Is there an ARCHAEOLOGICAL COVERUP going on in New Zealand?

originally posted by: hiddenNZ
a reply to: Marduk
its a pretty simple thought really.

Its a pretty simple thought, supported by hearsay evidence and a lot of evidence that has been fabricated, like the woman in the video, claiming her DNA came from Germany and Peru.
You can't think of a different reason that she might have Peruvian and German DNA ?
Because the one that she claims, that her ancestors travelled the world before arriving in New Zealand is complete and utter nonsense.

originally posted by: hiddenNZchanges the meaning of tangata whenua (the people before us) into another whole different meaning.(people of the land

Well, the Maori dictionary from 1929 states that "whenua" means land and has done for over 80 years, Maori for "before" is "i mua ake", so I expect that someone else told you that as well. Because from a linguistic perspective, its also nonsense.

a reply to: Marduk
mmmm,thats odd......new username and account as after I made the last post I was logged out and couldnt get back in.
But as a reply to your post....so the lady is a liar,and so is her 70 generations of ancestors....man you really say some stupid # marduk. You cant spew wiki all the time son,it may work for some that dont know NZ...but I do,have been in a maori motorcycle club,been in jail with maori,lived with them,and know a fair bit of NZ history,so some guy thats never been here,let alone ever met a maori,can change my thoughts. They never had a written language but pictographs have been found on monoliths,paintings in caves,carved rocks in the middle of lake taupo.....the list goes on.Its always you or aoraki that trott on in to try and discredit me and my links/info....its getting old and pretty transperent to be honest,but thats ok.Answer this....of all the lands in the world,do you honestly think NZ has only been inhabited for a few hundred years,that must be some sort of record.....a broken one. We are only 2000 odd km from australia,the current in the tasman is predominantly south west....so people could have drifted here....like the maori said they did,from a further distance.If they could apparently drift here or whatever,why couldnt anyone else,lol.

originally posted by: hiddenNZagain
a reply to: Marduk
mmmm,thats odd......new username and account as after I made the last post I was logged out and couldnt get back in.
But as a reply to your post....so the lady is a liar,and so is her 70 generations of ancestors....man you really say some stupid # marduk. You cant spew wiki all the time son,

She took a genetic test, the genetic test she took tells you what percentage of your genes originate with what country.
It doesn't tell you in what order you accumulated the Genetic markers

So her claiming that she had genes from Germany and Peru means that she has inherited genes from German and Peru from her ancestors. Without telling her anything else.

So her claiming that her ancestors were in Peru and Germany is her interpretation which cannot be supported with the data she was given. Its more likely that her great great great great great great granddaddy was a Peruvian guy who screwed a German girl and they had a baby.

And the Maori meaning for "whenua" has meant "land" since 1929

I have no dog in this hunt, so have no reason to lie about this, you however clearly have an agenda based on a preconceived idea and that has led you to ignore the facts. When people start ignoring the facts in favour of their beliefs they become intellectually redundant.

yep ok mate...you win the "hunt".....im over trying to get info out there when people like you,with too much time on their hands,who think they know everything about things they will never see or be told about,try and make the poster look simple....well guess what....im simple but im not stupid or blind,I may not have the education that you have had,but that doesnt make my posts any less usefull than your own.i understand genetics to a point and agree with your points,but she was also speaking of oral history surrounding her people being labled as extinct,and of non maori lineage. I appreciate your intelligence man,but its a fine line between intelligence and ignorance,which i see alot of in your posts.
Anyways,thanks for the insight

considering your best attempt at getting the information "Out there" consisted of a pseudohistoric YouTube video, I won't hold my breath for the encore


And you have had the education I have had, because I'm self taught,

Come on folks!

Surely you can debate without resorting to ad homs or engaging in tat for tat. Please limit the debate to the topic and remember the topic is not each other or opinions of each other.

Do not reply to this post.

Blaine91555
Moderator

no dont hold your breath for the encore. but for others that are interested in OUR nz history,heres another site for them to mull over.Please save your comments for your sumarian history topics eh?
tangatawhenua16.wix.com...

originally posted by: hiddenNZ
no dont hold your breath for the encore. but for others that are interested in OUR nz history,heres another site for them to mull over.Please save your comments for your sumarian history topics eh?
tangatawhenua16.wix.com...

Nope, I will continue to post wherever I like thanks, this isn't your soapbox.

a reply to: Marduk

I like your choice of words......sometimes....soapbox.......how ironic.
Aaannnyyways,why not just chill out and read for awhile without the putdowns,it will get interesting soon,Once again,ill parrot many earlier posts,you know nothing personally of NZ,maybe its time to endulge in a different language without the help of uncle wiki,sometimes the same old teacher gets a bit boring

Gee...might just be me...

...but I'm smelling a whole racial undercurrent/agenda reading that link...

originally posted by: hiddenNZ
a reply to: Marduk

I like your choice of words......sometimes....soapbox.......how ironic.
Aaannnyyways,why not just chill out and read for awhile without the putdowns,

Excuse me, all the ad hominems have been posted by you, quite simply because you don't have any evidence to support your beliefs so you have resorted to offensive rhetoric to make your point, but the only point you have made with that approach is that you shouldn't be taken seriously.

If as you say I know nothing about any of this, why was it so easy for me to point out that the 1929 dictionary doesn't agree with your claim for "tangata whenua" proving its made up racism which you are peddling and the claims made for the woman in the video you posted were spurious, You admitted that you knew it was spurious, yet you still posted it.

