Legendary Times Magazine Global Community Network

[Csabi_B]

Attention

This post is merely a theory based on my deep ignorance. If you are curious about its reality, you must do your own research for supporting facts. So remember my motto: I lie, I rave, I'm wrong. Your questions to help your research and your debunking arguments are welcome very much. This post is not racist, but it is about racism. I hope you are wise enough to tell the difference. The main theme of this post is the question: Can the human races be the result of degenerations in the human species? If my suppositions and hints and the facts behind them, especially the facts, make you angry, you must remember you are not obliged to read this post and you are not encouraged to flame and mute me. But I recommend you to think, especially if you get embarrassed by this post.


Pharaoh's Dream


Introduction

An author of a book about the legend of Atlantis mentioned academic historians and official archeologists have the habitual reflex to deny and reject everything which points in the direction of Atlantis and 'prehistoric' civilisations. Thor Heyerdahl's heretic theories of ancient seafarers were attacked for a long time. A guy who claimed to be the grandson of the discoverer of the ruins of Troy created a stir when he claimed to have evidences ancient Egyptians were the descendants of Atlantis. I qoute from a book: "The promised revelations never materialised. Paul Schliemann simply disappeared and has not been heard of since." I quoted to point out I am not the one who suggests the annihilation of evidences but the book I found this in. Is there a forbidden history? What can be the reasons? Does the distant past affect our present times so seriously?


Racism

Are there racial facts that can make a basis to tell the inferior from the superior? Can the genom determine constructive and destructive social behavior for example? All the nationalist genocides in orthodox history were 'justified' by religious and social differences. The social behaviors different from which the nation of power had were branded destructive. For example the peaceful and loving Christians genocided any of the North-American indians who did not wish to be peaceful. They called the victims thieves, scalp-hunters, wildmen, and such. Did the settlers have reasons to apply brute force? If they had, was there any other means to pacify aggressive people? What to do if the missionaries of love and brotherhood get eaten by cannibals for example? There is two things to do to avoid brute force: the European settlers invent miracles of exorcism or they stay in Europe for ever. But let's leave alone settlers from Europe for a while. The point is in aggression. Is there really genetically coded aggression or just genetically coded leaning to aggression. What is aggression? The release of hatred. Clearly, people rarely kill each other in love, especially when they do not wish to die after all. Clearly, an individual cannot love six billion people, he has to separate individuals in space and time by sympathy. This is called discrimination. The individual is not rare at all who oddly enough cannot imagine the case others may not feel sympathy towards him. The individual also is not rare at all who has a sparkle of imagination, but he invents and reserves his right to strip others of the right to feel or feel not sympathy, though. Can we call this destructive social behavior? Clearly, such a man never likes to be refused. He can do two things: he accepts refusal or he takes what he needs one way or another. Such a man cannot accept refusal without anger. Can anger be mastered? God told Cain to master his anger, but Cain could not master his anger, however, he could kill Abel as he could not kill God the Almighty. Why did God not inform Cain how to master anger? Was Cain retarded, incapable to understand the truth all social living beings feel sympathy and discriminate as the mechanisms of interactivity dictate? Was God sure of Cain's defect before the famous test? If so, why did God bait Cain to murder Abel? God only knows. I know for sure, however, this story in the Genesis (I Mos 4.1-24) is a good demonstration of discrimination: the 'victim' of discrimination murders the victim of anger. A divine idea indeed! But this is an old tale, not a fact. Nobody has ever killed anybody in envy and anger in the real world, hasn't he? Well, God put a mark on the murderer in the old tale. Some people say this certain mark was a permanent color on the skin, and all the descendants of Cain wear it even now. I smell racism here. So Cain stepped out of the tale into reality, and all people of color are dangerous and murderers? Nobody who is dangerous is a murderer, he has to commit murder before. Nobody who has color skin is dangerous. Color skin does not poison you, it does not burn or freeze you at the touch, it does not stink, it does not rot your eyes out, and color skin can hardly blunt your axe, it can hardly bounce missiles back to the shooter. Color skin is just as harmless but vulnerable instead as white skin. Here white skin means the color skin which can be white (pigmentless) too as the climate requires. However, certain defects in the brain can be dangerous. If we suppose Cain could not understand how to master his anger because of his retardation, we can state the aforementioned "some people" really mean people of color are retarded. If people of color are not retarded, the "some people" are racists (nationalists based on racial differences). If people of color are in fact retarded therefore dangerous, then the "some people" have some points and reasons. There are two ways of act of racism: one side hates(1) the other for discrimination and the other side hates(2) the one side because the one side's hatred comes from retardation. Sympathy based on racial differences is not racism. Hatred based on racial differences (aka nationalism) is racism. But if we have the proper word for that hatred (nationalism), why did we invent the word 'racism' to cover the questions and facts nicely? I mean what would we call the due anxiety in case the racial differences might be the symptoms of genetical diseases?


