Skeletons of Inca-people found in Norway. How and Why...

so you don't even recognise cuneiform the written language of mesopotamia
so your claim that you could read sumerian was what
an idle boast ?
an error ?
a lie !!!!

laughable

Originally posted by Marduk
so you don't even recognise cuneiform the written language of mesopotamia
so your claim that you could read sumerian was what
an idle boast ?
an error ?
a lie !!!!

laughable

Marduk

Apperantly you are thinking that I am attacking you personally when I call you Turduk .

It is not my intention to attack you or hurt you in any shape or form .

I offer my apoligies for your hurt feelings .

for your sumerian related questions please feel free to email them this lady who is a 93 years old sumerologist who will be happy to help you .




she most recently wrote " A Sumerian Named Ludingirra " and she is the authority which I rely on .

here is her web site www.geocities.com...


If I carry on this conversation with you , then there will be more useless point scoring and judging by the reaction what ever I say will be seen aas an attack on you .
I refuse the bite this silly bait .


You should talk to the real expert , it is her ideas that I also partially defend and these ideas are not yet available in english .

don't worry she won't give you a warning even if you tease her or her ideas .

Originally posted by Marduk
the bone abnormality is found in 3% of all races
including 3% of Norsemen as they are one of the "all races"
so there is zero evidence for this being an Incan skeleton or any other skeleton except Norse

This has been pointed out on other sites (antropological ones) -- as well as the lack of Incan artifacts.

no one at all is claiming that these are Eskimo bones
your making this up as you go along arent you

That actually was one of my speculations. It's plausible that they're half breeds (which also explains to some extent the position in the graveyard.)

fyi the scandanavians did not go around making memorial stones to dogs

The stone is a gravestone and I can confirm that the inscription in Futhark appears to be the grave of a horseman.

Originally posted by Byrd

no one at all is claiming that these are Eskimo bones
your making this up as you go along arent you

That actually was one of my speculations. It's plausible that they're half breeds (which also explains to some extent the position in the graveyard.)

yeah I saw you say that at HOM and thought you were speculating
heres the real facts of the matter about the interparietal bone
the statement tp the press that it is only found in the Inca was made by the staff archaeologist at Borgarsyssel Museum, Mona Beate Buckholm
she holds no qualifications at all in Human Biology
the interparietal bone is one of those which in human becomes fused with age like the other bones of the skull.
not everyone is the same, Interparietal bones are found in 3% of all human genus
there is also Apert's syndrome which causes irregular skull formation which is also characterised by a interparietal bone being present and this syndrome affects 1 in 16,000 people

so the chances of there being a skull with an interprietal bone present in a graveyard is one in thirty

now St Nicholas church where these bones were found was built in the 12th century
Norway was christianised around 1000CE
so finding non christian bodies buried in unconsecrated ground is far from unusual as conversion in Norway was quite peaceful and people didn't all rush to kneel at the cross as they still don't to this day

of course what really would prove it is the age of the Skeletons and the dna samples taken from the teeth which will tell where the individual grew up, but conbsidering that this story was started by someone making an unqualified statement to a member of the press, after a story I wouldn't lose any sleep over it



[edit on 30-6-2007 by Marduk]

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by tomcat ha
Well incans in scandinavia is more plausible than vikings in latin america. The gulfsteam would be a significant help to anyone travelling from the americas to europe.

Uhm... no.

Gulf stream is only in the northern hemisphere. So niether option is terribly likely.

Actually you are both wrong and you are both right. If you can make it to the straits of Florida you can catch the Gulf Stream north to Europe and be carried along by the current. The traditional sail route to the Americas is to travel south to the Canaries and catch the (I forget the exact name for them) equatorial winds that blow east to west, and allow them to carry you right to Martinque, then catch the gulf stream home. The gulf stream is quite impressive. I have been in the north Atlantic where the water is a steel gray blue then suddenly right in the middle of the ocean is a literal line on which the other side of which the waters are not only considerably warmer but a shade of greenish blue.

As for the Vikings they traditionally hugged the shore and had ships decked out with both sails and oars so if the winds were calm they could row. There are arctic currents that go back and forth between northern Europe and Labrador.

As for the Inca.... This title is misleading.... the Inca as a culture did not exist in 1000 AD.

[edit on 30-6-2007 by grover]

Originally posted by Marduk
the statement tp the press that it is only found in the Inca was made by the staff archaeologist at Borgarsyssel Museum, Mona Beate Buckholm
she holds no qualifications at all in Human Biology

I'll differ with you a bit there. Traditionally, archaeological degrees include coursework on hominid evolution and the forensics of hominids.

there is also Apert's syndrome which causes irregular skull formation which is also characterised by a interparietal bone being present and this syndrome affects 1 in 16,000 people

There's not much there to judge from, but I don't think it's Apert's. The sutures look relatively normal.

so finding non christian bodies buried in unconsecrated ground is far from unusual

That was one of my speculations.

of course what really would prove it is the age of the Skeletons and the dna samples taken from the teeth which will tell where the individual grew up, but conbsidering that this story was started by someone making an unqualified statement to a member of the press, after a story I wouldn't lose any sleep over it

Nothing was said about what else was found with the three bodies.

I agree that she rushed to judgement and will probably be castigated by her peers. But it's an interesting find, anyway.

Originally posted by grover
Actually you are both wrong and you are both right. If you can make it to the straits of Florida you can catch the Gulf Stream north to Europe and be carried along by the current.

