Other Natural Religions

[rhytha]

Wow, thanks Husky for analysis of eastern religions, have not read in full, but will once i have time.

[Husky]

Oh phew. I was afraid to read your post. I thought you were going to call me out on having skipped all the actual maths in the physics/maths books that I had alluded to. (It's true, I'll confess: I took one look at any and all maths/computation and skip-skipped past them. I'll take their word for it that the proof checks out. I mean, I like proofs as much as the next guy - well, there was a time when I did, but only simple stuff of course - but this was like math I didn't even recognise. Pop-sci doesn't always seem to mean what I thought it meant...)



Had I known that you/anyone was going to read it, I think I would have properly spell-checked my posts instead of spot-checking. I seem to have continued my trend of forming nonsensical sentences. It's embarrassing. Will go over them properly and then fix them up if/when I can be bothered.

analysis of eastern religions

- It wasn't really an analysis. It was just summarising obvious things that you or any Hindoo would notice if you talked to traditional Taoists. We all know Hindoo stuffs, it's our thing. It is the degree to which there exist parallels in other heathenisms with our own stuff that is interesting. And the differences - which are in the details - is what proves independent origination. I.e. we're all doubly validated: our heathenisms validate each other and independently. Plus then there's physics and to what extent Taoism has provided a good model of the physical world.



I was deliberately quite guarded (more so about Taoism) - and you must have noticed: extremely shallow - in those posts. But Hindoos can always read between the lines of the light fluffy presentation, whereas others won't know to.



- Also the posts specifically weren't about "eastern religions" in general, but only about eastern heathenisms, particularly the ones named. I.e. specifically not about Buddhism or Jainism (or Sikhism). Only about Hindu, Taoist and Shinto religions. (Extrapolated to Shinto religion based on known similarities with Taoism on the matter, and based on traditional descriptions and discussions of Shinto religion elsewhere.) I actually think at least a partial case can be made for Hellenismos, but find that Julian* already made it - he wasn't guarded at all hock:





* But speaking of his imperial magnificence, though otherwise on another subject, I came to post something bright for a change. Julian said the following, which is taken from official translation, where he conveys the Greco-Roman version of bhakti (the Piety of Hellenismos) by means of illustration/analogies to other relationships:

I feel awe of the Gods, I love, I revere, I venerate them, and in short have precisely the same feelings towards them as one would have towards kind masters or teachers or fathers or guardians or any beings of that sort.

<snip>

With the above, the Roman emperor also gives an indication of the nature of the Hellenistic Gods and how we - as non-Hellene heathens - may begin to form a proper view of their nature. Only the Hellenes have a proper perception of their Gods after all and therefore only they can convey this, if anyone.

[Husky]

Not really related to this thread, other than that Julian is a heathen, being a traditional Hellene. Good read though.



research.ncl.ac.uk/histos/documents/2011.02SmithCastingofJulian.pdf



(Not that it's news that he had no intention of invading India, since it was also confirmed by other writers. Plus he wasn't even intending on annexing Persia in his Persian war.)

[Husky]

Actually related to the last posts on the previous page.



rajeev2004.blogspot.co.uk/2014/12/quick-notes-evangelical-startups-super.html

•Science Increasingly Makes the Case for God: Astrophysicists now know that the values of the four fundamental forces—gravity, the electromagnetic force, and the “strong” and “weak” nuclear forces—were determined less than one millionth of a second after the big bang. Alter any one value and the universe could not exist. For instance, if the ratio between the nuclear strong force and the electromagnetic force had been off by the tiniest fraction of the tiniest fraction—by even one part in 100,000,000,000,000,000—then no stars could have ever formed at all. Feel free to gulp.



Multiply that single parameter by all the other necessary conditions, and the odds against the universse existing are so heart-stoppingly astronomical that the notion that it all “just happened” defies common sense. It would be like tossing a coin and having it come up heads 10 quintillion times in a row. Really?



Fred Hoyle, the astronomer who coined the term “big bang,” said that his atheism was “greatly shaken” at these developments. He later wrote that “a common-sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super-intellect has monkeyed with the physics, as well as with chemistry and biology . . . . The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question.”



Theoretical physicist Paul Davies has said that “the appearance of design is overwhelming” and Oxford professor Dr. John Lennox has said “the more we get to know about our universe, the more the hypothesis that there is a Creator . . . gains in credibility as the best explanation of why we are here.”



Posted by Pagan at 12/27/2014 08:11:00 PM Labels: evangelical, Quick Notes, science

Reactions

Inferno aka "Pagan" is well behind the times: the arguments cited (being old) have been superceded by the arguments presented - based on the additional knowledge gained in the interrim - by current physicists like Hawking and Cox. Not all of their arguments are based on string theorising - note well - but are largely founded on fields of physics that have significantly given proof of themselves. The multiple universes theory is not a product of String Theory. As I said: even regular quantum physics already gave rise to the view (and with reason) of the likelihood of multiple universes, and well before String Theory chose to develop on the theme. Nor is the theory that 'there are other universes out there where other physical laws may govern' a product of String Theory. (String Theory's objectionable novelty was the possibility of "just about anything you can imagine" existing in at least one universe somewhere out there. I.e. the kind of view that gives rise to arguments like how there can be a universe out there with jeebusjehovallah/the pink unicorn/the flying spaghetti monster as creator gawd. Still, anything is possible *I suppose* - the usual argument from hand-waving/prove me wrong - except that the important fact remains: that jeebus still never existed in this universe and no biblical creator gawd either.)



As several physicists have argued from standard physics, physics supports the notion of the existence of an unknown number of other universes out there where the laws of physics are often very likely to be radically different: e.g. where gravity cannot be, or where the other forces known to us cannot be, or are of such values as to mutually interfere/make the evolution of the universe impossible, and which cause the universe to collapse at birth or before any stars have formed etc etc. That is, all kinds of possibilities of how matters can be different and not produce the same results/"sequence" of events seen in our universe. And there could be universes where many of the initial stages of a similar cosmic evolution may have come to pass, but where something caused later stages to fail or turn out differently such that life cannot exist there (c.f. how life cannot exist past the era of the stars in our universe; the timeframe within our universe for any life to exist is minute: only as long as the stars are. Once the stars are gone, there is an *ocean* of time where no life can be, followed by the point after which nothing can happen ever again in our universe/end of Time - as per a currently commonly-held view of our universe).



As IIRC Hawking and others argued, it is therefore the very fact that our universe has intelligent life - i.e. our life, our consciousness, as example - that we are even able to ponder our universe and start to imagine the uniqueness/miracle of it. It is *we*, who have had the chance to evolve to exist in this universe - this universe where the particular (peculiar?) laws of our universe have made our particular existence possible - that look back on said peculiarities of our universe wherein our life/consciousness was made possible, and then (with typical self-aggrandising paranoia) conclude that it was all a "great miracle" or a conspiracy of "gawd did it". But even if we/our universe wherein life can exist had but one in a 1 to the nth of chance to exist, it is hypothesized that there are still more than n universes where life may not have been possible, and possibly an order of magnitude more universes still, a few of which wherein life would be possible and often would exist. None of this argues for the necessity of Gods, forget obviously invented "gawd" mono-entities of the recently made-up religions.



Therefore, Indians should refrain from spouting outdated scientific opinions, especially when these are parroted by new agey AmriKKKan 'journalists' or those AmriKKKans who are actually trying to sneakily introduce the biblical gawd by claiming that earlier physicists couldn't explain it all away and therefore suspected a "creator" behind it all. And, AmriKKKans are kept stupid: as I recall, even in the version of Hawking's arguments that was made for TV, the very episode where Hawking argued against god is the one that was made hard for the public to even access. And in the DVD version, Discovery or History Channel (or one might be a subsidiary of the other) even appended a segment unbeknownst to and unendorsed by Hawking where christoislamics were given the last word and argued that their invisible mono-gawd did exist and did it all anyway, even though the babble-koran has no conception of physics or our universe and is so obviously man-made by ignorants.



Further, life can easily be argued to be a *natural and actually unavoidable* consequence of the evolution of our universe (the evolution of life on our planet is a subset of that; and it is highly suspected that the laws of evolution of life on our planet are at least a subset of those that govern the evolution of life on any planets in our universe) - which is itself a product of the physical laws governing our universe. This is well-covered by Cox. Life - as defined by science - is a (bio)chemical process. And, as scientists say, where there is water and rocky terrain rich in minerals, the biochemists are convinced that life is a natural and unavoidable corollary. And this is just life as we know it. There may be other kinds of ... "life". And who knows what may exist beyond our universe. And what forms of sentience may be possible and actually exist. I have yet to see a valid argument for a creator "gawd" entity that science cannot explain away. Certainly, Inferno/'pagan' has cited none that current physicists have NOT explained away very well.



Hawking's famous comment - that humans are just an advanced breed of monkeys on a minor planet (but that we are fortunate enough to understand the universe) - can be extrapolated: that just as life need not exist on every planet of our universe (or even our solar system, as far as we know at present), likewise one can suspect that life or some form of sentience need not be possible in every universe, but there may be universes that coincidentally evolve in such a manner as to make life or some form of sentience possible (and that in some of these universes, life is further an actuality). And this is exactly what Hawking (and many another hardcore western physicist) has argued for about our universe at least: that it is the Pure Coincidence of the laws of physics in our universe being conducive to life that have consequently led to life in our universe (whereas laws of physics in any number of other universes need not have been). I.e. Pure Coincidence. No introduction of extra variables like creator entities.





Look, I'm not arguing for atheism here. But scientific atheism has very valid arguments for why "there need not be and therefore very probably isn't any (ockam's razor)" gawd entity. I agree entirely with the atheist arguments. Such arguments are true to all publicly visible, measurable/empirical and generally-known facts. (And yet the heathen Gods are real. But because the atheist viewpoint is valid to what can be generally known, heathens don't impose their religion on atheist viewpoints. Heathenisms are not universal religions and hence not missionary. They're ethnic, but specifically for those of the ethnic group who are innately prone to their ancestral heathenism. There's no point "convincing" other people of heathen Gods. People who adhere to ancestral tradition and have unsubverted views - i.e. heathens - who practice their tradition and ritual practices, can thereby always prove these matters for themselves, as they're private matters anyway.)

Invisible monogawd inventions are all a fraud, and a known fraud besides, so I'll stop wasting more words on that.





The Gods of the heathenisms are to be known. They will not be known by science, I more than merely suspect. <Leaving out a lot of further monologuing that I'd typed out.>

[Husky]

On the previous post.



- Corrected some spelling errors. (E.g. "superseeded" instead of superceded - don't know where the torrent lingo came from, but am a phonetic speller: so NL fit me just right despite regular changes to spelling rules, but English is a nightmare when typing without thinking.)

The Gods of the heathenisms are to be known. They will not be known by science, I more than merely suspect. <Leaving out a lot of further monologuing that I'd typed out.>

Just to be pedantic. Rewrite to:

The Gods of the heathenisms are to be known. They will not be known (or "revealed" to the public/to scrutiny) by science, I more than merely suspect. <...>



REINSERT:

In leaving out a huge chunk, unintentionally excised an important part:

<Context: The heathen Gods - at least of 2 heathenisms, very possibly of more - are real. What is said about [the nature of] these Gods and their relation to the universe by those to whom these Gods have revealed themselves - e.g. Hindu Rishis, Taoist sages - can therefore be considered as a possibility until disproven. Some part of which are more than a possibility, since some of what has been stated by these heathenisms about their heathen Gods and about the universe is known to be a fact, demonstrated to traditional heathens during their ritual practices.> Working from such a background - of a body of views with much that is valid/can be validated by heathen individuals - the heathens therefore base themselves on the reasonable working assumption that the relation between the real Gods of heathenism and the questionmarks regarding the universe is also as described in heathenism. It is *here* that science is useful in "proving" (a degree of) something about heathenism: in that there exists a decent mapping between the universe as revealed by physics/science and the universe as revealed by heathenism, e.g. Taoism (and actually also Hindoo religion, though the proof for Hindoo cosmology is...'tarred' by the non-independence from physics cosmology, as argued in the final posts in the previous page. But can perhaps use Taoism as independent validation of Hindu religion: the bigger picture of Taoist cosmology is validated by physics. From a bird's eye view, Taoist cosmological views [and Shinto too, from indication] are similar to Hindu cosmological views in exactly those very features that have 'parallels' in physics. While this is not exactly "QED" for Hindu religion, it seems reasonable to imagine that Taoism can be used as a fair connector between Hindu religion and physics, because Taoism is - as far as I'm aware - independent of both, not having influenced or been influenced by either physics or Hindu cosmology to any significant or known extent, at least in the matters concerned. Plus the details of Taoist cosmology are sufficiently and significantly different from the Hindu one as to make influence unlikely).





And on this:

Hawking's famous comment - that humans are just an advanced breed of monkeys on a minor planet (but that we are fortunate enough to understand the universe) - can be extrapolated: that just as life need not exist on every planet of our universe (or even our solar system, as far as we know at present), likewise one can suspect that life or some form of sentience need not be possible in every universe, but there may be universes that coincidentally evolve in such a manner as to make life or some form of sentience possible (and that in some of these universes, life is further an actuality). And this is exactly what Hawking (and many another hardcore western physicist) has argued for about our universe at least: that it is the Pure Coincidence of the laws of physics in our universe being conducive to life that have consequently led to life in our universe (whereas laws of physics in any number of other universes need not have been). I.e. Pure Coincidence. No introduction of extra variables like creator entities.

Specifically, the physicists' argument is: we (humans) are able to contemplate the universe only because the laws in our particular universe coincidentally made life [consciousness] in it - like that of ours - possible. Whereas life may not be possible in any number of other universes and which hence did not there give rise to any intelligence contemplating it and (concluding by default) what a "miracle" their universe is.



Besides, life evolved to fit the universe a.o.t. the universe having being fine-tuned "in anticipation" to fit the eventual appearance of life in it. So it's a bit insane to say that it's a "miracle" that the universe is fine-tuned to our life.

That is, at least as per what's known with certainty in science: life evolved according to the possibilties in our universe, which possibilities are governed by the natural=physical laws of this universe. <- To make my argument apparent, here's an analogy: To say that it's "nothing short of a miracle" that the oxygen and pressure levels are "just right" for us on our part of the planet, is to reverse the actual state/reality of the world: we are adapted to our environment. The environment did not adapt to us nor was it created [to become] "just right" so that humans etc could evolve to live in it.



That is, the conditions for life on the planet are not a "miracle". They existed - for a duration of time, as part of larger long-term changes. And so we/life on earth arose as a possible consequence of those conditions. I.e. coincidence, in combination with subsequent inevitable natural processes. That's *all* people are going to be able to prove. We (as in: all life on the planet) evolved to fit our world, and its changing conditions, many of our species extincting along the way when then-prevailing conditions were all wrong.



So, yes, many an extant species would extinct if the atmospheric pressure levels or oxygen levels were significantly different, unless given enough time to evolve and adapt to the change in conditions. But the presence of the (currently) suitable conditions themselves - which conditions we suited ourselves to and not the other way around - do NOT point to the existence of 'gawd' behind everything being "just right" for all of us who live on the planet today. Else why not argue that gawd fortuitously made the dinos extinct just so us mammals can dominate and humans can take over? <- Such excuses are inane. Millions of years from now when mammals have dodo-ed... what will be the new argument? More pre-destination? And when life on earth becomes impossible, will it be a great disappointment? <- Because *that* is pre-destination - that is the destiny of the solar system and the universe - but destined by physical laws, not requiring "gawd did it" arguments. The universe can reasonably be argued as a self-contained system in a larger self-contained system of universes.