Stop Racism!

This is the motto of the propaganda film showing various races on an X-Ray displayer. The film strongly indicates we are all the same under the skin. Such propaganda films overwhelm the media while some people complain publications on factual racial differences are mysteriously disappearing from the shelves of public libraries. Now what do the propaganda people mean when they say "Stop racism"? Do they mean we must not hate the other races or rather do they mean we must not recognise racial differences at all? Do they mean everybody must omit sympathy and give ANYthing to those who are unable to master their anger? Do they mean they intend to justify rape for example? Ignorant questions of mine! Of course they do not mean otherwise they could be the biggest hypocrites Earth can bear on its surface. So everybody has the right to know the racial facts regardless the effort of invisible hands annihilating info and of official speakers misinterpreting available reports and spreading false rumors. Now what if the racial facts proved the idea there are no human races but degenerated nations of the human species? Then we cannot deny to ask which nations are less or more degenerated. As ignorant as I am, I cannot announce the answer here, but I can sure say the answer might make lots (millions and billions) of people embarrassed. Regardless of nationality, the people who cannot master their anger might get very angry if we created one more reason to refuse them when they wish to spawn children with healthy people. Which mutation can be called degeneration, properly speaking, which loss of attributes can be called disadvantageous or unbearable enough to ruin a healthy and happy life of the individual? Through evolution a being may lose important and vital attributes too. Degeneration can be dominant in the genom of a species if there are other mechanisms to turn the directions (by the truth of Paradox Principle). The teachers in schools can simplify things, all right! They say evolution is all about genetics. If a being lives no social life, he is to take by force anything he wishes, takers get the honey, givers sing the blues. An extreme anti-social life style is cannibalism. Such an anti-social life style does not require much intellect; fish, insects, and worms will do. It is no wonder degeneration in intellect brings about anti-social behavior as well. If there are retarded individuals in a society, they are going sooner or later to reduce the number of the healthy ones through occasional murders and rapes and to become dominant or even sole unless the society is advanced enough to prevent them from doing so. The only thing a society can do to prevent the retarded ones without force is flee wherever the murderers and rapers want not or cannot follow and stay there for ever. Clearly, a planet by its geometry has obvious restrictions how far a society can flee by running. Our present society does not flee, but isolates the ones who have serious defects in the brain. Such defects often show themselves apparently on the body and the face, because such defects are rarely sole flaws in the brain but extensive damage in the DNA. Such sign of retardation can be the Mongoloid face. It is not easy to damage a compact disc so it should contain difference of only one bit or one byte, but even a tiny scratch can do a major loss of information. The result may be wrong operation, a crashing program, and corrupt and missing data. A damaged compact disc is as useful as a degenerated member in the society. I am not saying a damaged compact disc is useless, but only a fool copies the contents from the damaged disc when an intact one is available. Well, the human species has four races by the orthodox anthropology: Mongoloid, Europid, Negroid, and the Native-Australian. Can we say the genom of the Mongoloid race is damaged in the same part where the clinically degenerated and Mongoloid faced individual's genom is damaged? At least that is what appears. And is there an at least apparent difference between the intellect of the Mongoloid race and the intellect of other races? It is obvious the Mongoloid race does not have so serious defects in intellect as the clinically degenerated Mongoloid faced ones, but is it also obvious the Mongoloid race and some other races do not have any defect in intellect?