So from the two points of your evidence that have been discussed over the last two pages, one, is entirely fabricated and the other at best is made on a misunderstanding of genetics.

This is your evidence, and its rotten to the core...

a reply to: alien
ahh the old racial undercurrent topic again......

a reply to: Marduk
ahh another "im a racist" comment.....its gotten really old,lol.
Im not racist at all actually,im just pointing out facts that are known by both the maori and the pakeha (europeans) here in NZ.Yeah so the 1929 dictionary is gospel isnt it,tangata whenua is what the maori called the people here before them when the early europeans asked whos bones they were finding.....now they use those words to describe themselves....thats the point I was trying to make. And ad hominems....didnt you just say I was peddling racism,isnt that another way of saying im racist? Pot/kettle kind of thing?
Thats the card thats always pulled out when people mention this topic of NZ history.....but even the chief of the biggest tribe in NZ has said they were not here first,what say you about that?I guess he is just a liar to,with a whole list of agenda to say such things huh.

a reply to: hiddenNZ

Indeed.

Though not the topic...the wording and inferences of that link/blog is what I'm referring to.

To be clear here: My own Iwi/Hapu hold histories within our purakau, tauparapara etc that refer to others being here before we arrived.
So no arguments on that from me.

The issue I have is with the inferences made there.

Maybe I missed something along the way as I have admit to have not followed this thread, but what I can gather, doing a quick google, the idea is that there were Celts and Vikings in NZ at one point in time.

If this is true, whats the big deal? Vikings floated all over the place, why would it...

A. Be significant other than as an oddity. I could easily see a Viking ship going off course, getting stranded and the relative low population of Norse Longboat dying out in a generation or two assuming that they had one or two women on board when they landed.

B. Be worth "covering up" in the first place?
I mean the common story of America is Columbus set sail and landed in the Cayman islands, meeting the locals etc, however most know that the Vikings landed in the Americas long before.
It makes no difference one way or the other in the vast majority of peoples lives, unless one happens to get asked a daily double question on "Jeopardy."

The reason I doubt the cover up is there is no reason to cover anything up.
There is nothing to be gained by covering something like this up, and everything to gain.
Namely a nice grant from a University to dig in the dirt.

originally posted by: hiddenNZ
a reply to: Marduk
ahh another "im a racist" comment.....its gotten really old,lol.

If you don't think the claims being made for a Celtic civilisation in New Zealand are generally of a racist nature, then you really are overlooking the facts, or fabricating them, like we saw earlier...

Historians and archaeologists dismiss the theories. Michael King wrote in his history of New Zealand, "Despite a plethora of amateur theories about Melanesian, South American, Egyptian, Phoenician and Celtic colonisation of New Zealand, there is not a shred of evidence that the first human settlers were anything other than Polynesian", and Richard Hill, professor of New Zealand Studies at Victoria University of Wellington, said in 2012, "Not one of [the theories] has ever passed any remote academic scrutiny." Hugh Laracy of the University of Auckland called them "wild speculation" that has been "thoroughly disposed of by academic specialists."

Another historian, Vincent O'Malley, and the New Zealand Archaeological Association regard the theories as having a racist or at least a political element, seeking to cast doubt on Waitangi Tribunal claims. Scott Hamilton in "No to Nazi Pseudo-history: an Open Letter" further explains objections to the theories of Bolton and Doutré (and the website Ancient Celtic New Zealand).

Your claims for the Waipoua Forest are examined in detail here
readingthemaps.blogspot.co.uk...
And guess what, its made up pseudohistory based on a misunderstanding, which has been spread by racist ideology.
Not only is the Waipoua Forest open to the public, but there have been many archaeological digs there since the claim that none are allowed was made

Its not that people are claiming, the government won't let anyone dig there, people are claiming that the government won't let people dig there because they don't want them finding the dead white people...

As you are supporting this crap, then you are supporting racism...


Maybe you could just answer me this one question
Is Martin Doutre a racist ?
And no, claiming that you haven't heard of him isn't valid as you have been expounding his claims in this thread

a reply to: Marduk
jesus you just dont get my point do you,even when the above poster said their people aknowledge maori were not here first.
And as for a celtic race...where did I say I believe in that,because I flat out dont,it could be possible but its not a thought i entertain so save the brush tarring man.
my point is,maori have said many many times they were not here first....are they all liars,im sure they are in your mind.
Why not call the other poster a liar also....hmmmm.

originally posted by: hiddenNZ
a reply to: Marduk
jesus you just dont get my point do you,even when the above poster said their people aknowledge maori were not here first.

Yes, apparently the Maori claim that there were some fairies living in remote areas when they arrived. Is that what you are claiming, fairies ?

And as for a celtic race...where did I say I believe in that,because I flat out dont,it could be possible but its not a thought i entertain so save the brush tarring man.
my point is,maori have said many many times they were not here first....are they all liars,im sure they are in your mind.
Why not call the other poster a liar also....hmmmm.

You have been posting information from people who make the ancient celtic new Zealand claim all the way through this thread. Now you are pretending that's not what you are talking about

How disingenuous of you. Are you a shill for Martin Doutre ?
Or are you actually him, because every one of the claims you have made here, was previously made by him

a reply to: Marduk

This is your evidence, and its rotten to the core...

Seems to be a lot of that going around.



But on the topic of the thread, the government could very well want these powers to stop people from jumping to any forgone conclusions and accidentally spreading information causing the public to panic.

For example: Archaeologist finding a few deformed skeletons or skulls and jumping to conclusions about aliens. As with anything else, there is always potential for abuse.