Some planets, throughout their existence, can't harbour life - life as we know it (i.e. water-dependent life-forms), because they just don't have water and never had it or never had it long enough or other factors weren't conducive for the planet to make the most of it. (Water is the single common factor underpinning all life-forms that we know of.) As a result, life did not evolve on certain planets (or perhaps extincted there), whereas life did evolve on earth and continues to abound here. Using a similar line of reasoning, it becomes conceivable that some universes might not give rise to life - as we'd know or recognise or understand it. ['Consciousness' is harder to state anything about, since it is still somewhat a mystery to science. One can be all Shinto and see 'essence of existence' in all things animate and inanimate, and hence also in all universes and their constituents, but for this discussion am sticking to what science can tell us or has proposed thus far.]



One can therefore argue very reasonably that the presence of life in this universe does NOT imply let alone prove a "miracle" of the "gawd did it" variety. (Though the Gods yet originated it All or govern its ordering/functioning - as per various heathenisms.) Like life on earth just happened to pan out, whereas it didn't (or else peetered out) on some other planets out there somewhere, similarly, things just happened to work out well in our universe, which events made it possible for us all to exist - from cyanobacteria to their relatives: cabbages and kings.

Ockam's razor. Pure Coincidence. No unnecessary=extra variables. Prove it wrong.



Can't scientifically prove/reveal the Gods. Isn't Tirobhavam one of the main features of Parabrahmam?* The Gods are to be known but are known by other means. And heathens can know them (that's where heathen practices come in), but they tend to do so individually.



* Ancient heathens (elsewhere too) considered this one of the great mysteries and the purpose was to unravel it on an individual basis.

[Husky]

The link and the large quoteblock in the 2nd post below are the important points.

This post is just some further loose remarks.





Post 1/3



1. Forgot to add the next statement, meant for clarification, to the brief references to Loop Quantum Gravity in my posts on the previous page. May insert the following there later. For now, pasting it here. (Reminder: LQG argues that time itself should be part of the equations of physical laws of the universe - that some or all of these laws themselves may change over time.)



Evolution of the universe means it's a system influenced by time. Evolution in bio is that process where *over time* life evolves. <- Note how time is a crucial part of the process and an important feature in dictating current state. People argue that biology gives evidence of a natural=physical (physics sense) system where time is itself an important influential/contributing variable. The proposition of Loop Quantum Gravity is that it isn't just life that evolves=changes over time, but that the universe evolves in a very literal sense, i.e. physics laws themselves changing over time. C.f. general physics cosmology has the evolution of the universe in stages (time is a component but more passive itself) but with the physical laws remaining the same over time.





2. The "gawd designed the universe" arguments are a subset of the "something did it" proposition, mostly of the form "Some Intelligence is Behind it". That is, even if there is an intelligence behind it - though it ain't the gawd of the mono-moronisms for sure (the babble/koran don't say anything about the universe) - it need not be a deity. E.g. AI/philosophy have submitted the possibility of Simulation Theory. Which encompasses possibilities like: 1. this (the universe including life in it) is a big simulation by some intelligence [entity, either individual or group], perhaps for research purposes*; 2. the intelligent entity might itself be an AI; 3. Ancestor Simulation Theory: we may be robots/AI ourselves, made to closely resemble organic entities, emulating our original ancestors ("organic"?) whose possible experiences we are retreading/exploring. [This was the inspiration behind the BSG reboot and lots of 90s sci-fi too, btw. So it could all well be the AI "cylon god" behind it, and we could all be cylons: emulating organic predecessors. Anyone else hearing "All along the watchtower" playing? Oh wait, that's youtube running in the background, never mind. But when I switch it off, the CMB=cosmic microwave background is audible to all, and has been for as long as we know... (Cue the "twilight zone" theme.) Just kidding obviously.]





* The aims of the simulation are variously suggested to be for the experimenters to work out how their species' intelligence could have evolved; or simply to construct alternate possibilities, c.f. how humans in the 90s created simple computer simulations to randomly test the evolution of mobility by feeding in some "physical laws" (limitations) into a model context (limited "universe") and getting the program to randomly generate different forms of possible movements, with each form being evolved from the previous as part of the short-sighted learning algorithm**. The program tries for stability, which would indicate some level of success in the movement, before it proceeds to further "evolve" other forms of motion.



** Since actual evolution, too, is a Brute Force stabilising algorithm: it does NOT produce the best design of all time, just a viable design for the current environment in the current time.



The whole thing about a common idea in AI's Simulation Theory (which encompasses the theory where a hidden entity/intelligence is behind it all, even an AI program - or that we are a robotic simulation modelled on our once-real ancestors etc - of which the "gawd is behind it all" theory is a proper subset)

is that from our vantage-point, being in the sim ourselves, it is hard to detect whether there is anything "behind it all". We have observer bias, but from the POV of being part of the experiment. Our position is that of microbes confined to a lab. And we can't see past the lab. And there's no certain/reliable way of detecting what is past the lab. Or even any certainty that we can exist beyond it (c.f. if a computer simulation is switched "off"). No reliable way of detecting what is real and unreal, of detecting the 'true' reality behind what's commonly perceived as 'reality', and whether that supposed 'true reality' is indeed the real Real* or just more of a red herring/layers of an onion. (* "Level Real". :Avalon FTW Because anything we detect from our POV as labrats can *all* be conspiracied away as part of the simulation, or a larger simulation, an additional layer. [Or even that we are programmed not to be able to conceive the answer.] <- These are all notions long dealt with in science/AI and eventually science fiction. Nature Of Reality questions are in that respect like questions on the Nature Of Consciousness, and even Nature Of Memory: what is real, how can we - being subjective as subjects - even know. The possible answers turn into philosophy in the end. <- And that's what happens to unanswered/unanswerable questions in western science: since humans need answers or else they - society/generations - go mad trying to answer unfathomable questions, they produce the pacifier of modern philosophy to posit what is unknowable but at least possibly sufficiently mentally-satisfying. [Whereas the trite "mono-gawd did it all" answer had been considered a sufficient pacifier in the christoislamised world (and still is among christoislamics) - until the west started breaking free of the christoclass virus and thus increasingly started asking proper questions and searching for proper answers. Even so, Hawking said in his doco that the Pope - JP II, I think - told him and other physicists gathered by His Papal Phantom Menace that they were not allowed to ask questions about/seek answers to the origins of the cosmos, i.e. that cosmology was off-limits, as this part of physics must be answered with "gawd did it". Hawking et al naturally disagreed and sought the answers anyway.]



Therefore, the "gawd did it" excuse is only one among a great many conspiracy theories. And I'm not just talking about how an invisible monogawd is as likely to exist as the pink unicorn or the FSM/Flying Spaghetti Monster - all of which (and an infinite number of fictive creatures) are equally likely and *equally* to be credited with the creation and governing of the universe. <- Invisibility and undetectability can be conveniently appealed to by *all*, and equally, after all.

That "gawd/pink-unicorn/FSM did it" is certainly no more likely - has no more evidence going for it - than the equally admissable proposition that a highly evolved/technologically advanced but naturally-evolved non-deity intelligence did it (i.e. simulation theory) or that a technologically capable AI did it (and which is sometimes conjectured as part of the simulation itself, e.g. the program that generated the simulation could run the simulation using its own resources incl. memory. Compare with how Hindu or Taoist Gods ARE themselves the universe - the universe is of them, of their own Shakti -; similarly, the AI runs the simulation using its own powers in the form of resources. BTW, some of the philosophical views/considerations that gave rise to Simulation Hypothesis are also influenced by Hindoo religion. So Simulation Theory's suggestions can't be used as proof of Hindoo religion either, not being independent.)

In fact, it could be argued that as the universe seems to conform to some mathematical laws (physical laws) and not to magical miraculous nonsense of the babble/koran tripe (or the My Little Pony universe), that Simulation Theory - by an intelligent but not necessarily omniscient or even truly omnipotent entity (doing research, say) - is more likely than miraculous magical entities.





Again: as explained, the "gawd did it" excuse is only one among a great many conspiracy theories. And unless people have proof - which heathens have for their heathen Gods/heathenisms, BTW - "gawd did it" is nothing more than a conspiracy theory; and the gawd theory is moreover NOT necessary to explain the existence of the universe, or the possibility of life and us in particular in it. (Example arguments given by scientists are in the previous post.) Else, as stated, Simulation Theory has at least as much chance of being true as gawd, and has just as much scientific "proof" for it. I.e. like the invisible monogawd proposition, simulation theory is not detectable with certainty either (as any detections can always be dismissed as another layer to the "conspiracy").





3. Now as Hindoos know, in Hindoo religion, the 5 defining actions of the Parabrahmam/paramapuruSha/Ishwara are (and it's right there in every Nataraja vigraham, for example): Srushti, Sthiti, Samhaaram, Tirobhavam and Anugraham. Science can say the final bit is a convenient cop out, but at least Hindoo heathenism - even if the shruti were dismissed as not apauruSheya - shows a lot of reasoned arguments not to mention a vast deal of contemplation on the nature of the universe, reality and fundamental essence ("consciousness"), which is NOT seen in the lately invented religions and which is not original to the missionary plagiarisms. The last two of the 5 defining acts of Parabrahmam indicate the Hindoo answer to why Hindoo religion predicts that science will Not publicly reveal the Hindoo Gods: tirobhavam is of their own will, and only their anugraham - which is also an act of their volition - will reveal them. Anugraham is only to be obtained in certain ways and is predicated on correct (Hindoo) perception by the individual. For the rest, the universe will look free of the Gods - as it always does without divyachakShus.

[Similar arguments for certain other named heathenisms, BTW.]





The link and the large quoteblock in the next post are the important points.

[Husky]

Post 2/3



A couple of posts back, mentioned a televised version of Hawking's written discussion on the question of 'god' in cosmology. I've now checked my DVD library, and the relevant episode is Hawking's "Did god create the universe" in his 3-part "Grand Design" documentary series (2012) for Discovery. I'd also recommend books or other materials by various physicists. There's lots out there.



About Hawking's "Did god create the universe" episode in his 3-part "Grand Design" series for Discovery:

• It is made for a general audience and speaks generally, such that children can follow along. Physicists will yawn, but the general audience will not be bored.
  
  
• For those who fear they won't understand Hawking's digitised/electronic voice: Hawking wrote the content, but most of the narration is by Cumberbatch for Hawking. Hawking just introduces a few segments (a couple of sentences here and there) with his electronic voice.
  
  
• Each episode is just 45 mins. So can easily watch the whole Grand Design series (~2 hrs 15 mins) easily. Better than wasting it on a bollywho movie, right? Leave bollywho for christoislamorons. It's all they're good for.
  
  
• Ep #2 Key to the Cosmos is IIRC on string theory, and ep #3 The Meaning of Life talks about what the purpose of life could be, having argued in ep#1 that the assumption of gawd/religion is no longer necessary. From memory, this 3rd episode even briefly touches on AI and simulation theory.
  
  

Had also mentioned that Hawking's "Did god create the universe" episode was deliberately de-railed by the christoclass virus, in order to keep the sheep brainwashed into the invisible angry mono-entity whose imagination [or rather, that of its inventors] is so limited that it can only threaten with a puerile heaven for beliebers and hell for unbelievers, but whose "Word" (=babble/koran) does NOT remotely exhibit the intelligence needed to generate our universe. [Besides, "mathematics is witchcraft" as per christianism, and so GrecoRoman mathematicians were massacred for this "crime" against the non-existent monogawd. While in the alleged 'golden age' of 'islam', only secular ex-muslims and unmuslims were scientists. And even so, much of their math and science was plagiarised from Hindus, the GrecoRomans, Chinese and Zoroastrian Persia.]

In fact, Netflix apparently has/had Hawking's "Grand Design" doco series available, but only the 2 non-offensive episodes: the "did gawd create the universe" episode was specifically not on there. Must have really disturbed AmriKKKan christians.





People who want to watch it, can get the DVD. Or do so online apparently: I just checked online and this next link seems to have it, but have to sit through adverts first (I tried playing just now, the ads were under a minute and then the actual episode started. I'm assuming the episode posted at the link is uncut and untampered, but as I didn't watch more than a few seconds past the adverts, I can't confirm):



watchdocumentary.org/watch/curiosity-episode-01-did-god-create-the-universe-video_8cc568d0e.html





And here's a review of Discovery's standalone DVD release of the 'offending' episode that explains the real problem - and how christianism is behind the de-railment. (Note that the entire "Grand Design" series DVD release in UK R2 and Australia R4 regions should contain the episode but without inclusion of the christian apologetics segment which has been exposed below).



The DVD review is for the item:

amazon.co.uk/STEPHEN-HAWKINGS-Curiosity-Create-Universe/dp/B007G6MD3I/ref=sr_1_1?s=dvd



The particular review's page - which has 2 comments on it - is:

amazon.co.uk/review/RSFQI6NH6VR3D/ref=cm_cr_dp_cmt?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B007G6MD3I&channel=detail-glance&nodeID=283926&store=dvd



Note that the review site is amazon *UK*, and that Discovery Channel that brought out the Grand Design series (and then stabbed Hawking in the back by attaching a christian segment at the end, to give the final word to christoislamania/creationism) is AmriKKKan. So the British comments are making fun of AmriKKKan christians (Again) - like other Europeans regularly do.

16 of 26 people found the following review helpful

1.0 out of 5 stars

Fallacious religious arguments for the existence of god included. Otherwise the DVD is quite good., 5 Aug 2012

By

Steven

This review is from: STEPHEN HAWKINGS: Curiosity Did God Create The Universe? [DVD] (DVD)

In this DVD, by Discovery Channel, Stephen Hawking gives his reasons that there be no god required to explain the existence of the universe by pointing out firstly that the mass in the universe is balanced by the negative energy of space such that this could all have come from nothing thus needing no creator and secondly that time only started with the big bang leaving no place in which a creator could have created the universe. This part of the DVD is fine.



A 20 minute discussion on the existence of god is included in the DVD including some scientists but only those who believe in god such as Paul Davies a well known science author.

(A "science author"? But not a physicist? <- The distinction *matters*, right?)

Comment is made refuting Stephens views while ignoring other reasons to believe in a lack of god such as the commonly understood view of Richard Dawkins that the god itself is too complex to have just come into being or always existed so that by the logic that demanded the existence of the god to create a complex universe you would also need an infinite number of gods each having been created by another. The god itself is attributed with the complex traits of self awareness, the cognitive ability to understand the universe, and the ability to bring the universe into being. Thus the use of god to account for the creation of the universe only puts the question of the origin of complexity back a step rather than resolving it, and further shows the existence of such a complex thing as a god to be extremely unlikely as follows.



The argument raised against Stephen's ideas involved the use of the idea of the multiverse but makes no mention of the well known idea that with an infinite number of universes in the multiverse that the apparent unlikely nature of physical laws in the universe just happening to allow for the existence of life is no longer a valid argument in favour of the need of a creator because an infinite number of such universes each with their own laws will statistically likely create some that allow for life. Nor is it mentioned that as we learn more the apparent impossibilities of various aspects of a naturally caused 'creation' become understandable as natural occurrences, such as evolution showing how complex organisms and eco-systems could exist without the need of a god creating them, and that as we learn more again, and hypothetically everything, then more again, and hypothetically everything, could be explained without the need to resort to a god. There is, however, no such explanation that would allow for the complexity of a god to have come about. I think Stephen Hawking refers to the use of god to explain the shrinking number of unexplained aspects of the universe as the "God of the gaps".



Not to mention the likely hood of a god creating such cruel eco-systems where almost all animals are torn to pieces by predators or starve when to old to hunt if they don't first die from terrible injury or one or more of god's hideous diseases.