The Sense of Humor

Well, I laugh in a nasty situation that I cannot solve. I cannot make disgustingly ugly people beautiful, I cannot make the lame, the blind, the deaf, and the retarded healthy. I cannot but laugh at them. I laugh because the sight hurts me badly. Some of such poor people in self-respect and some of healthy people in hypocricy take my laughter as an insult. My laughter hurts them. My laughter has got to be so loud their ears get damage regardless how I silence my laughter to a smile. Probably this is not the case. They probably do not understand how I can laugh at them without being glad seeing their misfortune. These are the people who laugh at the misfortune of the one they hate or are afraid of; they are glad at the sight. Others' misfortune is a joke for the one who wants to help but he cannot, but others' misfortune is a relief for the one who wants to do anything else but help. You can tell the selfish and evil people who respect themselves very much by their taking insult from 'mockery'. God's act of discrimination was not a joke for Cain, for sure. Cain obviously lacked the sense of humor. I cannot tell if anybody has the sense of humor beside me, but everybody can test it. Read Catch 22 by Joseph Heller. It is the funniest novel I have ever read. It talks about so much misery, unjustice, madness, and helplessness in our world you may almost weep in laughter if you have sense of humor. Otherwise it may give you head-ache, gloom, and upset. I read other novels too. I read the Romance of the Three Kingdoms. It was also funny, however, I doubt the writer wanted to make me laugh at some points where I laughed. The Romance of the Three Kingdoms talks about a major civil war in ancient China. Let me quote some sentences: "Mother, when I was a boy, I went with Father to wars, where people are cut down as one cuts reed stalks." "One day they sought shelter at a house whence a youth came out and made a low obeisance. They asked his name and he gave it as Liu An, of a well known family of hunters. Hearing who the visitor was, the hunter wished to lay before him a dish of game, but though he sought for a long time, nothing could be found for the table. So Liu An came home, killed his wife and prepared a portion for his guest. While eating Liu Bei asked, 'What flesh is it?' Liu An told him: 'Wolf.'" Also, the characters often broke out in lamentations and weeping when they were facing inextricable difficulties. They often called for the executioners in anger. They were often angered into duels, battles, swoons, and even heart attacks. Some characters were very crafty. I also found traces of amazing memory, excellent speech, and bountiful kindness, but I was unable to find traces of sense of humor. Note this novel is mere fiction, and we cannot tell if the Chineese people were such as I digested here. This is the way the writer saw Chineese people. The writer has a Chineese name: Luo Guanzhong; this does not necessarily mean he was Chineese. The Chineese nation is of the Mongoloid race. Now how could such a fictional Mongoloid society endure in case its members might be dangerous to each other? The key is obedience replaced sympathy. There were aristocrats and subjects. Our present societies have inherited a lot from ancient times, haven't they? Another key is there were people around who remonstrated begging and proposing things when the aristocrat called for the executioners in anger. It seems a terror-stricken society where the individual's fate depended on how much anger an event or a mere thought caused to another nearby. For example, when bad news were brought, the messenger was put to death. Can we call this notable retardation or just an ineducated mind?


