed ancestry could be post-Columbian, but it need not be.

Why you seem good a making stuff up you are ignoring what real facts we have. Please note the dating of the docks

Calvert and others[8] reported dates of 2780±70 14 C yr BP (UM-1359),[9] 3500±80 14 C yr BP (UM-1360), and 3350±90 14 C yr BP (UM-1361) from whole-rock samples; a date of 3510±70 14 C yr BP (UM-1362), from shells extracted from the beachrock core; and dates of 2770±80 14 C yr BP (UM-1364) and 2840±70 14 C yr BP (UM-1365) from carbonate cementing the beachrock core.

This is way before cannons. Do you understand that BP stands for Before Present: It means the amount of time before January 1, 1950

1560-850 BCE. That somewhat coincides with the Phoenicians civ which was 1100-200 BCE. However, there were no Aztecs then just the Olmecs and earlier versions of the Maya.

www.famsi.org...

Did they mine gold? Not that I am aware of they did have some gold.

Oddly one of the things we find all over the Mediterranean are pottery sherds and lost anchors - Phoenician ones - yet not a single one of those is found at a 'port'? How do you explain that?

Explain a port that has no water and no food supply for ships coming across an ocean and taking months to do so?

Again explain why there is no archaeological evidence of this trade? Why no Columbian Exchange?

You might want to look at what a foreign trans-ocean port looks like:

en.wikipedia.org...

Massive amounts of Roman material in India, some Indian material in Arabia and Med.

en.wikipedia.org... A Roman trade port in India

originally posted by: Solvedit

originally posted by: HarteWhat is a dock for?

Harte

Tying up ships, offloading trade goods, loading goods obtained in trade.

Plus, if they used a collapsible dock, why wouldn't they use a collapsible village? I think Bimini is warm enough that you don't need much more than a tent.

But if they were dealing in high value goods with a small contingent of men, their only security probably came from being able to sail away at a moment's notice, and that means they probably continued to use their ships for living quarters.

Five problems

Water
Food
No archaeological evidence of such a port
No Evidence of anyone trading with the Americas or Europe at that time*
Lack of a sheltered harbor versus hurricanes - you know those giant blowy things.

One of the things I researched while working on the site of Kalavassos in Cyprus was the opium trade in the Med. It left hundreds of thousands of small brown jars all over the Med. If they were trading in the Americas - where are these jars?

onlinelibrary.wiley.com...

onlinelibrary.wiley.com...

originally posted by: Hanslune
Why you seem good a making stuff up you are ignoring what real facts we have. Please note the dating of the docks

What part of my theory depends on the Americas being discovered just before Columbus?

Oddly one of the things we find all over the Mediterranean are pottery sherds and lost anchors - Phoenician ones - yet not a single one of those is found at a 'port'? How do you explain that?

I covered that clearly already. They used collapsible docks but missed one.

Explain a port that has no water and no food supply for ships coming across an ocean and taking months to do so?

More like depends on rainwater, plus there's evidence they abandoned that one because it's still there which would dovetail with "bad choice" just like you pointed out.

Again explain why there is no archaeological evidence of this trade? Why no Columbian Exchange?

Secrecy.

You might want to look at what a foreign trans-ocean port looks like:

en.wikipedia.org...

The cartels must not be shipping drugs into the USA because they don't have a port just like that one.

Massive amounts of Roman material in India, some Indian material in Arabia and Med.

en.wikipedia.org... A Roman trade port in India

Why must one port be like another? Haven't you already established there's no evidence they were bringing the same kind of goods? They need not have been exchanging bulky goods. Don't you remember what happened to Odysseus in Libya?

Let me spell it out because you're blithely ignoring even your own evidence. I am speculating they were taking small, high value cargoes and secrecy was paramount.

If the Bimini road really dates from Phoenecian days, they could have been exporting copper ore.

It would have been a much lower value operation and would not need outstanding secrecy and security.

Copper ore is almost worthless if you don't know how to refine it into copper.

They could have staged their cargoes right out in the open before loading them and taking them back to Phoenecia.

The memory of the New World could have lived on in families of shipping magnates who had been involved in the trade until just before Columbus.

originally posted by: Hanslune1560-850 BCE. That somewhat coincides with the Phoenicians civ which was 1100-200 BCE. However, there were no Aztecs then just the Olmecs and earlier versions of the Maya.

Why oh why could the Aztecs learn dock building from the Phoenecians, but not from the Olmecs or Maya, if the Olmecs or Maya had learned from the Phoenecians?

originally posted by: HansluneOne of the things I researched while working on the site of Kalavassos in Cyprus was the opium trade in the Med. It left hundreds of thousands of small brown jars all over the Med. If they were trading in the Americas - where are these jars?

They could be repurposed until broken.

There are jars, you established that yourself.

Why do they have to market their drug in the same way in a totally different culture?

Suppose for a moment the chief wanted to control the opium, so they delivered it to chiefs in big jars?

originally posted by: Hanslune
Calvert and others[8] reported dates of 2780±70 14 C yr BP (UM-1359),[9] 3500±80 14 C yr BP (UM-1360), and 3350±90 14 C yr BP (UM-1361) from whole-rock samples; a date of 3510±70 14 C yr BP (UM-1362), from shells extracted from the beachrock core; and dates of 2770±80 14 C yr BP (UM-1364) and 2840±70 14 C yr BP (UM-1365) from carbonate cementing the beachrock core.

I may have conceded on the date too soon. In some places in the Southeast, the natives built large mounds out of their garbage, primarily shellfish waste. It became a substance called "shellrock" which was used to pave roads, perhaps still is. Sometimes they put a layer of shellrock under asphalt. It's mollusk shells combined with really sticky white sand. It seems to remain sticky and tacky even when dry. They might have used something like shellrock to serve as fill when they built their dock because it's more solid than sand but easier to extract than quarrying coral or stone.



Anyway, my point is, the pile of shellfish waste which was used to fill the dock could have been created 3500-2770 years BP. Who knows if the people who researched the date of the Bimini road were actually able to scrape some of the mineralization out from between the grains of sand and test its age.

originally posted by: SolveditThere is some evidence the residents ot Chaco canyon (the "Anasazi cliff dwellers") may have been cooked and eaten by tribes from the South. Perhaps when a less developed tribe had gold, they'd get raided for it in a similar vein.

Maybe, rather than a famine, there were dope fiends spending all of their time looking for gold dust, and none of their time growing maize and beans and squash.

originally posted by: Solvedit

Why must one port be like another? Haven't you already established there's no evidence they were bringing the same kind of goods? They need not have been exchanging bulky goods. Don't you remember what happened to Odysseus in Libya?

It should look like a port not a place without resources and no sign of it being a port

Let me spell it out because you're blithely ignoring even your own evidence. I am speculating they were taking small, high value cargoes and secrecy was paramount.

Yes you are making that up and it isn't based on any evidence you can present. Who exactly was doing this and why didn't the Columbian exchange occur when they were going about this?

You can make anything you want but if your idea cannot explain the existing evidence - it isn't a theory its just fantasy