I emailed Discovery Channel asking the following questions but they said that their data base, although containing much information, did not contain that which I had asked for. That is to say they did not answer the questions.



- was Stephen Hawking or others given opportunity to reply?



- did he know a discussion only involving those of religious beliefs that often had poor logic and failed to even mention other well known reasons for the lack of existence of god would follow?



- do you think that such a biased and poor discussion effects the credibility of the Discovery Channel?



Possibly Discovery Channel was concerned for market reasons that in a very superstitious country, such as the USA, that many people could react against such a DVD if it lacked Christian propaganda. It is also possible that such propaganda was included because of superstitious beliefs of those involved with Discovery Channel.



The inclusion of superstitious propaganda in this manner harms the credibility of both Discovery Channel and those involved in the discussion, including Paul Davies, who would have been knowledgeable of the above mentioned major floors and omissions of the arguments used for the existence of god and the apparent lack of opportunity of others to reply to criticisms made.



When I watch documentaries I want information presented to be both correct and complete so due to their lack of credibility I will never buy anything from Discovery Channel again, nor from Paul Davies.



People who are interested in the above could read from the following books concerning various aspects of religion from child molesting in the Catholic Church to the existence of god:-



The Case of the Pope: Vatican Accountability for Human Rights Abuse, by Geoffrey Robertson QC, dealing with child molesting in the Catholic Church;



The Vatican Exposed: Money, Murder, and the Mafia, by Paul L Williams, dealing with the Catholic Church's association with Hitler, Mussolini, the mafia and other similar issues;



Attack of the Theocrats: How the Religious Right Harms Us All - and what We Can Do About It, by Sean Faircloth, dealing with superstitious fanaticism in the USA,



The God Delusion, by Richard Dawkins, dealing with the extremely low probability of the existence of god,



The Faith Healers, by James Randy, dealing with the methods, motivation, and harm done by faith healers,



The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution, by Richard Dawkins, dealing with the reasons to believe in evolution,



Why I am not a Muslim, by Ibn Warraq, dealing with the problems of Islam,



Root of all Evil? (DVD), by Richard Dawkins, dealing with problems of superstition,



Telling Lies for God: Reason vs Creationism, by Ian Plimer, dealing with creation science, although it's out of print and expensive on some web sites,



Deceit and Self-Deception: Fooling Yourself the Better to Fool Others, by Robert Trivers, dealing with why and how people deceive themselves over various issues,



Kepler's Witch, by James A. Connor, dealing with the work of Kepler and the religious perils he and others faced in the 1600's during the lead up to the 30 year war,



Origins of Us (DVD), presented by Dr Alice Roberts, dealing with human evolution.



(From the above list, I've only watched Roberts' "Origins of Us" documentary.)



There are of course other books on these subjects but I've included those I have at least read. I included above a book on creation science but did not include one on intelligent design as I am waiting for one to arrive called God, the Devil, and Darwin: A Critique of Intelligent Design Theory, although not having read it yet I can't say more than that it exists. There are also books on the psychology of why people maintain superstitious beliefs even in the face of overwhelming contrary evidence but I have not yet got around to any.







Comments

Track comments by e-mail

Tracked by 2 customers



Showing 1-2 of 2 posts in this discussion

Initial post: 17 Aug 2012 21:13:12 BDT



GregShineALight says:

Well the Discovery Channel is American - that speaks volumes.



I'm amazed that people can still say that they believe in 'god' - what a bunch of credulous morons miley:

(If only they were just morons. Worse still is that the rest of the world has to be stuck on the same planet/universe as the genocidal christoislamorons, or in fact, any missionary ideologies. Sigh.)



5 of 6 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No

Posted on 4 Apr 2014 01:32:35 BDT



Jose Henrique says:

Great review, congratulations! Creationists are always trying to trick people. One of them, (Ray Confort) added 50 pages of rubish creationists propaganda to the 150 edition of Charles Darwin and shortened Darwins own words. One editor of Albert Einstein in what can be said to be a postumus act of treason, added that Einstein believed in god, when in reality Einstein wrote a letter (March 24, 1954) where he said he do not believe in god. What a shame to Discovery Channel and to a bunch of cristian editors who are always trying to lie to people and create books and material full of lies. In a way this is like Iran! The objective is always to create a teocracy by tricking credulous morons and entertaining people with stories where they cannot understand the truth and think for themselves in a correct way and America need a lot of education for the people.



(Intriguing about Einstein. It's true that christians have regularly tried to claim he was promoting the christian gawd/christianism. Laughable.)

An important thing in the above: Rajeev2004 blogger "Pagan" (formerly known as "Inferno" IIRC) excerpted from a news article which contained an appeal to Paul Davies' statement for authority. Paul Davies seems to be plugging for creationism (redubbed "intelligent design" in the last decades) =christoislamoronism. IIRC, Pagan's excerpt featuring Paul Davies soundbyte even used the word 'design' in relation to an implied 'gawd' entity. That combination is usually a tell-tale sign of christianism.



Hindus have to beware not to fall for crypto-christian advertising and apologetics. US pseudo-scientific journalism is usually christianism - sneakily attempting to promote creationism - or else it is new-agey types who are scary in their own right (often dabblers in Hindu else Taoist else Buddhist religion). Hindoos must avoid such people and learn to detect their pathetic argumentation at all costs. As for the crypto-christians, they feed off of the lack of proper general knowledge among the twitter generation (short attention span, and an even more superficial familiarity with details than say those who merely read pop-sci): first, crypto-christians will plead a "creator" so generally as to sound borderline Deist, then once people take the bait, the claimants will reveal their christianism. Jesus is always introduced through the back door in such cases, it's SOP for christianism.



Also christoislamorons are very much afraid of physics and physicists - more than even of biology*, obviously, since physics covers an entire area not even touched upon by the babble-koran, and christians feel they have to make up for lost ground/invent new christo-mythos to involve the universe. (* Lots of christians - especially the anti-evolutionaries have inundated biology in recent times). In public writings, christianism has moved past apologetics on biology and onto physics, trying to de-rail that too. Hindu vocalists should be very wary of blindly chiming in with these nutcases. Also, before opening their mouth, Hindu vocalists should at least familiarise themselves with some degree of understanding on what physics says and doesn't say, in order to immunise people against appearances by sneaky christian creationism.



Christians are even trying to promote their "gawd did it" nonsense by trying to piggyback on Hindu physicists' work [which - at most - only supports *Hindoo* and Taoist cosmological explications, and specifically not the christoclass virus, nor even Buddhist or Jain cosmology for that matter]. Hindu physicists' work IS well-respected by all physicists. Christians are very dangerous and their idiocies should be shot down immediately, not unwittingly repeated over the internet by Indian nationalist bloggers and new agey Hindus.





The large quoteblock in this post and this next bit in red is the important stuff:



Watch Hawking's episode "Did god create the universe?" from his 3-part "Grand Design" series (2012). Can get the DVD. Alternatively, it seems you can watch it online at the following link, but have to sit through under a 1 minute of adverts first. (I'm assuming the episode posted at the link is uncut and untampered, but as I didn't watch more than a few seconds past the adverts, I can't confirm):



watchdocumentary.org/watch/curiosity-episode-01-did-god-create-the-universe-video_8cc568d0e.html

[Husky]

Post 3/3



The next is a suggestion, which I'd also tried implementing in my own extended family:



I think if Hindoo kids were made to watch good documentaries - especially Attenborough's natural history docos (start with those on evolution) - then it would permanently immunise them to christoislamoronism. Good documentaries give a Bigger Picture (of the history of life and the world, and our planet's place in the universe, etc), and also further encourages commonsense and logical thinking. The christoislamoronisms are so utterly incompatible with the known facts, that educating Hindoos about the reality of the universe and our world/life in it would instill in Hindoos the self-empowering sense to avoid christoislamicommunisms like the plague, so they would no longer be dependent on external aid in the form of other Hindoos having to warn them off from christoclass traps. Hindoos would also not fall for new-ageisms either (another important trap to avoid) or peddle it about the internet.



Plus this is exactly the sort of thing that will never catch on among Indian christoislamaniacs, so Indian christoislamaniacs will remain stupid forever [well, they're already permanently stunted thanks to their babble-koran and instilled tendency to "blind faith"/belief], while Hindoos - like people in E Asia already do, apparently* - can stay up to date, with no more effort than reading highly entertaining pop-sci and watching entertaining TV. Plus does one even need to mention that Attenborough et al's natural history/animal docos are like a great excuse to gape at cuddly animals in their natural settings while pretending you're in it for the "educational value". (<- OK, I confess that's the *real* reason I watch documentaries. But other people would likely have loftier reasons in addition.)



* All my Chinese colleagues at work - heathen (=Taoist) and non-religious - had already read the translated version of Hawking's famous pop-sci in high school. (Meanwhile, when I was in high school I just read sci-fi/fantasy or historical/adventure novels like Sutcliffe and native NL authors. Wait, that's still the stuff I predominantly read.... But anyway, even if Dawkins has poo-pooed fairy tales as per news of his tweets, Einstein very rightly recommended that parents hoping to raise prospective physicists expose the kids to lots and lots of fairy tales, to fire their imagination, since Imagination is the most important skill of all and promotes intelligence and the ability to grasp things. Maybe we can't all be Ramanujan or Einstein or Hawking, but at least we can all develop ourselves. And at least we won't be stupid like those possessed by christoislamania.)



Therefore, like the Chinese, Hindus should similarly translate pop-sci books into local languages and Hindu schools should make them part of the syllabus for Hindoos-only (christoislamic and communist parents will object to their kids getting exposed to such stuff and will riot that "it offends minorities", so no point offering such information to "all" Indian kids). Can also teach it alongside Hindoo class, for instance can use physics cosmology and Hindoo cosmology (the theistic i.e. pre-classical Vedic Sankhyam from the Upanishads etc) to help students to gain a better understanding/visual conception of the other. Indian cryptochristos cannot shriek "saffronisation of science education in Hindoo schools", because - and christocommunists just need to face it - western physicists have found Hindoo cosmological conceptions inspiring and influential in their conception (and even formulation) of modern physics. <- And that is the real use of statements by Heisenberg et al endorsing Vedic concepts: to silence cryptochristos and communists by telling them that Hindoos have Every Right to teach Hindoo cosmology and physics side-by-side, because "even western physicists found it useful and used Hindoo religion as a sounding board". (Eventually, could even introduce other heathen cosmological views like especially that of the Daoists.)



And if Chinese schools are encouraging their students to read good pop-sci, then surely this is creating entire generations of Chinese immune to the christoclass virus. I already know from Chinese colleagues and friends that they look down on christianism as a moronic mental disease - which it is - and don't understand why people get possessed by it. (I regularly got asked about what the appeal was to christianism. I stick with my hypothesis that it appeals only to those prone to it: morons.)

I understand that the Chinese govt-owned channels even translate most of the important documentaries - especially British and other European ones, since they're better than American ones: each time I recommended any documentary to Chinese friends, they had already watched it in their own language or else immediately looked it up only to find it was already available officially dubbed by a channel or at least subtitled by lay Chinese.



Indians shouldn't get left behind. Don't be like the AmriKKKans (who did their best to obscure the key portion of Hawking's Grand Design series or else produce christo apologetics about it that they inflict on the christo populace to ensure these remain stupid). Be like the Chinese in this matter. Since Hindoos don't have the money to make insightful documentaries, at least can dub or subtitle what's already out there. Also, it can replace bollywho in people's homes: Hindoos in Bharatam really should disconnect TVs from Indian cable, and just find online videos of documentaries and other classy programmes to show their kids. Enthusiasts and parents can even produce fan subtitling and start a fansub community, since the Indian christomedia won't subtitle such anti-christian documentaries as physics and bio programmes.











The large quoteblock in the previous post and this next bit in red is the important stuff:



Watch Hawking's episode "Did god create the universe?" from his 3-part "Grand Design" series (2012). Can get the DVD. Alternatively, it seems you can watch it online at the following link, but have to sit through under a 1 minute of adverts first. (I'm assuming the episode posted at the link is uncut and untampered, but as I didn't watch more than a few seconds past the adverts, I can't confirm):



watchdocumentary.org/watch/curiosity-episode-01-did-god-create-the-universe-video_8cc568d0e.html

[Husky]

1. Addendum - or rather, plural: 2 items - before change of topic. Also inserted these in the original posts.

Nature Of Reality questions are in that respect like questions on the Nature Of Consciousness, and even Nature Of Memory: what is real, how can we - being subjective as subjects - even know. The possible answers turn into philosophy in the end. <- And that's what happens to unanswered/unanswerable questions in western science: since humans need answers or else they - society/generations - go mad trying to answer unfathomable questions, they produce the pacifier of modern philosophy to posit what is unknowable but at least possibly sufficiently mentally-satisfying. [Whereas the trite "mono-gawd did it all" answer had been considered a sufficient pacifier in the christoislamised world (and still is among christoislamics) - until the west started breaking free of the christoclass virus and thus increasingly started asking proper questions and searching for proper answers. Even so, Hawking said in his doco that the Pope - JP II, I think - told him and other physicists gathered by His Papal Phantom Menace that they were not allowed to ask questions about/seek answers to the origins of the cosmos, i.e. that cosmology was off-limits, as this part of physics must be answered with "gawd did it". Hawking et al naturally disagreed and sought the answers anyway.]

And

Therefore, like the Chinese, Hindus should similarly translate pop-sci books into local languages and Hindu schools should make them part of the syllabus for Hindoos-only (christoislamic and communist parents will object to their kids getting exposed to such stuff and will riot that "it offends minorities", so no point offering such information to "all" Indian kids). Can also teach it alongside Hindoo class, for instance can use physics cosmology and Hindoo cosmology (the theistic i.e. pre-classical Vedic Sankhyam from the Upanishads etc) to help students to gain a better understanding/visual conception of the other. Indian cryptochristos cannot shriek "saffronisation of science education in Hindoo schools", because - and christocommunists just need to face it - western physicists have found Hindoo cosmological conceptions inspiring and influential in their conception (and even formulation) of modern physics. <- And that is the real use of statements by Heisenberg et al endorsing Vedic concepts: to silence cryptochristos and communists by telling them that Hindoos have Every Right to teach Hindoo cosmology and physics side-by-side, because "even western physicists found it useful and used Hindoo religion as a sounding board". (Eventually, could even introduce other heathen cosmological views like especially that of the Daoists.)

[Husky]

Still on the old topic.



To add:



I think it was Dr Close (Physics, associated professor) who very briefly covered Giordano Bruno while lecturing on astrobiology. Most pop-sci tends to momentarily veer into topics like Galileo and Bruno as lessons from history, but what was interesting is that Dr Close was the first to state something about the matter that others hadn't (unless I'd simply forgotten that they did):



Dr Close said that Giordano Bruno - whom Close dubs the first astrobiologist - contemplated not just the possible existence of a countless number of worlds (planets) in the heavens and countless other life forms living there, but also the existence of countless numbers of other Gods [i.e. he was proposing symmetry]. Close then declares that it was this *last* proposition - the existence of a multiplicity of other Gods - that got Bruno burned at the stake by christianism. Which I thought was rather telling.





A few more quaint factoids,



from Hawking's "did gawd create the universe" episode:

- Hawking said that a medieval Pope was so disturbed by the existence of Natural Laws, which were obviously not christian, that the pope banned natural laws. Then Hawking went on to casually report that this didn't stop said natural laws and that the pope died because of one, despite all his efforts to curtail them: gravity caused his place to collapse on him. More proof that physics is real and true and gawd/babble isn't.