Inside the Guts

Can we call lactose-intolerance a genetical disease, or is 'lactose-tolerance' a rare attribute of the Europid race for one? Some people say lactose-intolerance means the termination of producing the lactase enzyme after the suckling period. Then the guts 'eject' the contents (diarrhea) because the undigested lactose irritates the immune system. The receptors take the lactose for a bacterium toxin. Some kind of allergy. What if a lactose-intolerant individual never produces lactase? Clearly, the individual has not so active an immune system to reject lactose in the suckling period. You should not give little children certain kinds of food, honey for example, because little children are still very vulnerable to germs. I really do not know where the aforementioned 'some people' get their 'facts' about lactose-intolerance because I see no difference in total lack of lactase and periodical lack of lactase. The suckling baby is not left unfed because milk contains fat also, and he just urinates out the undigested lactose. Lactose is not a poison. The baby stays alive. There is no problem. Or is there one? Some kinds of grain also contains certain polipeptides that some people cannot digest to amino acids. This makes the immune system react abnormally again. It is called glutalin allergy. Who has this genetical disease that should not consume such grains as wheat for one. Well I cannot talk with animals, but some (all?) of the mammals consume cow-milk with gusto not only in their suckling period. Some people put outdoor a plate of milk for the night because they like the cute little urchin. Some other people say this is not a good idea because the milk may go bad by the time the urchin finds it. No lactose-intolerance of the urchin was mentioned. Sacred rats of a sacred temple somewhere in Asia are mollycoddled with delicious cow-milk. There are suckling cows causing some loss to farmers. I never noticed if pets (dogs and kittens) had problems with milk. Doves, pigs, cattle, dogs seem to have no problems with glutalin. The Mongoloid race has problems with lactose. The only racial fact I could find about glutalin allergy was: a connection between glutalin allergy occurence and race is not proved. It is interesting this question has showed up. Clearly, if we had data to simply look at about the occurrence of the disease in the different races, we could have said: it is proved that there is no connection between glutalin allergy and race. Do we lack data? How come the grains which contain glutalin grow where the Europid race resides, on the rotating climate, and where the Mongoloid race resides there is rice, bean, maize, potato, and various fruits, on the monsoon and the tropical climate with full year vegetation. It could be a difficult task to gather reliable statistics on this matter. The Europid race has long been a pastoral people and consumed cow-milk and milk products. If you take a look at the continental and oceanic areas, you see poor flora. Trees grow hardly. Grassland mainly, because the climate is too cool or too dry. If the Mongoloid race happened to be both lactose-intolerant and glutalin-intolerant, they could hardly stay alive in Europe unless they solved the food transport. That could have stopped their invasion in case they might have wanted one. What stopped the vast Tartarian invasion? The 'heroic' Hungarians? Was that invasion the only one that non-Europid races might do in the past?


Within the Blood

"...antigens similar to the A and B antigens occur in nature, including in food, plants, and bacteria. After birth an infant's gut becomes colonized with normal flora that express these A-like and B-like antigens, causing the immune system to make antibodies to those antigens that the red blood cells do not possess. People who are blood type A will have Anti-B antibodies, blood type B will have Anti-A antibodies, blood type O will have both Anti-A and Anti-B antibodies, and blood type AB will have neither." This quote comes from Wikipedia. What is the use of these antigens on the red blood cells? All of it just causes difficulties in transfusion. Has nature gone crazy? Well, the mystery is not solved in the Wikipedia article. Let's try by ourselves. I belive it is not news for you lots of animals with man among them live in symbiosis with bacteria. This requires the ability not to kill the useful germs. It seems to me the antigens on the RBC provide information for the immune system so it could recognise the useful germs as own part just as it recognises the RBC as own part because they express the same antigen. As the blood type O does not recognise useful germs as own part, it kills them, therefore who has blood type O that can hardly co-operate with germs or his immune system have to be less active to spare germs. You can choose between the two bad ones. The Wikipedia article contains some racial statistics on the occurence (%) of blood types A, B, AB, and O:
Bororo (Brazil) A 0, B 0, AB 0, O 100;
Indians (USA-General) A 16, B 4, AB 1, O 79;
Malaisians A 18, B 20, AB 0, O 62;
Mayas A 1, B 1, AB 1, 0 98;
Peru (Indians) A 0, B 0, AB 0, O 100;
Koreans A 32, B 31, AB 10, O 28;
Maoris A 54, B 1, AB 0, O 46;
Japanese A 38, B 22, AB 10, O 30;
Chinese-Canton A 23, B 25, AB 6, O 46;
Chinese-Peking A 27, B 32, AB 13, O 29...
It seems the Asian Mongoloids mixed with 'barbaric' peoples while the American Mongoloids stayed quite clean. I have not heard there were human sacrifices in ancient China, but the American warriors hardly seemed to get tired of it.