Aye, but the Incas came from the WEST side of South America (Peru region), centered on Peru. By the time the Spaniards came, they'd expanded beyond that valley:
lsa.colorado.edu...

So the Vikings were unlikely to have sailed all the way to South America, and trekked across the northern part of the continent just for the heck of it. I think everyone agrees that they made it to the Northeastern coast of Canada and may have explored down into Maine.

But Peru? Nope. I don't buy that.

As for the Inca.... This title is misleading.... the Inca as a culture did not exist in 1000 AD.

Excellent point. I overlooked that one, I think.

I don't buy that either. As for the extent of the Incan empire, which BTW barely lasted a century and was already breaking up by the time the Spanish got there, Never extended east beyond the Andes.

Unless genetic markers were found that link the bones with the Inca; the odds are that the remains aren't.

When it comes to mysteries the one that I always find most faciniating is the fact Australian Aborigines and the Irish are so closely related. To this day many Aboriginal children are born with blonde hair and blue eyes that darken as they grow up.

Originally posted by grover


When it comes to mysteries the one that I always find most faciniating is the fact Australian Aborigines and the Irish are so closely related. To this day many Aboriginal children are born with blonde hair and blue eyes that darken as they grow up.

oh please provide some credible evidence of this
i never heard that one before

Just because you haven't heard of it doesn't mean squat. But I will see what I can find.

Originally posted by Marduk

Originally posted by grover


When it comes to mysteries the one that I always find most faciniating is the fact Australian Aborigines and the Irish are so closely related. To this day many Aboriginal children are born with blonde hair and blue eyes that darken as they grow up.

oh please provide some credible evidence of this
i never heard that one before

Here ya go, Marduk:
www.gnxp.com...
And some pictures:



As for the relationship to the Irish... Pffft. There is such incredibly little genetic variance between the different human ethnicities that such a "discover" is pretty much inevitable. You can take the genetic map of a Pygmy from Kongo, the map of a seven-foot blonde swede, and a Honduran kid with a hunchback and club foot... and they would be so damn near identical that you wouldn't be able to tell who's is who's without the label.

If you follow the old system of ethnographics that rely on physical characteristics rather than genetic markers, though, Aboriginal australians fall into the "caucasoid" group - whites, aboriginals, turkic peoples, ainu, polynesians, aryans, and davidic peoples

[edit on 1-7-2007 by TheWalkingFox]

well the first link claimed that blonde aboriginal babies was a perfectly natural occurence and not the result of any affinity with a blonde race
besides which
the Irish arent blonde
thats the swedes
lol
I'm thinking that some of those kids should be in hollywood horror films
they remind me of childsplay
shudders


anyway your claim

There is such incredibly little genetic variance between the different human ethnicities that such a "discover" is pretty much inevitable.

is completely false
there is genetic variance to such a degree that geneticists can look at a dna sample and tell you what part of the world your ancestors came from
heres a paper on Human genetic variance
www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov...
its from pubmed so shouldn't be too hard going for the uninitiated

btw ethnographics is the study of Ethnic (Ethno) writing (graphics) to discover links between cultures
maybe youre thinking of something else

I'm aware there's genetic variance. The tricks is, what you're looking for.

If you take, say the Australian Aborigines and try to look for who they're different from, you're going to get a better result than if you try to find out who they share the most similarities with. Either way you're ultimately looking for differences, but in the latter case you can just as easily go "hell with it, they're Irish" and still be pretty damn close, lol

I do find it funny that they were found as "Irish". I'll bet it was an Irish dude who did the study. Ten bucks says they're descended from a "Cherokee princess", too...

[edit on 1-7-2007 by TheWalkingFox]

Ethnography does prove a link between the Ancient Irish and the Akkadians
members.aol.com...
in these languages statistically there should be approx 100 words the same
this study found 600
all this really proves is that you can prove anything with statistics
500 studies have proven that a statistic truth

but as for genetic similarities between aboriginals and the Irish
the Irish genetically in contemprary times have the same dna as the rest of Europe
so does that mean we're all aboriginal
especially some Brits I know who havent moved much beyond living off the bush and then going on walkabout and not being able to handle their alcohol
hang on
I just described 50% of the human population



you might hear occaisonally mentioned links between the Basque and the Irish and mtdna X
you can ignore that as its a statistic fabricated by the A.R.E. as evidence to back Cayces claim that Atlantis was in the Bahamas

are you sure it's a good proof

My first thought was these people were probably Saami...and looks like I'm right. This trait is common among the Saami, and the haplotype is Saami.

scienceblogs.com...

Enjoy!

en.wikipedia.org...



The lower yellow is the one that is called an Inca bone.

For comparison this is the normal skull sutures.

face-and-emotion.com...




Some Saami for you to look at. If the Peruvian Inca and the Saami of Northern Europe developed some similar mutations, it might be interesting to look at why. What advantage does this little mutation have that it would end up in two very disparate groups?



But to make it more interesting, why do these two groups that live so far apart not only have a similar mutation, but such similar textiles?

Saami:
(there are two slightly different types of Saami. One group looks more caucasian, the other group looks more Innuit/Innu)










Yeah that's right. That's traditional Europeans living in a teepee. One of the oldest groups of Europeans too.

Peruvian Incans:















Now bear in mind that the Saami live in a much colder climate than the Peruvians.