- Hawking recounted how of course the church then decided that suddenly gawd would have created the natural laws after all (when previously he hadn't, as per christianism, and which is why these laws of physics had been banned). <- When christianism can no longer fight something, christianism then subsumes it, before proceeding to claim that this was always a part of christianism/theology and was foreshadowed in gawd's word "all along". AKA pathetic apologetics/excuses and forgery to make christianism appear as still relevant (but was it ever?)



And physicist (cosmologist) Krauss:

- He declared something along the lines of how "forget jeebus dying for your sins, stars have died so you could live!"



Here, found the actual quote:



goodreads.com/author/quotes/1410.Lawrence_M_Krauss

“The amazing thing is that every atom in your body came from a star that exploded. And, the atoms in your left hand probably came from a different star than your right hand. It really is the most poetic thing I know about physics: You are all stardust. You couldn’t be here if stars hadn’t exploded, because the elements - the carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, iron, all the things that matter for evolution - weren’t created at the beginning of time. They were created in the nuclear furnaces of stars, and the only way they could get into your body is if those stars were kind enough to explode. So, forget Jesus. The stars died so that you could be here today.”

― Lawrence M. Krauss, A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather Than Nothing

The operative part is "forget jeebus". Taoists are right to make the stars central to their views, rather than chasing after non-existent spooks like jeebus.

[Husky]

ADDED:

Quotes are still copy-pasted from goodreads.com/author/quotes/1410.Lawrence_M_Krauss



To further give the "other side" of the argument, the material that the article quoted in Inferno/Pagan's entry at the Rajeev2004 blog didn't provide (but which cryptochristo article made it seem like physicists were unanimous about the 'hand of some invisible creator entity' - the Flying Spaghetti Monster most likely - or even that they were contemporary physicists) -





Just before some new-ageist type declares this next to be a 'miracle' too, here is Krauss explaining why it is merely perfect timing ("now and only now") and hence still can be argued as coincidence:

“In 5 billion years, the expansion of the universe will have progressed to the point where all other galaxies will have receded beyond detection. Indeed, they will be receding faster than the speed of light, so detection will be impossible. Future civilizations will discover science and all its laws, and never know about other galaxies or the cosmic background radiation. They will inevitably come to the wrong conclusion about the universe......We live in a special time, the only time, where we can observationally verify that we live in a special time.”

― Lawrence M. Krauss, A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather Than Nothing

(Last I looked it up, people were still asking for verification/a recheck that the other galaxies are indeed accelerating away from us, but this seems to be the current consensus and has been since at least the late 90s/early 2000s - when I first heard of it - so am taking it for granted.)



I wonder if christoclass religions will be kooked up in that future time to declare that ours is the only galaxy and that we are therefore special and unique and that such uniqueness proves it was all a 'miracle' blablabla. And that the fact that many galaxies had existed in an earlier time (in our current era) was just a "conspiracy" of the atheists denying some monogawd. No such stupidity would surprise me.

“The real thing that physics tell us about the universe is that its big, rare event happens all the time — including life — and that doesn't mean it's special.”

― Lawrence M. Krauss

See, not special in the sense of 'unique'. Enough with cryptochristos and their new-agey parrots threatening that "physics proves" it's all a miracle-of-gawd. Commonplace occurrence. Wondrous, yes - like the birth of stars, also commonplace in our cosmic era - but no need to invoke gawd-type excuses when physics can explain everything without recourse to extra variables.



This is correct too for those who wish to call upon physics as 'evidence' of what are essentially unprovable theses:

“If we wish to draw philosophical conclusions about our own existence, our significance, and the significance of the universe itself, our conclusions should be based on empirical knowledge. A truly open mind means forcing our imaginations to conform to the evidence of reality, and not vice versa, whether or not we like the implications.”

― Lawrence M. Krauss, A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather Than Nothing

For those who wish to use scientific arguments to prove something or other about the invisible mono-gawd/who try to slyly argue for the monogawd:

“The universe is the way it is , whether we like it or not. The existence or nonexistence of a creator is independent of our desires . A world without God or purpose may seem harsh or pointless, but that alone doesn't require God to actually exist.”

― Lawrence M. Krauss, A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather Than Nothing

(Obviously)



And this one is for the dweeby Rajarants, who like to pretend to be scientific while they are new-agey pseudo-scientists:

“Metaphysical speculation is independent of the physical validity of the Big Bang itself and is irrelevant to our understanding of it.”

― Lawrence M. Krauss, A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather Than Nothing

There, tell Rajarant that, who played at being all "scientific" when he tried to divorce the Hindoo Gods from Vedanta for not being "scientific enough" for him (=his excuse for the fact that the Gods don't compute to him and probably have distanced themselves permanently from him for his verbal diarrhoea), even as he then tried to peddle Vedantic metaphysical speculations that appealed to him from his garb of pseudo-science. Dude should retire. Makes a mockery of proper science.



In general, if you're going to argue from the POV of science - i.e. if you're going to pretend to be scientific - then *be* scientific, not wishy washy new-agey, making exceptions and creating loopholes for your pet theories. And so, when arguing from the scientific POV, also don't don't Don't speak about the "purpose" of life or some such nonsense. Science has no evidence for any actual purpose [everything still seems coincidence to science], so don't propose untestable predicates. As far as science can tell - and it is the most reasonable argument based on what's known (doesn't mean it's true) - life is the product of coincidence and there is No Purpose. I'm going to have to agree that it is logically consistent within science (as far as we know) for Dawkins to say that such questions themselves - like "what is the purpose of life" - are inane, as they do not apply.



The atheist argument and that of all western physicists who don't subscribe to christo-new-ageisms is: find meaning in your own life. It doesn't matter if nothing has a purpose and life is but brief and then over forever. Make it worthwhile for yourself and for others. <- Atheist argument, and entirely justified, if you look at it from their POV.



And heathens can (and do) do at least as much, while still holding on to their perceptions that there is a larger meaning, that "Vedantic metaphysical speculations" are not devoid of the Gods (as per Vedantic texts themselves) - despite Rajarant's desperate desire for this (or Elst's repeated attempts to divorce important aspects of Hindoo religion from the Hindoo Gods) - and are moreover quite true and can be grasped not only intuitively by the heathens but can also be verified for themselves with their ritual practices. If anyone thinks it's a waste of time, then don't do it. This isn't a missionary religion, it doesn't require converts or even adherents. It lives and dies with the traditionalists. Aliens will never acquire it, and alienated will lose it for all time (as they should). Heathens follow heathenism because it is tradition - that is, verified by ancestors and hence worth pursuing, to thereby verify first-hand for oneself. The heathen Gods - Hindoo (and Taoist) certainly - CAN be known. You need but the traditional heathen perception and to practice your heathen rituals aright.



But the main point was: when you're arguing from within the scientific paradigm, do not bring in heathen reasonings and contemplations. And certainly not new-agey spin-offs.

And don't fall for those who do, especially when they argue for a "god creator"* - as these tend to be monogawd pushers.



ADDED:

(*Or subversions like new-agey pseudo-Vedantic NS Rajarant-type "metaphysical speculations", where NSR - eternally self-ejected from the Vedic religion hence from Vedanta too, naturally - wants to poach on Vedic insights, with the stated intention of divorcing these from the intrinsic theism, even as he hisses histrionicly at the Vedam itself, like a typical encroaching alien. Dude will turn science into a new-ageism - like he did with Vedanta - if given half a chance.)





The relevant bits are the blockquotes in this and the previous post and anything emphasised in colour or bold.

[Husky]

The part relevant to this thread is the first 4 paragraphs. The rest of this post is Yet Another Rant - against de-heathenising, and the growing mess that silent spectator Hindus (or are there truly only the discernable kind that applaud to specious claims?) have allowed and will not put an end to.





The following is from what I understand. Stating matter-of-factly, so no sources or even links (they exist, however private sites by and for Taoists need to be shielded from aliens and subverted/subvertibles, who represent a grave threat to heathenisms, not even their own any more):



The inner universe (body) in Taoism is a reflection of the physical outer universe, and the (Taoist) cosmic Gods therefore are specifically stated to abide in both. This is the Taoist view associated with practices to do with Chi/Qi (or however it is transliterated).

This is not unlike in (Kundalini) Yoga - and IIRC Pranayama too.



Also, like in Hindu religion, the aim is to retain the Gods within by a harmonious lifestyle (practices, prescribed foods vs proscribed foods, etc). As a result, Taoism aims to avoid any act/behaviour that drives away the indwelling Taoist Gods from the Taoist's body*. This is, as usual, connected with the pursuit of Taoist immortality. The aim is to make the Gods reside permanently within the Taoist: their divine, harmonious, contented immortality renders the cultivating Taoist immortal and of the same contented nature, in harmony with/one with the Tao.



[* Hindoo religion also literally warns against doing anything to drive away the Hindoo Gods who are residing within the body (inner cosmos). E.g. Krishna in the Gita also alludes to something like it in some shlokas IIRC, dissuading people from performing such extreme austerities - or rather self-mortifications - as to torture not just themselves but Bhagavaan in their bodies too. See BG 17.5-6.]





** In an article on Yoga, Elst lent credibility to a fellow alien's theory, in a book he'd read on how Kundalini Yoga could 'and therefore would' have derived from Taoism. Elst stated - perhaps with reference to his alien authority - that Hindus would have borrowed the practice of Kundalini Yoga from Taoism, and - as a Hindu innovation to the borrowing - Hindus were to have added the novelty of Gods as residing in various chakras of the body in this yoga.



Already mentioned earlier how alien self-declared authorities have at various times claimed that Taoism's Chi-based practices were borrowed from Hindus' yoga, while at other times other writers have reversed the claim and stated that Hindus' yoga (often Kundalini is singled out) is derived from Taoist practices instead.

BTW, the Taoists specifically make no claims on yoga. (Their own internal discussions show they see it as an old and authentic Hindoo practice rooted in India. They note it was exhibited in Buddhism via borrowing [from Hindu religion].)

At the same time, Taoists are emphatic that their ritual practices (like the chi-based ones) - and the traditional Taoist views belonging to them - are entirely indigenously Taoist and derived from their Gods. I see no reason to disbelieve them as Taoist traditionalists receive instructions directly imparted by their Gods and Immortals to this day.



What I want to draw attention to however, is the fact that Elst not only assumed that the borrowing could well have taken place (and in the direction from the Taoists to the Hindus) to derive Kundalini Yoga, but moreover - and most importantly - that Hindus were to have introduced the notion of associating Gods with the chakras as the Hindu innovation on top of the borrowings.

Ironically, the one feature that Elst pretended was to have been uniquely Hindu in all this - the Hindu Gods dwelling in the inner cosmos of the Hindu Kundalini Yoga - was the very feature that we specifically do share (in the form of a similarity) with the traditional Taoist ritual practices and the Taoist views associated with them: the fact that Taoist Gods are to reside in the inner universe (this being a reflection -within the body- of the outer universe).



Elst, in the same or another article, wrote that heathen Hindus (theistic Hindus, i.e. Hindoos) had effected a "coup d'etat" on godless Indic schools, IIRC he particularly alluded to the late, i.e. classical, Sankhyam and Yoga.

Yet it is notably Elst's own tendency/need to remove the theism from heathenisms - born of his own non-theistic interests in his dabbling in Hindu (and possibly Taoist) religion besides European neo-paganism - that made him present the Taoist views associated with the Taoist ritual practices as devoid of the Taoist Gods.



And may as well add here, since I've luckily done the actual work of making my argument in earlier posts on this and the last page, that it was not the Hindoo heathens that did a coup d'etat on the late atheistic Sankhyam, but rather that the classical Sankhyans lifted their Sankhyan views almost wholesale from the pre-classical theistic Sankhyam of the Vedas that Vedic Hindus like the Rishis followed. (Elst is also regularly doing a coup d'etat on the Vedic Rishis: Elst wants to hijack them as espousers of his own atheistic new-age "Hinduism", and tomorrow Elst will start implying that theistic Hindus later rewrote the Vedic Rishis as theists too. Elst is convinced he is a great expert, and so are his parrots. But the lie stops when he touches Taoism: Elst's mangling of Taoism to a subvertible and gullible Hindu audience I won't allow. It (Taoism) being one of the last pristine heathenisms, unaffected by the deviant Indian tendency to subvert. Besides, Taoists are not present to defend themselves. But they took serious exception (to Elst's misrepresentations) when I brought the matter up. The kind of serious exception that the dead species of Hindoos used to take before they were replaced by the subvertibles.)



As for the evidence of the late, classical, atheist Sankhyan having taken from the pre-classical theistic Sankhyam and then removing the Gods, not only was this already documented since decades by several learned heathen scholars of the actual heathenism involved,

but the obviousness is staring one in the face and actually already discussed further up in this thread, though I want to draw specific attention to its relevance to this matter here:



- the pre-classical, theistic Sankhya of the Vedas provided a self-contained explanation of the All and the place of man/sentience therein. It is in this explanation that the sankhyan view makes sense: it is intimately connected to Hindoo cosmology (the evolution of the universe as per Hindoo religion), which explains the origination of the view of the problem (as per sankhyam) and its solution (proposed by sankhyam), and a means to effect the solution (yoga, to ... let's use the verb reunite the individual jeeva with the paramashiva/purushottama, the Hindoo All whose own self/powers and derivation originated the cosmos including the jeevas).



- the later, classical (atheistic) Sankhya did away not only with the Gods, but (therefore) by necessity also did away with the cosmology - as being unverifiable predicates - but retained a final predicate: the problem and its proposed solution (and there was the related 'school' yoga). The missing explanation in the late atheist Sankhyam - whence their view (Sankhya) even derived - is found in the pre-classical theistic Sankhya from the Vedas. And only makes sense there. (Still later religions would make up cosmological explanations of their own, but I'm not going to even bother going into that.)



Suffice it to say that the ancestral heathen (Hindoo) religion shows the derivation of Sankhyan views (and moreover provides the only reasoned derivation, btw), where these views are clearly and naturally derived from the larger framework of Hindoo heathenism's cosmogony.

In contrast, late classical Sankhyam never showed the derivation (it did not have cosmological views), and merely starts with the Sankhyan views already intact and as the primary assumption.



As usual, what I'm saying is: Hindoo religion showed its working on how Sankhyam is derived.

Classical Sankhyam didn't.

(And Buddhism and Jainism fudged in some necessary cosmological views later on to the Sankhyan views which they'd borrowed - which views were by their time nearly 'self-evident' assumptions especially for those splitting from Vedantic views - to fill in the obvious blanks: the missing cosmology in non-theist/classical Sankhyam. B & J rejected Hindoo cosmology because it undoes the main purport and views of Buddhism and Jainism.)





To return to an argument already made here: Elst is ...as much a sinologist as an indologist. Certainly he is not more an expert on Taoism than he is on Hindoos' own heathenism.

I wonder if he'll try dabbling in Taoism after he is finished with Hindu religion. But is no one else tired of seeing him make references to Vedic Rishis as authority for promoting his non-theist views (specifically his views that seek to remove the theism from Vedic religion) as authentic?

Or his awkward insertion of himself (and other dabbling aliens) in the company of Vedic Rishis, as if he is following in their footsteps?



And for a dabbler with no actual sympathy for Hindu Gods (besides thinking them a quaint notion concocted by "his" Vedic Rishi predecessors) - he adds in borderline snide remarks about the Gods (so central to Hindoos) at every opportunity - why do Hindus allow Elst to arrogate to himself the right to mention narratives of the Gods, where he treats them in his typically non-theist way.