Color

The 'color' of the skin has been mostly mentioned in racist separation of human rights. It is the least important difference in races however. The 'white man' can get such a suntan he appears the same as Negroid and Mongoloid, but he loses it quickly without sunbath. One thing is sure: no Negroid or Mongoloid gets pale skin if he avoids sunlight. Another thing is unsure, properly speaking, I do not have the slightest experience a Negroid or Mongoloid can get suntan. I am in fact ignorant! I have not seen paler places that underwear usually covers on the naked bodies of Negroids and Mongoloids. Clearly, nobody with clothes is expressed equally to sunshine. It seems to me the Europid race has an ability to change pigmentation accordingly to sunlight. Pigmentation protects against UV rays, so it is surely useful, but is it also useful being pale where/when the sun does not shine? The 'micro organisms of the individual', in other words the body cells, produce hydrogen peroxide for defence against aggressive germs. But there is a problem with hydrogen peroxide: it destroys the pigment also. To work around this, certain cells of skin produce an enzyme to block hydrogen peroxide somehow. This is why a white man can have black hair and 'black' skin. Aggressive germs hardly attack the horn in the hair, so the modulation of the enzyme is needless in the root of hair. UV rays kill numerous kinds of germs, so it is better to defend against UV rays than germs when the sun shines, and it is better to defend against germs than UV rays when the sun does not shine. So here is the question: did the Europid race get the ability of modulation of that enzyme and the ability of increasing pigmentation or other races lost it by degeneration? If we accept the theory people of color are pristine, we may reject the idea of degeneration, but me may not reject the idea the modulation of pigmentation is more advanced for a global species than static pigmentation. So I am driven to the next question: are people of color in fact pristine and is the human species a territorial one?


Junglemen

There is a stereotype saying the civilisations developed from 'primitive' tribes. So this may give you the idea the civilised Europid race is the descendant of the Negroid and the Mongoloid races, for the two have nations of 'primitive junglemen' too, closer to nature. I saw a movie about pygmies. In the story the anthropologists considered the pygmies the origin of man because they showed an undeveloped and primitive stature. They actually treated their specimens as beasts. Their specimens expressed religious or superstitious rituals. I wonder what is the use of superstition in nature? I have never seen an animal doing religious rituals. Where is the evidence man invented superstition and religion naturally? I can also imagine retarded people go crazy and invent corrupt ideas about the world. Religions and superstitions seem corrupt ideas to me. Are the pygmies undeveloped or rather degenerated? The other Negroid tribes dared not to approach the pygmy territory because those were fierce unsocial beasts. No diplomacy working. But this story of pygmies is mere fiction, because I am not sure if a pygmy even exists, for I have never faced one and neither I wish. An advanced society does not essentially mean amazing architecture far from natural simplicity, all the more it were the people of color who built amazing temples and burial structures. What amazing did the white man build before the Holy Bible? Nothing.


Megalithics

There are huge stone structures built by the 'Flintstones' throughout Europe called menhirs. There are also massive stone works such as Stonehenge and Newgrange with apparent astronomic sense. Some people consider some nations on Mediterranean islands megalithic cultures too. There are also 'dwelling places' such as Skara Brae. The 'Flintstones' were illiterate. They seem to have had no remarkable religions. They ornamented their structures with simple fingerprint and vagina patterns. They made sex toys and sex symbols of stone. No traces of weapons and wars. They probably dwelled in tents, but these tents have rotten to dust since the 'Flintstones' got extinct around BC 1500. There are stone-ager paintings in Sahara showing rich pastoral culture. I saw such paintings in a book (The World's Last Mysteries; Reader's Digest): "Hunters armed with spears race to attack a lion which has seized one of their sheep. This scene, from the days when Stone Age man grazed their flocks where only desert now exist, is painted on a wall at Iheren in the Tassili N'Ajjer." Let me add a thing. The hunters (or rather flock defenders?) wear odd masks and head veils against sunshine. I am not pressing they are not Negroids, but there is nothing against they may be Europids. "This dramatic Saharan rock painting was made about 5,500 years ago at Takededoumatine in the Tassili N'Ajjer. It shows a busy camp scene in the life of the pastoral people of the cattle period. Calves are tethered in front of the oval-shaped huts, while a herd of long-horned cattle returns from pasture." Let me add some things. These long-horned cows with remarkable udders remind me to the intensive breeds for milk-production of nowadays such as Holstein Friz and Jersey. There are unfinished figures as well erased parts on the picture. There is a cow with an erased rear in an odd stand, and nearby there is a crouching man as if milking an invisible cow. It seems to me the artist had difficulties to draw the process of milking a cow. But it is sure he did not have the time to complete the work. There is nothing to prevent me from seeing such or rather the same pastoral people and milk-automats may very well be in Europe. There are no megalithic ruins in Sahara, but there is no need to be there, for Africa has and had a warm climate. I am pressing cow-milk is a pristine nutrition, some kind of simbiosis between cattle and man. So 'lactose-tolerance' is not a new thing in the human species. Well, why did the stone-ager Europeans erect those menhirs spending obvious effort and craft? The menhirs were not pure rock pillars as they appear now. They were covered by quartz pebbles. Were these pebbles ornamentation or rather sunlight collectors? We can tell objects from each other how they reflect light, conduct heat, and emit heat. Snow reflects light very well. Iron conducts heat very well. Quartz emits heat very well if I my ignorance fails. If you erect an iron monument, the pillar indeed gets hot in sunshine, and it channels heat underground. If you erect a monument with a heat-emitter surface, the monument stays cool inside, it does not channel heat underground, but it warms the air nearby all the more. Why did the 'Flintstones' construct such stoves in their country? Because they felt cold. This is no wonder in the times when ice-covers had just withdrawn. Erected pillars can be handy in winter time and polar areas when and where the sunrays come from almost horizontal directions. The 'Flintstones' were not retarded in this aspect. The 'Flintstones' got extinct from Europe. Might they get extinct from Asia, Africa, and America, too? Some kind of Europid mummies were found in China. Some kind of Europid nation lives on the northern islands of Japan, they are treated as inferiors to Japanese. Some people say they fled in the wrong direction, they should have fled to the west. Some kind of Europid mummies were excavated by Thor Heyerdahl in South-America, and some kind of Europid prisoners in the hands of the ancient Native-Americans are shown on ethnological artefacts. I mean ancient Native-Americans the Mayan, Aztek, Olmek, Inca nations, but I do not know what I should call the nation that lived in America before the Native-Americans if that were the case. Here is a question: did the different climates formed their own nations or rather differently degenerated nations migrated to their own optimal climate? Nations migrated a lot as a matter of fact. Orthodox history claims almost every nation came from somewhere, from unknown places. Nations did not grow out from the ground at the place they showed up, but there can hardly be told a place where a nation grew out from the ground. It seems as if lots of nations had had an Exodus of their own while there are nations that originated themselves from gods. Which is which?