It is bad enough for - whichever internet and new age Hindus did it - to have let Elst feel he's a "Hindu" now. But now he thinks himself an insider, he not only starts making claims on Vedic Rishis - as if he has a right to them by his self-delusional claim to following in their footsteps - and not only speaks of "us" (and "we") as if he shares the same history and experiences and plight as actual=ethnic Hindus, he is even allowed to treat the heathen Gods of the Hindoos with a levity and a dismissive and condescending manner, which an anti-Hindu would not have been allowed. (Also, why does he imagine he has a right to speak of the Hindoo Gods, to allude to them, at all? As a non-theist and unheathen - if not as an outright alien - he has the Right To Remain Silent on the heathen Gods of the religion he makes free to dabble in and which he would separate from them, to make it conform to what he wants it to be. At its most basic, this last denial of his presumption is no different from how ethnic Indian, Indic atheists who call themselves "Hindu" too have no right to encroach on the Hindoo Gods or their temples: these are the very matters that belong to heathen Hindus, i.e. Hindoos, alone.)



But as if our own gangrene were not enough. One of these days I'm going to contemplate how to ... return the favour to subverted (and subvertible) 'Hindus', including those who let Elst think he's in. All favours ought to be returned, as all debts ought to be repaid in full too.



For now, though, I remain grateful that while Elst is sinking his subversiveness further into Hindu religion, that he is too busy to attempt to poison Taoism (at least, among Taoists/for a Taoist audience) likewise.





No, I haven't done with complaining it seems. Have more (related) cloying things to exorcise by spamming.

I have caught whimpers of complaint from internet "Hindu" activists rejecting late christo-conditioned Europe's presumption in claiming Greek philosophy stripped of its Gods by its illegally attempting to divorce the two: christoconditioned Euros were trying to separate Philosophy from the Heathenism of the GrecoRomans, since - again - the latter could not be digested by the unheathen mind that dared to covet the former. (Later on, christianism would try to ingest Philosophy as a christianism.) There are many christoconditioned in the west now who praise Philosophy as their great ancestral tradition, even as they, often in the same breath, dismiss or even deride the very Olympic Gods who brought forth this divine wisdom - which is of Them, and inextricably linked to Them - into (Hellenistic) mankind's ken.

Yet not a murmur from any Hindus when the Hindoo Gods are treated like nothings while the teachings passed on by Rishis - intimately associated with the Gods - are coveted and are delinked from the Gods and the religion pertaining to them.



I never learnt from christoconditioned western books that "Plato was a worshipper of the images of the Gods" (which books instead preferred to pretend he was a 'secular' Greek philosopher). To learn that detail, I had to hear it from Emperor Julian, whose recorded statement first revealed this little - yet non-trivial - fact about Plato to my limited knowledge. I see the same happening increasingly with Hindoos' ancestral heathenism.

Rest of this post to be placed in a more appropriate thread.







The part relevant to this thread is the first few paragraphs, copied below. The rest is my usual tendency to spam with an incoherent and off-topic rant.

The inner universe (body) in Taoism is a reflection of the physical outer universe, and the (Taoist) cosmic Gods therefore are specifically stated to abide in both. This is the Taoist view associated with practices to do with Chi/Qi (or however it is transliterated).

This is not unlike in (Kundalini) Yoga - and IIRC Pranayama too.



Also, like in Hindu religion, the aim is to retain the Gods within by a harmonious lifestyle (practices, prescribed foods vs proscribed foods, etc). As a result, Taoism aims to avoid any act/behaviour that drives away the indwelling Taoist Gods from the Taoist's body*. This is, as usual, connected with the pursuit of Taoist immortality. The aim is to make the Gods reside permanently within the Taoist: their divine, harmonious, contented immortality renders the cultivating Taoist immortal and of the same contented nature, in harmony with/one with the Tao.



[* Hindoo religion also literally warns against doing anything to drive away the Hindoo Gods who are residing within the body (inner cosmos). E.g. Krishna in the Gita also alludes to something like it in some shlokas IIRC, dissuading people from performing such extreme austerities - or rather self-mortifications - as to torture not just themselves but Bhagavaan in their bodies too. See BG 17.5-6.]

[Husky]

Yesterday's news



msn.com/en-us/news/us/this-telescope-will-destroy-sacred-ground-and-hawaiians-are-outraged/ar-BBk5Jid

This telescope will destroy sacred ground and Hawaiians are outraged

Business Insider

kdickerson@businessinsider.com (Kelly Dickerson)





The summit of Mauna Kea in Hawaii is arguably the most perfect spot in the world for a telescope.



But some native Hawaiians who believe the mountain top is a sacred site and are worried about the ecological impacts of building a huge telescope there, may disagree.



The peak of the mountain is nearly 14,000 feet above sea level, looming high above any light pollution and most clouds. It's a crystal-clear window into the cosmos.



Astronomers want to build a new telescope, called the Thirty-Meter Telescope (TMT), to take advantage of the pristine view on Mauna Kea.



If it's built, TMT could reveal parts of the universe we've never seen. And the dry and cold air on Mauna Kea will produce the sharpest images yet of the parts of the universe we've only glimpsed.



The problem is that Mauna Kea is sacred ground to native Hawaiians. It's home to hundreds of culturally significant and sacred sites. And while you'd think an observatory wouldn't be that destructive, the impact of the construction project on the fragile, remote mountain top could have consequences.



Construction of TMT was slated to start in March, but a series of protests by native Hawaiians brought the work to a grinding halt.



This is not the first time Hawaiians have fought to keep telescopes off Mauna Kea. There are actually 13 existing telescopes in the area. But this is the first time protestors have captured international attention, and they did it by using twitter, creating petitions, and publishing photos and videos documenting the protests:



Desecrating sacred ground



Hawaiians believe that Mauna Kea is where the sky father Wakea married the Earth mother Papahanaumoku and together they created the Hawaiian islands.

(HindOOs and Japanese Shintos etc can readily relate.)



So now Mauna Kea is considered the "region of the gods," and it is believed that benevolent water spirits live there. It's considered sacred ground.



Maintaining reverence for the mountaintop is not the only concern. Natives have also pointed to the environmental impact of the telescope. At 18 stories high, TMT will be the largest telescope on the mountain. At that size it will also be the largest building in Hawaii.



Building a telescope like that will require lots of power and new roads up the mountain. It will also require drilling down about two stories into the ground.



These activites could impact two endangered species that make their home on Mauna Kea: the Nene Goose and the Silversword plant. Some natives are concerned about the potential environmental cost.



One of the cards in the video below reads: "As an island with finite resources, we cannot afford further mismanagement."



[...]

It's no different from how dredging the Ramarsethu is considered meaningful/fruitful to some and is (or was) objected to by Hindoos, and even some nationalists and de-heathenising.

But all heathens would feel solidarity with the heathen Hawaiians. (Maybe Hindu heathens on twitter are expressing their solidarity, don't know.)

[Husky]

Related to how cryptochristianism, under the typical crypto pretext of "preventing self-harm"

- has banned self-piercing among Tamizh Nadu Hindoos for Murugan on Thaipusam

- is building up to next ban fire-walking by Kannadiga Hindoos for Sri Dharmaraja-Draupadi etc



During the sacred Taoist Festival of the Nine Emperors (a period of vegetarianism, a strict ritual observance for even non-vegetarian Taoists):



1. Taoists in Thailand (Phuket), do self-piercing "self-mortification" in the form of even driving blades (entire swords) into their bodies, but also multiple long thin needles and other stuff etc. Both men and women do this. And they also undergo a trance-like state.



Some example images at



shutterstock.com/pic-125337800/stock-photo-phuket-oct-taoist-devotees-participate-in-a-street-procession-of-the-nine-emperor-gods.html?src=PWKdI_ADQ8UoGXX0-MEqlQ-1

PHUKET - OCT 3: Taoist devotees participate in a street procession of the Nine Emperor Gods Festival, known locally as the Phuket Vegetarian Festival, on Oct 3, 2011 in Phuket, Thailand.

During the festival "Some participants go into trance and act as a medium for the Nine Emperor Gods". An example image of this at



shutterstock.com/pic-130225349/stock-photo-phuket-oct-a-taoist-devotee-participates-in-a-ceremony-of-the-nine-emperor-gods-festival.html?src=pp-photo-125140829-1&ws=1



2. Taoists in Malaysia do firewalking by carrying vigrahas of their Gods across the firey stones.



Example photos of this festival can be seen at

adibrawi.com/2014/10/03/nine-emperor-gods-festival/



where they are captioned by the photographer with

Malaysian Chinese devotee rest after burning a coals during the last day of Nine Emperor Gods Festival at Nine Emperor Gods temple outside Kuala Lumpur on October 02, 2014. The nine-day Taoist festival, believers welcome the "emperor gods" who they believe live amongst the stars, in order to bring good fortune, longevity and good health. Some devotees stay at a temple during the festival, which begins on the eve of the ninth lunar month of the Chinese calendar, where they consume vegetarian meals and recite continuous prayers. Photo Adib Rawi Yahya

Entering trance-like states as a medium for the Gods is also seen in Taiwan, where self-flagellation - upon a ritual spirit entrance into the body of a human - is a known Taoist ritual. E.g.



neil-wade.photoshelter.com/image/I0000gxkCUHMlWNc

This man is performing a Ji Tong ritual. The spirit-medium, said to be possessed by the spirit of a Taoist God, self-flagellates at a religious ceremony in Tainan, Taiwan.

Though there are Hindoos that self-flagellate in India, the case I've heard of (seen in IIRC an episode in India presented by Asha Gill from Lonely Planet) is different: in the Hindu case, the Hindu does self-flagellation to expiate others' sins, but does not undergo a trance.



Self-flagellation was an old custom among heathens in the Middle-East too. And also seen in Greece and Rome, see:



en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flagellant

Flagellation (from Latin flagellare, to whip) was quite a common practice amongst the more fervently religious. Various religions, like the cult of Isis in Egypt and the Dionysian cult of Greece, practiced their own forms of flagellation. In ancient Rome, eunuch priests of the Phrygian goddess Cybele, the Galli, flogged themselves until they bled during the annual festival called Dies sanguinis (Day of Blood). Women were flogged during the Roman Lupercalia to ensure fertility.

The rest of this post is continued in the "Evil" Hindu practices thread.

[Husky]

Forgot to make a correction to the following, based on completer information obtained since:

[quote name='Husky' date='01 September 2014 - 02:43 PM' timestamp='1409562331' post='117324']narrated a <5 min summary version of the Kumarasambhavam to yet another Chinese friend and she declared it was the most romantic thing she had ever heard. And I'm pretty much pathetic at telling kathas, so her appreciation is all owing to the innate attraction of the Kumarasambhavam. Further, despite not being religious, she had no issue with the Kumarasambhavam concerning the lives of Gods - whereas modern "Hindus" gawk at the notion of multiple Gods, unable to comprehend their own religion. Instead she found many commonalities with her own country's native religion that I had not known. So yes, E Asian heathens (and even non-religious E Asians) are entirely understanding of Hindu religion and have an automatic ability to appreciate it and respect it.[/quote]

As it turns out, the dear friend described above is a Taoist heathen after all. Based on 3 instances:



1. When I went to her home to eat the lunch she and her sister invited me for (they made exclusive vegetarian, just for me) her computer screensaver was the Taoist Trimoorti. I've known this fact for much longer, but did not conclude that they were heathens because a Taiwanese friend's family had huge statues of two very primary Taoist Gods but were themselves atheists and used it as mere art/Chinese culture. You know, the way some Indians treat the Nataraja vigraham.



2. But since then, my friend had described the festival where the Jade Emperor sends a heavenly God to visit all Taoist homes and make a report of the actions of each family for the year, so he can report this back to the Jade Emperor. The Jade Emperor himself then visits all the homes and dispenses the fruits of their karma. Uh, I mean: then the Jade Emperor (on his sacred birthday festival, which falls on the 9th day of the Chinese New Year) visits all the Taoist homes and rewards all with a subsequent year that is suited to their past year's actions.



The way my friend described the details of the above period of festivity/observance, she spoke literally of "That God will come into our homes <and record our actions for the past year>" and that the Jade Emperor will then be subsequently "welcomed into their homes on his birthday", for which her family just as those back home in China would make immense preparation.



That is, my good friend did NOT describe the above as if it were a mythology or some quaint festival, but as living religion: as her real Gods, truly coming to her home.



3. During this year's Deepavali festival, having heard that it was big among Indians, she asked me about some details. After I told her of it, she said that in her husband's home [and all his village/hometown] it was the tradition to light lamps all the way from outside the home (from the gates) into the home during a certain festival to a [male] God (the God of Prosperity I think it was, one of a famous triple of Taoist Gods: IIRC one of Prosperity, one of Longevity, and one of Blessings). The purpose was to actively welcome that God into their houses by lighting his way there. In return for her sharing, I told her that we had a prominent Goddess of Prosperity, though of course there is also Kubera etc. The larger point is that she intimated that it was her husband's living tradition and is still observed every year by his family back home.





4. At other times she has mentioned that various <Taoist traditions> were that of her people. In specific, when the famous Tao symbol once came up when googling, she said that that was her own people's tradition [i.e. Chinese people's tradition]. Once, when showing me images of the sites she had visited, I saw she had visited some famous Buddhist temples in China, but only as a tourist: she commented that Buddhism and later Christianism had been making lots of inroads in China over time, but that Taoism was actually their people's original, ancestral way, and she wished people would keep to their traditions more. She said Buddhism like Christianism was not native Chinese culture - though I already knew that - and asked about Buddhism whether it came from India (which she already knew, but she was guarded and didn't want to insinuate that it must have come from India). After swallowing painfully and confirming it - i.e. indirectly confirming that my people, Indians, set Buddhism on her country's Taoist identity - (blaming Nepal won't make a difference as they're ethnically Indian too), she then asked me what India's original traditions were. I said it was different [from Buddhism] and far more akin to her own. She said that Indians should keep to their tradition and not let it go. Wistfully agreed, but said there was nothing I could do about changes taking place. But I got the notion on several occasions that she's sad about changes taking place in her world too.



On other occasions where I broached the subject of Confucianism, she said that that was a boon for Chinese governments to manage the population. I suggested it may be the way the communist government had projected Confucianism, but she said historical Chinese emperors had used it in much the same manner.



Usually we talk about issues regarding preservation of native language and 'culture' and 'cultural values', and she has tons of insightful observations. She introspects a lot and often mulls the growing problems facing her society. Already got the feeling that she was quite guarded about religion in China, as she was originally very careful with her choice of words when referring to Gods. Eventually, over the past years, she opened up more and more until on some occasions she essentially (unmistakably) spoke of them as being Gods of her living tradition and evidently real to her family and that of her husband.



Am always floored at how well Taoists keep their heathenism hidden, sounding more atheist than myself (at least in their presence). Had noticed earlier that Taoists, especially with priests in their families/mini-temples in their homes, only openly revealed their heathenism to me upon discovering that my own family was heathen (admittedly, I heedlessly blabbed to E Asians in younger days, but I am still willing to blab about India's heathenism in general to E Asians who seem non-opposed to "paganism", as I had done to the above-described friend, though I don't immediately admit to being of a heathen family myself). But I confess that no matter how often it happens that I discover Chinese/Taiwanese friends to have been fellow heathens all along, it takes me by surprise. I mean, in every case, I have known all these individuals well for years - or I think I know them well - before they suddenly spring this little 'detail' on me; and it's not like it's an afterthought in their private lives either: they religiously observe their festival-rites and are very serious about taking their Gods as real.