Sons of God and Daughters of Men

"The sons of God saw that the daughters of men were fair; and they took to wife such of them as they chose. (...) The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came into the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men that were of old, the men of renown." (I Mos 6.2-4) Did something like that really happen or is this also just a tale? The author of the Book of Enoch invented the idea the spawns of this odd marriage were gigantic and beastly humanoids not worthy to exist on Earth, and God drowned them in a deluge. The cause of this invention might be the author sensed this marriage was very wrong though there is not any literal connection between the deluge and the cross-breeding. The text simply states people were just sinful to regret their creation. The text does not state whether the cross-breeding was wrong enough to make God angry, instead it states the spawns got renownful by their achievements. Cannibals and blood-drinkers are willingly forgotten, not renownful. So how could the author build his theory on this obscure part of the Genesis? The way he read other myths too! I quote RiaanBooysen as it is supposed to be a Sumerian text: "In a great number did the Igigi from Lahmu to Earth come, only one third of them on Lahmu stayed, to Earth came two hundred. To be with their leader Marduk, his wedding celebration to attend, was their explanation; Unbeknownst to Enki and Enlil was their secret: To abduct and have conjugation was their plot. Unbeknownst to the leaders on Earth, a multitude of the Igigi on Lahmu got together, 'What to Marduk permitted is from us too should not be deprived!' to each other they said. 'Enough of suffering and loneliness, of not offspring ever having!' was their slogan. During their comings and goings between Lahmu and Earth, the daughters of the Earthlings, the Adapite Females as them they called, they saw and after them they lusted; and to each other the plotters said: 'Come, let us choose wives from among the Adapite Females, and children beget!'" If God did not permit his sons marry the daughters of men, it is no wonder he got angry, and it were not particularly the spawns of renown the reason of His anger. Why did God not permit the sons to do as they lusted? To find out God's thoughts, we have to make clear who were the sons of God and the daughters of men. The Genesis tells the story quite carefully. It dares not say the daughters of God were either less beautiful or ugly, and it dares not say what happened to the sons of men. It does not say the sons of men yielded the daughters of men for the sons of God as wives, and neither it say the sons of men were homosexual. But if we assume both the sons of God and the daughters of God were ugly and both the sons of men and the daughters of men were handsome and beautiful, God might probably want that state to last for ever. God commanded man to multiply. I do not know what God commanded to His sons, but clearly, people could not multiple if their sons and daughters were separated by abductions. If God had permitted abduction, He might have done against His own command. And did God want His sons not to multiply because His sons and daughters were ugly? Well, I cannot tell for sure, but I have told you before there are certain nations who originate themselves from gods. One is the ancient Egyptians. (I mean the ancient Egyptians when I am saying 'Egyptians' afterwards, not the Arabs who call their country Egypt nowadays.) Can we accuse Egyptians of abduction? "When he was about to enter Egypt, he said to Sarai his wife, 'I know that you are a woman beautiful to behold; and when the Egyptians see you, they will say, "This is his wife"; then they will kill me, but they will let you live. Say you are my sister, that it may go well with me because of you and that my life be spared on your account.'" (I Mos 12.11-13) Can we accuse other nations too? Some nations have the institute of harem. Imperial China had palace eunuchs and concubines. I doubt ancient times produced surplus of daughters, so ancient aristocracy sure got its concubines from somewhere. Clearly, if they wanted to be in peace with their subjects, the source had to be foreign nations, and if the daughters of foreign nations were more beautiful, all the more it might be. We have to tell what is beauty in order we could tell what is less or more beautiful. Signs of health are beauty for sure. Can people recognise degeneration as illness? If they can, the degenerated individual is ugly.


Idealised Faces

I not only read the Romance of the Three Kingdoms but played its the video-game setting too, the sixth in the series by Koei. What I noticed while playing the game was the characters' (fictional) portraits did not resemble the Chinees people I have seen in reality. They resembled Europid people instead. I have heard lots of Japanese people want an European look. They use hair-dye and such. I wonder how well black hair-dye sells on the cosmetic market. Of course this may be the pressure of media and Hollywood movies, and people are 'taught' to follow the presented ideals. But in the way around, what if Hollywood movies became so popular among non-Europid people because they found the Europid females beautiful to behold? I cannot tell, but I tell you what I saw in a book. As we know, aristocrats of Egypt had lots of portraits and statues made. They are pictured so handsome some racists insist the Egyptians have got to be of the Europid race. Let's see what is inside the coffin. The coffin of a pharaoh is some kind of mask of the body, but the mummy actually wears a mask showing the late owner of the corpse has a handsome face if I my ignorance fails. The aforementioned book shows both the burial mask and the real face of the mummy. A mummy's face is not expected to be beautiful, for sure, but the main features of the face were apparently different from the mask. I doubt those obviously skilled sculptors and goldsmiths were unable to reproduce the pharaoh's face. But I can imagine the pharaoh called for the executioners after the sculptors reproduced his ugly face instead of a face he could be satisfied with. Handsome or not, the features of the mummy resembled an indian (Mongoloid) face. Were the Egyptians some kind of Mongoloid or Negroid?