Every time I fall for their semblance of being non-religious. Where Chinese individuals are clearly atheist - such as speaking of narratives of Gods as mere fairy stories - I don't have doubts. But others seemed more subtly but nevertheless atheist too (but weren't ultimately) as they never mentioned the heathen dimension to various important festivals until I asked them in detail. I haven't detected a single pattern in the last to come up with any tests. It seems to take years and seems to require their own assessment of what they feel they can tell me/how much they think I will understand or accept what they are. So wonder if I'll ever guess correctly beforehand. But I've learnt one useful lesson from the observation: Hindoo NRIs should take an example from the way Taoists living abroad keep their religions very private. Ironically, have become very private vis-a-vis other Indians now, always immediately assuming they are unheathens, perhaps even christoislamics, until I see proof in them first of their heathenism. Sad effect of become wiser and more aware, including of how not everyone who has a Hindu name is a Hindu (can be a cryptochristo) and how not everyone who calls themselves a Hindu is a heathen. Feel more at ease at opening up on the subject with new E Asian acquaintances than new Indian Hindu-origin acquaintances living abroad. The day may come when the same becomes the case within India. Heathen matters that I'd think nothing of of blurting out to Taoist friends, I would not even dare to mention anonymously on any Indian Hindu nationalist web space, and prefer alluding to 3rd party views (or non-Indic heathens, like Hellenes) to indirectly make the arguments I want advanced for Hindoo heathenism. And I now simply assume - and there's no evidence to the contrary to change this - that every 'Hindu nationalist' online will have Elst class arguments/views, or will acquire such novel views in time. Specifically, I just assume everyone is subvertible, and mistrust them.

Thank the Gods for the Taoists.





This post was actually on how it turned out that the following Chinese person (and her family) - who I thought I knew, and for some years too, being a dear friend - had turned out to not be non-religious, but to be a Taoist heathen after all:

[quote name='Husky' date='01 September 2014 - 02:43 PM' timestamp='1409562331' post='117324']narrated a <5 min summary version of the Kumarasambhavam to yet another Chinese friend and she declared it was the most romantic thing she had ever heard. And I'm pretty much pathetic at telling kathas, so her appreciation is all owing to the innate attraction of the Kumarasambhavam. Further, despite not being religious, she had no issue with the Kumarasambhavam concerning the lives of Gods - whereas modern "Hindus" gawk at the notion of multiple Gods, unable to comprehend their own religion. Instead she found many commonalities with her own country's native religion that I had not known. So yes, E Asian heathens (and even non-religious E Asians) are entirely understanding of Hindu religion and have an automatic ability to appreciate it and respect it.[/quote]

Can't say I will love her more for it - as I don't think I can love her or her sister more than I already do (their friendship has crept up unawares over the years, such that I consider them quite family) - but may feel even more comfortable speaking to her on heathen matters, since I know she understands, and now also know she does so first-hand and hence at a deeper level, from a position of heathen affinity rather than mere cultural sympathy.

[Husky]

Apparently many native Americans cremate(d) their deceased -



blog.sevenponds.com/cultural-perspectives/tolkotin-native-americans-rituals-for-the-end-of-life-and-burial

Tolkotin Native Americans: Rituals for the End of Life and Burial

Why Native American traditions for death and dying captivated early explorers.



North America, circa 1831: Irishman Ross Cox had long braved his emigration to America and finally published Adventures on the Columbia River.

The early explorer’s book is integral to our understanding of the era, and not just because it informs us on the infamous American Fur Company in which he was a prominent player. Throughout his observations of the “mysterious Northwest,” Cox’s book highlights the Tolkotin Native Americans of present-day Oregon, expressing his fascination in their rituals for the end of life and burial.



The Tolkotin Native Americans saw the relationship between life and death as a cyclical communion with nature, and their creation myths – a concept that astounded early explorers. “The ceremonies attending the dead are very singular and quite peculiar to this tribe,” writes Cox about Native American perceptions of death and dying. Cox was also unaware of what anthropologists and historians know today: that the Native cremation burials he observed were one of the most pervasive traditions amongst the otherwise diverse Native American tribes of the Northwest.



Although Cox’s understanding of Tolkotin traditions is affected an ethnocentrism common to settlers of the Northwest, we can sift through his biases to find a vivid picture of their cremation burial process:



“The [loved one who has passed] is kept nine days laid out in [the family’s] lodge and on the tenth it is buried. During the nine days the [loved one] is laid out, the widow of the deceased is obliged to sleep along side it from sunset to sunrise, and from this custom there is no relaxation even during the hottest days of summer!



A rising ground is selected [for the cremation], on which are laid a number of sticks, about seven feet long, of cypress, neatly split. Invitations are dispatched to the natives, requesting their attendance. When the preparations are perfected, the [loved one] is placed on the pile, which is ignited…during the process, the bystanders appear to be in a high state of merriment.”



Finally, the loved one is buried and tended to by their surviving spouse, so as to “keep [it] free from weeds.”

Anyway, native American heathens are Hindoos' spiritual kindred. All hyper heathens are.



The link appears to be a western site advocating natural cremation as an environmentally-friendly practice. Yet aliens (christoterrorists) are always trying to ban cremation by Hindoos in India under excuses that it "pollutes the environment".

[Husky]

Post 1/2



Points 6 and 7 are the most important of this post.



1. Some German book was claiming that Celtic mercenaries in the Carthaginian army (Carthage itself non-IE speaking IIRC) set sail for Americas and formed the "white" Indians called Chachapoyas.



welt.de/geschichte/article115996581/Wie-kamen-blonde-Weisse-vor-Kolumbus-nach-Peru.html



The article title:

Wie kamen blonde Weiße vor Kolumbus nach Peru?

Als die Konquistadoren in die Anden kamen, staunten sie über die hellhäutigen Chachapoya. Nach genetischen Untersuchungen ist sich Hans Giffhorn sicher: Es handelt sich um Nachfahren von Kelten.



means:

"How did blond white people before Columbus get to Peru?

When the Conquistadors came to the Andes, they marvelled at the white-skinned Chachapoya. After genetic investigations, Hans Giffhorn has become certain: we're dealing with descendants of the Celts."



(But are we really? = what this post is about.)



The Chachapoyas and Peruvian mummies regularly get declared "white=European" by white supremacists. So of course the above book would have fed the nonsense.

Example tripe by white supremacist amateur "geneticists" (note that supremacists are the #1 amateur geneticists on the web) at:

genetiker.wordpress.com/2016/04/19/more-proof-of-whites-in-ancient-peru-and-chile/





2. The Chachapoyan culture is tentatively dated around 800 CE and after. (Not BCE)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chachapoya_culture

History



Although there is archaeological evidence that people began settling this geographical area as early as 200 CE or before, the Chachapoyas culture is thought to have developed around 750-800 CE. The major urban centers, such as Kuélap and Gran Pajáten, may have developed as a defensive measure against the Huari, a Middle Horizon culture that covered much of the coast and highlands.



In the fifteenth century, the Inca empire expanded to incorporate the Chachapoyas region. Although fortifications such as the citadel at Kuélap may have been an adequate defense against the invading Inca, it is possible that by this time the Chachapoyas settlements had become decentralized and fragmented after the threat of Huari invasion had dissipated. The Chachapoyas were conquered by Inca ruler Tupac Inca Yupanqui around AD 1475. The defeat of the Chachapoyas was fairly swift; however, smaller rebellions continued for many years. Using the mitmac system of ethnic dispersion, the Inca attempted to quell these rebellions by forcing large numbers of Chachapoya people to resettle in remote locations of the empire.

3. Googling Chachapoya and clicking on images showed images of archaeology and people. Images pop up of freckled fair people (freckling thought to be early form of people "turning white"), a pic of a very yellow-haired fair girl (taken from the German book discussed in point 1), etc.





4. Then I looked for genetics studies on these people. Things get more interesting.



patagoniamonsters.blogspot.com/2014/08/the-peruvian-chachapoyas-or-white.html



Worth reading the above blog entry in entirety, it is informative. E.g. the PCA plots etc.



Some interesting bits:

Below is a photograph from a book [5] which puts forward the theory that the Carthaginians escaped the destruction brought upon them by Rome after the Punic wars and reached America, and their descendants are... the Chachapoyans! The fair children among the Chachapoyans are known as "gringuitos", diminutive for "gringo" which is the way that Americans (from the U.S.A) are given in Latinamerica. But, wouldn't Carthaginians look like North Africans or Middle Eastern People (darker skinned, dark eyes, dark hair) instead of being blonde?



...



To assume that contemporary fair haired children living in that region as "white" caucasoids with a pre-Columbian origin is an over simplification of complex facts. There may have been considerable European admixture during the Colonial period and later, as the population recovered during the nineteenth and twentyeth centuries. Only by studying the genes of their ancestors may we glean some useful information on their origins.



Fortunately the Chachapoyas mummified their dead, so we have plenty of material with a potential to yield useful genetic sequences.



The Mummies



Samples taken from seven Chachapoyan mummies were sequenced in a genetic study; only three yielded viable mtDNA which were assigned to haplogroups B2, M and D1, the others had insufficient coverage. [2]



The haplogroups B2 and D1 are a clear indication that the maternal lineage was American. Haplogroup M is quite strange because it is not one of the founding lineages of American Natives. It is found in Asia and only one other study mentions haplogroup M in the New World. Perhaps future studies will find more cases of it.



Anyway all three haplogroups are of a East Asian origin.**

(** mtDNA M is ancient as we know. And hence see the above person's discussion at patagoniamonsters.blogspot.com/2014/02/ancient-migrants-into-america-hg-m.html

where he doesn't call M mtDNA E-Asian but of ancient Indian origin, as is usually posited. So when the bloghost says the M found in Chachapoya is of E Asian origin, I assume it must refer to a subclade of M that was found in S America that was resolved to have links to E Asia?)



This is ratified by a principal component analysis of SNPs overlapping between modern populations and the Chachapoyans which places them clearly in the "Amerindian" group together with the Aymara and Mayas, far from the Europeans and admixed hispanics (Colombian, Puerto Rico and Mexicans from Los Angeles) and closer to the East Asian groups. These people were definitively not "white" Europeans, they were Native Americans with ties to Eastern Asia. Below is an example of two of the samples that were sequenced:



Chacapoya gene analysis



Of course the alleged European origin is sustented by the fact that some of the mummies exhibit, as one blog states: "... Chachapoyas had curly brown or red Caucasoid hair, and not stiff black Mongoloid Amerindian hair.... the individual had red or reddish-brown Caucasoid hair". Below is a photo and some links to photographs of these mummies, so you can see them and decide for yourself:



Photo 1, Photo 2, Photo 3, Photo 4, Photo 5.



mummy of a Chachapoya



The hair is indeed wavy not straight. The color... well it seems to be brown, not the usual jet-black of the Amerindians. But, does this necessarily imply pre-Columbian European admixture?



The mummies are not dated. Are they older than 1535 or more recent? If older then we can assume that their brown hair is not due to post-discovery admixture. But even then it does not imply European ancestry.



I have posted extensively on Red Haired Native Americans during January 2014 and as I posted in my criticism to the Paracas cone heads, I believe that Neanderthal genes may be responsible for red or brown hair among pre-Hispanic Native Americans.

(There are links in the original page on Red Haired Native Americans etc.

Red hair, fair hair, light skin etc needn't be exclusive to Neanderthals. Could be present in ANE gene pool, since Kalash have lots of ANE, Kalash been genetically isolated for 11,800 as per a 2015 paper and Kalash have these lightening features in their gene pool too. And, as ANE is shared by Native Americans and "Eurasia", red hair could have existed there at some frequency but because of lack of selection - no known advantages for red hair selection apparently - may be rarer.)



Red hair is a feature found in several Native mythical hominins (This post links to several posts on red haired hominins). and the reason for this, I believe is some ancient memory of their interaction with Neanderthals in America.



So maybe Europeans and Chachapoyans share a similar origin for their hair color: a common Neanderthal ancestry.

5. Among the comments, someone claimed that the German who authored the book on Carthaginian Celtic mercenaries sailing to the Americas to supposedly become the Chachapoyas said:

As regards genetics, on page 267 of the abovementioned book, Giffhorn cites the genetics researcher Manfred Kayser claiming that the paternal DNA of the gringuitos ist most likely Western European, while the maternal DNA is predominantly Native American.

Manfred Kayser is an official geneticist apparently, I was able to find his publications (on other stuff) in Nature.



But it turns out that when it came to Chachapoyans, Kayser wasn't working with aDNA but with the DNA of the contemporary Chachapoyan population (how convenient) who have been admixed - forcibly? - by conquistador types.



Didn't find any Kayser genetic publications on Chachapoyan DNA, though. Instead found the following Google snippet:



R1b1c_U106-S21_Haplogroup - Yahoo Groups

groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/R1b1c_U106-S21/.../22855 (groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/R1b1c_U106-S21/conversations/topics/22855)

Apr 2, 2014 - They have R1b Y chromosomes in Chachapoya natives with blond or red ... Manfred Kayser is doing the genetics, and he seems to have his ...



Note the year is 2014. I will get back to this.

For now, the comments from 2014:



groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/R1b1c_U106-S21/conversations/topics/22855

Watched this episode of Secrets of the Dead this evening. Just enough evidence to be intriguing. They have R1b Y chromosomes in Chachapoya natives with blond or red hair and light skin, but no ancient DNA yet, so the source could be post-Columbian. They do have mummies, so maybe they'll find some European DNA in pre-Columbian samples.

www.thirteen.org/13pressroom/press-release/secrets-of-the-dead-carthages-lost-warriors/



...

"I hope they're analyzing more deeply than just R1b."

...

I'm sure they are, but this program wasn't directed at us DNA types, and that's all they said. Manfred Kayser is doing the genetics, and he seems to have his finger in a lot of genetic pies, including the recent paper on selection of pigmentation alleles in Europeans that used ancient DNA. Most of the evidence discussed was archeological and cultural. They have a beautiful Celtic looking bronze alloy axe head with a carved animal head on it that doesn't resemble any animal in S. America (looks like something with antlers.) That was supposedly found in a river in the interior of S. America. Bronze technology is supposedly unknown in the pre-Columbian Americas. There are number of bits of evidence that suggest Carthagenian seafarers went to Atlantic Iberia after Carthage fell to the Romans and the idea is that together with some Iberian Celts some of them they rode the tradewinds and currents to Brazil on a one way trip. Nothing really nails it yet, but it would cool if ancient DNA or some other evidence clinched it. There are natives deep in S. America who have no tradition that they ever got any Europeans in their lineage, but they have red or blond hair, fair skin, and they have been shown to have European variants at one of these pigmentation genes, but of course they didn't say which one. I couldn't find that any of this has been published. Apparently publication by TV program. Maybe a good way to drum up some money to continue it.

(But is it a "European" pigmentation variant if others have it??? What if Chachapoyans are proven ancient native Americans? Is it still a "European" pigmentation variant then?)





6. In the comments section at patagoniamonsters.blogspot.com/2014/08/the-peruvian-chachapoyas-or-white.html

found a link a genetics paper.



The summary at the link which makes things more clear:



a. core.tdar.org/document/395959/assessing-the-genetic-diversity-in-the-extant-chachapoya-population-from-northeastern-peru-using-uniparental-dna-markers-mtdna-and-y-chromosome

Assessing the genetic diversity in the extant Chachapoya population from northeastern Peru using uniparental DNA markers (mtDNA and Y-chromosome)



Author(s): Antti Sajantila ; Evelyn Guevara ; Sonia Guillén ; Jukka Palo



Year: 2015



Summary



The aim of the study is to elucidate the origin and population history of the human communities from northeastern Peru, with both contemporary and ancient DNA data. For the first phase of the study, contemporary Y-chromosomal (23 STRs) and mitochondrial (HVR1 and HVR2 sequences) data from four populations (Chachapoya=276; Jivaro=47; Huancas=21 and Cajamarca=34) distributed in the northeastern region of Amazonas (Peru), was assessed.



At haplogroup level, the markers showed differential proportions of non-native genetic contribution (mtDNA=11%; Y-Chromosome=43%). This reflects the history of European colonization that took place during the 16th century, which favored male-mediated European gene flow into the native gene pool.** However, even though the Chachapoya area shares a common history of European colonization with several other populations in the Americas, the levels and nature of genetic diversity suggest that the Chachapoya has had a distinctive demographic history, shaped by their geographical position between highlands and jungle. For instance, the Chachapoya population shows a pattern of population expansion seen only in few other South American populations. Another interesting feature is that the Chachapoya assumes a basal position in mtDNA phylogenetic trees within South American populations, which may suggest an early origin for this singular people.

(1. A la how the Kalash assume a basal position in Eurasia because of their high "ANE" - where ANE is defined by one single aDNA sample... Mal'ta boy or something. Can't remember.

2. ** Hence the R1b that Manfred Kayser observed in the Chachapoyan gene pool and which led to Giffhorn's delirious "Celtic mercenaries in Carthaginian forces ended up in Perooooooo".)



SAA 2015 abstracts made available in tDAR courtesy of the Society for American Archaeology and Center for Digital Antiquity Collaborative Program to improve digital data in archaeology. If you are the author of this presentation you may upload your paper, poster, presentation, or associated data (up to 3 files/30MB) for free. Please visit www.tdar.org/SAA2015 for instructions and more information.

No exact DNA Hgs mentioned in the summary and not sure where the full version of the paper is published.





b. Not on DNA but also on Chachapoyas at the core.tdar site:



core.tdar.org/collection/29551/what-was-chachapoyas-towards-a-cultural-geography-of-the-northeastern-peruvian-andes

What was Chachapoyas?: Towards a cultural geography of the northeastern Peruvian Andes

Part of: Society for American Archaeology 2015 Conference





7. Finally found something more concrete on Chacapoyan DNA. An paper co-authored by Allentoft, note:



ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3824117/

Am J Hum Genet. 2013 Nov 7; 93(5): 852–864.

doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2013.10.002



Pulling out the 1%: Whole-Genome Capture for the Targeted Enrichment of Ancient DNA Sequencing Libraries

Meredith L. Carpenter,1 Jason D. Buenrostro,1,14 Cristina Valdiosera,2,3,14 Hannes Schroeder,2 Morten E. Allentoft,2 Martin Sikora,1 Morten Rasmussen,2 Simon Gravel,4 Sonia Guillén,5 Georgi Nekhrizov,6 Krasimir Leshtakov,7 Diana Dimitrova,6 Nikola Theodossiev,7 Davide Pettener,8 Donata Luiselli,8 Karla Sandoval,1 Andrés Moreno-Estrada,1 Yingrui Li,9 Jun Wang,9,10,11,12 M. Thomas P. Gilbert,2,13 Eske Willerslev,2,15 William J. Greenleaf,1,15,∗ and Carlos D. Bustamante1,15,∗∗





With the advent of next-generation sequencing techniques and the rapidly declining cost of sequencing, the field of hominin paleogenetics has begun to transition from focusing on PCR-amplified mitochondrial DNA and Y chromosomal markers to shotgun sequencing of the whole genome.1–8 The use of autosomal DNA is advantageous because it provides information about the genome as a whole, whereas the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and Y chromosome, as nonrecombining markers, represent only a single maternal or paternal lineage. Whole-genome sequencing of single ancient genomes, including Neandertals,1 Denisovan,7,9 a Paleo-Eskimo,2 the Tyrolean Iceman,4 and an Australian Aborigine,3 have transformed our understanding of human migrations and revealed previously unknown admixture among ancient populations.



(Note that their PCA plots therefore show the whole genomic affiliations of the Peruvian mummies. And what this shows - see below - is that the Peruvian mummies are very suitably ancestral to native American heathens and have zip in common with Europeans: the Chachapoyan show no Euro-admixture. Boohoo for eurocentrists. Yay for native American heathens and all nativist heathens.)



...

Samples NA39-50 were obtained from pre-Columbian Chachapoyan and Chachapoya-Inca remains dating between 1000 and 1500 AD. They were recovered from the site Laguna de los Condores in northeastern Peru.20 Bone samples were used for DNA analysis.

...



PCAs with only the European populations in 1000 Genomes further resolve the placement of some of these samples after capture (Figure S3). For the Peruvian mummies, we also included 10 Native American individuals from Central and South America in the PCA (Figures 3E and 3F). Interestingly, all of the mummies fell between the Native American populations (KAR, MAY, AYM) and East Asian populations (JPT, CHS, CHB), as would be expected for a nonadmixed Native American individual (Figures 3E, 3F, and S2). These mummies belonged to the pre-Columbian Chachapoya culture, who, by some accounts, were unusually fair-skinned,39 suggesting a potential for pre-Columbian European admixture. However, based on our preliminary results, these individuals appear to have been ancestrally Native American.

...

The three Peruvian mummies fell into haplogroups B2, M (an ancestor of D), and D1, all derived from founder Native American lineages and previously observed in both pre-Columbian and modern populations from Peru.42

So what is that nonsense the R1b yahoo group in 2014 saying that aDNA had not been obtained? In 2013 the above article was published and found all the Chachapoyan aDNA samples were native American specific.

Natives=heathenism wins again. Good.



So sad too bad for the "Celtic mercenaries from Carthage" theory. More eurocentrist white supremacist crap dead.

What was that about "a beautiful Celtic looking bronze alloy axe head with a carved animal head on it that doesn't resemble any animal in S. America".

Guess it's not a copyrighted Celtic look after all???? (No idea where the imputation of it being bronze is from. But maybe it looked bronze, the way it looked "Celtic"? Else if it is bronze and made by Chacapoyans, then native S Americans did have bronze. Right?)





While all the eurocentrist white supremacists nonsense should have died then and there with the genetics results such as the above, am not surprised that said supremacists should turn out to actually be the Undead/Nosferatu and that - in 2016 - try still to remain quiet about the genetics data in order to keep their debile white supremacist followers blind to the reality, while they still keep peddling "white=European" nonsense stories:



genetiker.wordpress.com/2016/02/03/statuettes-of-the-white-gods/

---

Genetiker says:

February 4, 2016 at 7:59 pm



Thanks for sharing my work.



The remains themselves expose the mainstream academic history of the Americas as being a colossal lie. They’re obviously European. No DNA is necessary to make that determination.

---



Said "Genetiker" who's all Ra-Ra about genetics otherwise.





8. Someone's blog entry from 2014.

Apparently PBS was spinning the German book's nonsense in 2014 even after ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3824117/

published an Allentoft paper in Nov 2013 on how the Chachapoya aDNA was just pure native American.





Some sympathetic western blogger sounds angry at the eurocentrist crap:



jasoncolavito.com/blog/pbs-chachapoya-of-peru-are-probably-carthaginians-and-celts-who-fled-from-rome-in-146-bce

PBS: Chachapoya of Peru Are Probably Carthaginians and Celts Who Fled from Rome in 146 BCE



4/4/2014



87 Comments



Holy crap! PBS has become America Unearthed. In an episode of the PBS series Secrets of the Dead running on local PBS stations this week and available online for streaming, the venerable public broadcasting channel asserts that blonde-haired, blue-eyed Celts and also some incidental Carthaginians discovered the Americas in Antiquity. (The blue eyes don’t make the show but show up on the show’s web page.) “Carthage’s Lost Warriors” was produced by ZDF, a German television production company associated with the long-running series Terra-X, which traffics in all manner of fringe theories, and the large number of dubbed German interviews testifies to the recycling of a German program. Archaeologist K. Krist Hurst called the show “baloney.”



The show opens with a “Celtic-style bronze axed” found “deep in the Amazon” and the narrator, Jay O. Sanders, asks if—heaven help us!—the Chachapoya are truly the blond, Caucasian descendants of prehistoric superhero warriors (martial prowess specified explicitly) who crossed the Atlantic at some unspecified date to penetrate the continent with their manly thrusts until they fertilized Peru with the glory of Old World culture.

(Reminiscent of the stories about the Tarim Mummies spun by Mair and fellow supremacists. Turns out there's nothing "Celtic" about Chachapoyan material culture. Must burn the white supremacists.)

...



Rather than put this down to indigenous genetic diversity (which the show briefly acknowledges as possible), the show suggests that this is due to Old World contact. The Carthaginians not being known to be blondes, I guess this is why Griffhorn proposes Celts, whose presumed red hair he wants to equate with reports of fair hair. German geneticist Manfred Kayser tests some Chachapoya hair and finds that the living individuals have some European ancestry tracing back to the Celtic areas of northern Spain, but at this point—500 years after Contact—it’s not possible to determine when the genes mixed. The homeland of the Celtic people Griffhorn fingers is the same as that of the Spanish who traveled to Peru in the 1500s; the Celts didn’t simply vanish after the Roman conquest of Spain (218 BCE to 19 BCE) but contributed to the gene pool of medieval and modern Spain, though the language and culture died out around the fifth century CE. No ancient Chachapoyan mummies were tested, which is a major omission.



(Confirming what was seen in point 5: that Kayser worked with modern Chachapoyan DNA alone.)



The show concludes that there is no “smoking gun,” only suggestive indications that the Chachapoya are not really Native Americans on the same stripe as the brown ones but owe their culture, their art, their religion, and their very genes to a boatload of Carthaginians and Celts who sailed up the Amazon in 146 BCE and, by dint of their superior European prowess, took over to such an extent that their potent DNA still rules the region 1,868 years later, largely undiluted by the intervening centuries.



I guess this means that they’re all inbred, but the show doesn’t go there.



This was really terrible, and the only significant difference between this show and America Unearthed in terms of quality of evidence and the desire to find hidden white people in the Americas is that this show searched South America rather than North America, and its hero never claimed that there was a conspiracy trying to suppress his work.

Have not read all the comments (have not tried either), but one that caught my eye:

---

Joe

12/29/2015 00:23:01



My wife is from Chachapoyas. I didn't believe her until we went to meet her family. But they were all blond haired grey eyed people just like her with B blood type. DNA says American Indian....



---



The above comment reminds me of the following comment at patagoniamonsters.blogspot.com/2014/08/the-peruvian-chachapoyas-or-white.html

---

UnknownDecember 29, 2015 at 1:24 AM



My Wife is from Chachapoya. Here family has a pretty good record of family history going back many hundreds of years.It is possible that sometime in the past some european was involved but her entire family is White as can be. Brown/blond hair and grey eyes. DNA shows typical Amerindian DNA. She comes from a village down river from Chachapoyas about 50 or 60 miles. I went there after we got married to meet the family and many many people there looked European. But they werent.

Reply



---



Anyway, it may be that fair and red hair, and light skin colours may be rather ancient. Considering that Kalash are high in ANE and have been found to have been genetically isolated for 11,800.* So lightness of hair and skin may not be a "European" (let alone IE) innovation after all, but something that is ancient and had travelled about the globe long ago.



*But note that Kalash are high in "ASI", which sort of goes against Moorjani 2011 and Moorjani, Reich et al 2013.





9. In 2015 (and probably this year too), there are still christian white supremacist eurocentrists in total denial (or in ignorance) of the aDNA results by Allentoft and by Sajantila showing on Chacapoyans were totally native American and ancient too.



E.g. a lunatic christo-white-supremacist comment at

patagoniamonsters.blogspot.com/2014/08/the-peruvian-chachapoyas-or-white.html

steven laughs August 28, 2015 at 3:37 AM



Incas, other Peruvians, and the Spanish when they arrived, all talked about the "hair" color, AND "SKIN" color of these people, who were also VERY much taller than the Inca.



Their culture also resembles Celtic & Nordic cultures, their style of buildings for example, as well as their practice of cremation, which was unknown to native Americans..



White people with blond & red hair are also mentioned by numerous other Native American tribes. The Paiute tell of red haired "giants", that they considered evil, constantly murdering, and possibly cannibalizing the Paiutes' ancestors. Their oral history states that they banded together, cornered the white people in a cave, smoked them out and sent a volley of spears & arrows into them.

This cave was discovered by Guano miners over a hundred years ago, "Lovelock Cave" in Nevada.

[...]

...and as for your neanderthal theory, I don't prescribe to Darwinism. The only explanation for the large skulls, and bones found, that I need, comes from the Bible, the Book of Enoch, and the oral history of basically EVERY ancient people from across the world - Giants. Real giants, not the crap Hollywood doles out. People that were from 8 ft tall, to a little taller.





The blue-eyes gene, has also been found to be non-existent in mankinds' oldest DNA, it wasn't introduced into our DNA until much later.

(Either way, the allele/mutation for blue eyes has been around since at least 10,000 years or so. A timeframe that doesn't fit biblical the biblical timeline: gawd made the world at "4000 BCE" was it?)



[...]



Personally when I think about the word "gentile", that even Jesus used to distinguish between the gentiles, and Jewish people,..and that He commented on 'whether they were able to receive salvation, or not', makes me think the 'Gentiles' of the Bible, were the watered down descendants of the Giants(Nephilim). ..That after so many offspring with normal women, after so many generations, the ancient DNA that caused the deformations like gigantism, had been replaced with more normal Dna, hence their souls were purer and able to receive the "salvation" Christ talked about. Mind you obviously I'm a Christian, but also one with a speculative mind and interest in ancient, antedeluvian history.

Look at that, a christian white supremacist eurocentrist pretending to have a genuine interest in history. Never seen that before arcasm:



Also what a lie by the above christian eurocentrist supremacist (<- what a combination, isn't that overkill):

"their practice of cremation, which was unknown to native Americans.."



But, as can be seen in the previous post:



blog.sevenponds.com/cultural-perspectives/tolkotin-native-americans-rituals-for-the-end-of-life-and-burial

Tolkotin Native Americans: Rituals for the End of Life and Burial

Why Native American traditions for death and dying captivated early explorers.

... what anthropologists and historians know today: that the Native cremation burials he observed were one of the most pervasive traditions amongst the otherwise diverse Native American tribes of the Northwest.

We don't have to still pretend that the late Andronovo steppe kultur at 1500 BCE invented cremation, right? IEists can believe that. It's their thing.

Meanwhile, when cremation can be natively derived among N American Native American heathens - since ancient times - why can't it be natively-derived among S American native American heathens too?







Anyway, Chachapoyan mummies' aDNA shows them to be have been totally native American. So the score is:

- native American heathens/heathenism: 1,

- alien demons (IEist, predictably): 0.



Points 6 and 7 are the most important of this post.

Summary:

- aDNA of Chachapoyan mummies of Peru turn out to be entirely native South American not Euro at all. As per Allentoft & co. (2013) themselves.

- moreover the aDNA mtDNA of the Peruvian Mummies is basal native S American. As per Antti Sajantila & co. (2015)

[Husky]

Post 2/2



More epic fails of eurocentrism/white supremacism.





1. Another typical looney white supremacist claimed at

patagoniamonsters.blogspot.com/2014/08/the-peruvian-chachapoyas-or-white.html

AnonymousNovember 27, 2014 at 8:49 PM



Of course White Indians were in the Americas! Blondes is a White European trait. White blonde indians were even seen by Lewis and Clark. Read about Solutreans who are the real native Americans. Look up Kennewick man. It may be hard for politically correct anti-Whites to swallow just like White slavery in America that is completely ignored! Just like Blonde Whites in China 1000 years before east Asians.

Reply

Replies

To which the bloghost replied

AWNovember 29, 2014 at 6:51 PM



I have not found any reference to white Indians in Lewis and Clark's papers, perhaps you can provide it.

This reference talks about the Mandan people (

lewisandclarkjournals.unl.edu/read/?_xmlsrc=lc.ronda.01.04.xml&_xslsrc=LC)

found in 1738, when Pierre Gaultier de Varennes de La Vérendrye, who actually was looking for. But did not find any white Indians.

Fair white skinned people in China can be explained by the Euroasiatic dispersal of Europeans.

Kennewick, unfortunately will remain a mystery due to short-sighted bigoted Nativeamerican fear of the truth that science can provide regarding their origin and the peopling of America.

Thanks for posting.

A heathen N American responds

AnonymousNovember 15, 2015 at 5:39 PM



In regards to your comment about Kenniwick man, how does ones reverence and respect for ones own ancestors make one bigoted and short sighted? Just because they would prefer for scientists to leave them and theirs alone, that means they're bigoted? How is white western science's need to know more

important, than showing indigenous people, they and their ancestors are not meant to be museum specimens for the curiosity of white people? You do know that when you posted your comment in 2014 Kenniwick Man had been studied extensively with countless, Books, DNA, and casts and measurements of his bones? For one who seems to be interested in natives and their lifestyles why do you have to be so spiteful when you feel that certain tribes refuse white science? By the way, I really like your blog, especially the ones about the Chumash indians, Tomols, and haplogroup D4h3a because I am Chumash

And D4h3a.

Reply

Never mind, Hindoo heathens understand the reverence native American heathens have for the sanctity of their ancestral dead.



Christian dead may not be exhumed of course: that would be disrespect, etc. Only christians=demons have rights. Meanwhile christians will trample all over others' rights. But they're not the only ones:



The bloghost declares as follows in anti-heathen atheist supremacism (but not white supremacism): euro-settlers in AmriKKKa have every right to other people's sacred stuff of course. Sort of like how alien demons (Dutch uni?) drilled holes in a Chola bronze Shiva moorti that they'd stolen, in order to "find out how it was made", as seen in news from HaindavaKeralam. Aliens always feel they have a right to heathens' stuff. Excuses like "scientific curiosity".



But the bloghost accidentally provides Very Useful information indeed.

AWNovember 15, 2015 at 6:35 PM



Hello Anonymous,

Lets set the record clear.

0. "Ones own ancestors" is a rather sweeping claim. This man may not even be (actually he is not) the ancestor of current native groups living in the area.

1, The first official paper on the genetics of Kennewick Man was Rasmussen et al. paper of June 18 2015. nature.com/nature/journal/v523/n7561/full/nature14625.html

All the rest prior to that was non-informative, bungled tests and so forth.

2. This man though ancestral to SOME Native Americans is not necessarily -and this is what the paper says- a direct ancestor of the groups now linving in the area. Which is quite logical.

(No, the paper is Much Much better than that, see below.)

3. Who said anything about museum specimens for the curiosity of white people. That is a bigoted concept. The remains of a human being can be studied for the advancement of human (mankind) knowledge. Aboriginals in Australia have a similar viewpoint to yours. What is this about reverence? Respect yes, but reverence?

Human remains of people murdered, abducted or simply NN remains found by chance are constantly studied to identify them by forensic means, And this does not cause disrespect or irreverence.

It is science. Science is neutral. Science is color blind. Something Relgion or spritual viewpoints cannot say.

And when I wrote bigoted I meant that: a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group).

This seems to be a "white" vs. "Native American" issue, and hence a bigoted matter. Prejudice, ideas which stand in the way of enlightenment, knowledge and progress for all mankind.

I couldn't care less when someone takes samples of bones and studies the DNA of a putative ancestor of mine i.e. Motala in Sweden or Loschbour Luxembourg or Stuttgart in Germany. They are dead, and long gone and their bones can shed some light on the history of mankind. Surely they would not object. I wouldn't if someone found my bones 5000 years or 8000 years from now. Only bones. People are more than bones.

Native American burial sites were always off-limits. They respected this even in war. Then again, alien demons and other non-heathens would never understand.

Guess that's how alien demon scientists must have argued when they infected African Americans with STDs to "investigate" cures.





2. Anyway, the published paper link on the Kennewick man (note, the famous Allentoft is involved again):



nature.com/nature/journal/v523/n7561/full/nature14625.html

The ancestry and affiliations of Kennewick Man



Morten Rasmussen, Martin Sikora, Anders Albrechtsen, Thorfinn Sand Korneliussen, J. Víctor Moreno-Mayar, G. David Poznik, Christoph P. E. Zollikofer, Marcia S. Ponce de León, Morten E. Allentoft, Ida Moltke, Hákon Jónsson, Cristina Valdiosera, Ripan S. Malhi, Ludovic Orlando, Carlos D. Bustamante, Thomas W. Stafford Jr, David J. Meltzer, Rasmus Nielsen & Eske Willerslev



Nature

523,

455–458

(23 July 2015)

doi:10.1038/nature14625



...



The mitochondrial genome was sequenced to ~71× coverage and is placed at the root of haplogroup X2a (Extended Data Fig. 1 and Supplementary Information 2), and the Y-chromosome haplogroup is Q-M3 (Extended Data Fig. 2 and Supplementary Information 5); both uniparental lineages are found almost exclusively among contemporary Native Americans15, 16.

We used the X chromosome to conservatively estimate contamination to be 2.5%, which is within the normal range obtained observed in genomic data from ancient human remains17, and we further show this contamination to be of European origin (Supplementary Information 4).

European tampering with the so-called "Kennewick man"* as being some kind of novelty no doubt introduced the contamination. *What an alien name that must be to native American heathens.



So Heathens win AGAIN.

Native American Heathens/heathenism: 2

Alien demons (white supremacist eurocentrism/christianism/moronism): 0.



But will Alien demons start exercising self-restraint to their debile self-aggrandising tendencies? No. I'm sure they won't.





Note: I agree with the native American heathen "Anonymous" who didn't want his ancestors' remains trifled with.

But since foreigners had anyway dug up and prodded and poked the "Kennewick man" and finally extracted DNA from his remains anyway,

I'm glad the heathens at least stand vindicated. Something good came from this misery inflicted on the native Americans. Their ancestor blessed them and let the truth come out: the appropriating eurocentrist demons have yet again lost.



But all of this tampering with native heathens' ancestral remains is only because eurocentrists made everything controversial in the first place and tried to encroach on every heathen thing for white supremacism. They're such a curse.

I'm sure tomorrow alien demons will still be going around pretending the 'Kennewick Man' was a "white" person from Eurolands and convincing themselves that all the genetics studies are an "anti-white conspiracy".





3. Here's a 2008 set of slides marked class room format - apparently some latent white supremacists wanted to propagate the following nonsense among kids:

www.slideshare.net/JudyMJohnson/3-many-peoples-kennewick



One of the images of a 'reconstruction' of the Kennewick Man is captioned with "Conclusion - Kennewick Man appears to be Caucasian"

image.slidesharecdn.com/3kennewick-091108104753-phpapp01/95/3-many-peoples-kennewick-16-728.jpg?cb=1257678256



Moral: When will alien demons be held accountable for their systematic lying against native heathens and their systematic appropriation (including in education) of native heathens' ancestory and accomplishments? Someone has to do a slideshow on the alien demon "culture" of appropriation and self-aggrandising, summing up that this - more than anything else apparently - is the defining feature of the alien demon "civilisation".



Sort of like steppist university level lecturers teaching that

- yamna drank mare's milk (NO, the Botai culture drank mare's milk - of whom it is not known they were IE at all and archaeologists insist Botai are not IE). Have yet to come across any news that Yamnaya drank mare's milk

- and that Yamna had the lactase persistence allele. NO, the Mathieson et al 2015 data set of Yamna aDNA has none with the allele.

3 Many Peoples- Kennewick



1. KENNEWICK MAN CLASS ROOM FORMAT AAPS OCTOBER 2008

3. Kennewick Man, The Power of First Impressions By Rick Osmon, Moderator, blogtalkradio.comloopa.loopa.cafe Scholar of many topics about Ancient America

4. On July 28, 1996 two young men found a human skull in the Columbia River at Kennewick, WA. James Chatters, a forensic anthropologist, was invited to conduct skeletal forensics. He recovered scattered bones and began to make observations

5. WASHINGTON KENNEWICK YAKIMA

6. Possible European traits: how the nose projected how the face projected, narrow face, delicate lower jaw, long, narrow cranium, absence of flaring cheekbones.

7. KENNEWICK MAN HAD PROJECTILE POINT LEAF SHAPED IN BUTTOCK COMMON BUT OLD CALCIFIED INTO BONE MAN NOT A RECENT SETTLER

8. PROJECTILE POINT SERRATED CASCADE PROJECTILE TYPICAL 8500 BP TO 4500 BP BUT SIMILAR STYLES IN USE IN WESTERN NORTH AMERICA INTO NINETEENTH CENTURY

9. COMMUNICATIONS FORENSICS EXPERT (CHATTERS) CORONER ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS AMERICAN INDIANS SKELETON WAS NOT LIKE AMERICAN INDIAN or Was a TRAPPER EXPLORER RADIO CARBON and DNA tests ordered

10. RADIO CARBON RESULTS 8410 +/- 60 BP SO ….. MUST BE AMERICAN INDIAN SUBJECT TO NATIVE AMERICAN GRAVES PROTECTION ACT NAGPRA

11. ARMY CORP OF ENGINEERS “ PULLED OUT ALL STOPS” TO GIVE BONES TO AMERICAN INDIANS UNDER NAGPRA SO BONES COULD BE SWIFTLY REBURIED.

12. Scott Malcomson New York Times Why Gov. action important Interviewed parties (No Government officials.) ISSUES: Race Related laws

13. DNA Repeated test results not accepted. Always caucasoid ? Gov. blamed contamination Contamination is problem.



(2008 whining. But yes, it was Euro-contamination of native American DNA. Allentoft & co. analysis 2015 analysis have concluded this clearly. Allentoft in 2015 also worked on collecting and analysing about 101 samples of "Eurasian" aDNA. So if he and his collaborators say Euro DNA had contaminated Native American Kennewick Man remains, it is because they know what they're saying. So the US govt for very correct in blaming contamination as the cause for pre-2008 genetics tests coming up with the wrong - i.e. "Caucasasian" - results. Eurocentrists should stop contaminating native American remains with euro DNA. One almost wonders if they do it on purpose...

Eurocentrists/white supremacists however like to imagine anti-white conspiracy everywhere. In reality they're the ones conspiring against native heathens. When will eurocentrists stop trying to steal other peoples' stuff?)



14. Why all the hubbub. Bub? If KM is not American Indian, then social, cultural, and legal factors are affected. KM ethincity can upset recognition of tribal rights. Also questions national Legal status.

15. Robson Bonnichsen: " that the earliest inhabitants of this continent may have no modern descendants. . . . Multiple colonizing groups appear to be represented and many of the oldest studied skeletons have strong Caucasian skeletal features."

16. CONCLUSION KENNEWICK MAN APPEARS TO BE CAUCASIAN

(No, the conclusion is

1. that alien demons refuse to stop committing cultural genocide against native Americans. Even after the year 2000.

2. Kennewick man is exclusively native American and not Caucasian/European at all. "Sorry" eurocentrists. What's that line? "Get used to disappointment".)

Summary: Point 2 is the important one in this post: the so-called "Kennewick Man" is totally native American, as per geneticists Allentoft & co themselves - who by-passed the Euro contamination of the aDNA to come to the right conclusions.



This and the previous post are somewhat related: about nativeness of ancient native N and S Americans (which eurocentrists had tried to contest as "ancient Euros"). The previous post is about the "white" Chachapoyans of S America/Peruvian mummies.

[Husky]

News from under an hour ago. How come I found the paper on Kennewick Man's DNA several days before the US govt could be bothered?

And how come the DNA analysis came out almost a year ago, and the US govt only found out about it now?





usnews.com/news/science/articles/2016-04-27/corps-determines-kennewick-man-is-native-american

Kennewick Man Was a Native American

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has determined that Kennewick Man is related to modern Native American tribes.



April 27, 2016, at 6:36 p.m.





[img caption:] A plastic casting of the skull from the bones known as Kennewick Man, is shown in in Richland, Wash. Elaine Thompson/AP



By NICHOLAS K. GERANIOS, Associated Press



SPOKANE, Wash. (AP) — The ancient skeleton known as Kennewick Man is related to modern Native American tribes, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said Wednesday, opening the process for returning to tribes for burial one of the oldest and most complete set of bones ever found in North America.



The Northwestern Division of the corps said its decision was based on a review of new information, particularly recently published DNA and skeletal analyses.

(The clinching DNA analysis is almost a year old, duh. Where were the "US Army Corps of Engineers" until then? Why did they only find out now? And not a week after I did?

Maybe AmriKKKa thought it could get away with leaving the matter ambiguous forever while pretending to be sympathetic to the Native American side. Guess Allentoft & co. accidentally rained on the white supremacism party.)



The corps, which has custody of the remains, said the skeleton is now covered by the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act.

(Interesting that the corps has had custody of the remains for almost a year after the Rasmussen et al 2015 paper featuring Allentoft came out.)



The 8,500-year-old remains were discovered in 1996 in southeastern Washington near the Columbia River in Kennewick, triggering a lengthy legal fight between tribes and scientists over whether the bones should be buried immediately or studied.



The bones will remain at the Burke Museum in Seattle until the corps determines which tribe or tribes will receive them.



The next step is for interested tribes to submit a claim to acquire the skeleton for burial, said Michael Coffey, a spokeswoman for the corps in Portland, Oregon.



Determining which tribe receives the bones is likely to be a lengthy process, Coffey said. In the past, the Colville, Yakama, Umatilla, Nez Perce and Wanapum Indians have claimed a connection to them.

The AmriKKKan govt is deliberately trying to stoke controversy and drag this on, so they can pretend to "intervene" as a "disinterested unrelated party", maybe to put the remains back in a museum.

(But did these people even read the Allentoft paper? It says clearly:

nature.com/nature/journal/v523/n7561/full/nature14625.html

We find that Kennewick Man is closer to modern Native Americans than to any other population worldwide. Among the Native American groups for whom genome-wide data are available for comparison, several seem to be descended from a population closely related to that of Kennewick Man, including the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation (Colville), one of the five tribes claiming Kennewick Man.

So, since the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation are the closest among those claiming him, they may have the right of choosing where to bury their ancestor and let them invite the other native Americans claiming him, and any others that want to attend the rite. Or however the Colville native Americans choose to do this.)



"We still have a lot of work to do," Coffey said.



However, a spokesman for the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation in Oregon said the tribes plan to cooperate to hasten the burial.



"We will send in our joint request for disposition for the reburial of the Ancient One," Sams said.

(Such a good, noble people. Of course the alien demons would have tried to genocide them. Isn't that ALL the alien demons have ever done?)



Last year, new genetic evidence determined the remains were closer to modern Native Americans than any other population in the world. Following that, the corps began to re-examine Kennewick Man's status.



"I am confident that our review and analysis of new skeletal, statistical, and genetic evidence have convincingly led to a Native American Determination," said Brig. Gen. Scott A. Spellmon, commander of the corps' Northwestern Division.



Sams said the corps' finding was correct.



"After 20 years, it acknowledges what we already knew and have been saying since the beginning," Sams said.



Most scientists trace modern native groups to Siberian ancestors who arrived by way of a land bridge that used to extend to Alaska. But features of Kennewick Man's skull led some scientists to suggest the man's ancestors came from elsewhere.



Researchers turned to DNA analysis to try to clarify the skeleton's ancestry. They recovered DNA from a fragment of hand bone, mapped its genetic code and compared that to modern DNA from native peoples of the Americas and populations around the world.



The results showed a greater similarity to DNA from the Americas than from anywhere else.



Copyright 2016 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

May the Native Americans forever be victorious heathens.

Native Americans should have chased the alien demons off their lands - Turtle Island (so-called Americas) - long ago. They'd be totally justified if they were to do it now.