Connections Between Egypt and South-America

Ancient Americans did not use the wheel too much or at all. Egyptians did not use the wheel too much. There are pictures on which the pharaoh drives a chariot, and the chariot has wheels of course. There is a picture painted by someone of the extinct people of the Sahara on which a man drives a similar chariot if we ignore the painter was not so skilful as the Egyptian artists. The wheel is a useful thing, so we can resolve the anomaly only when we assume the pharaoh's chariot was a loot of war or a gift from a foreign nation. Ancient Americans did not grow beards or rather they could not grow beards while they wore false beards if my ignorance fails. Egyptians did not grow beards while they wore false beards. I found an odd statement on the Internet the Egyptians did not have a word for beard but they had a word for false beard. In an analogy, if I do not have hair, I won't say 'Hand me my wig' but 'Hand me my hair'. Maybe beard and false beard meant all the same for the Egyptians. I have to ask my wife why she likes my beard (I am actually lying, for I have neither a wife nor a beard), but if my wife asked me whether I want her to grow a beard or wear a beard, I sure could tell her not to. Both the ancient Americans and the Egypteans practiced human sacrifices, built pyramids, missed iron, and had other basis of food beside wheat and milk. Present Egypt is one of the greatest rice producers on Earth, so I do not see how ancient Egypt could not be a great rice producer as well. The Egyptian aristocrats, although they had concubines, had so called dynastic wifes, from women within family. What about in America? "Quetzalcoatl, according to one version of the legend, was a Toltec prince of Tollan, 40 miles north of the later Aztek capital of Tenochtitlan (Mexico City), who reigned from AD 980-99. Secluded in his palace, never gazing into a mirror, Quetzalcoatl aroused anger by offering butterflies as sacrifices to the gods, instead of human beings. Wizards tempted him to drink and to lie with his own sister, then gave him a mirror to study his corrupted or aged (opinions vary) face. His royal mystery destroyed, Quetzalcoatl rushed to the coast, near the modern Veracruz, and sailed away on a raft, vowing to reappear one day to recover his hoard of treasure and to rule his people." What a heretic Quetzalcoatl was! (These mirrors remind me of the tale about Snowy White where the queen had a magical mirror of praises.) Ancient Americans, Egyptians, and imperial Chineese the three had one more thing in common: Plumed Serpent aka Feathered Serpent aka Winged Dragon. All the three claim mythically this divine person was the one who taught them lots of things such as literature, architecture, cultivation, and astronomy. Was it a speaking reptile or rather a man with a winged snake logo on his robe? The past indeed leads into obscurity. Thor Heyerdahl made a ship of papyrus reed inspirated by Egyptean artwork and crossed the Atlantic Ocean benefited by natural streams. The Ra II Expedition landed exactly where the ancient American civilisations showed up.


Genetical Evidence

We could easily tell the race of the Egyptians by DNA samples from mummies. I know Japan has obsessively searched for Her origins for a good while. Some of their theories involved Hungary too. But what have I read in EvD's book? Japanese researchers wanted to take DNA samples from Tutanhammon's corpse to check something about kings' lineage. The notorius Dr. Hawass denied the samples saying Japanese punks should just keep from rewriting history. So the evidence is the genetical evidence is denied.


The Dream

"Then Pharaoh sent and called Joseph, and they brought him hastily out of the dungeon; and when he had shaved himself and changed his clothes, he came in before Pharaoh. (...) Then Pharaoh said to Joseph, 'Behold, in my dream I was standing on the banks of the Nile; and seven cows, fat and sleek, came up out of the Nile and fed in the reed grass; and seven other cows came up after them, poor and very gaunt and thin, such as I had never seen in all the land of Egypt. And the thin and gaunt cows ate up the first seven fat cows, but when they had eaten them no one would have known that they had eaten them, for they were still as gaunt as at the beginning. Then I awoke. I also saw in my dream seven ears growing on one stalk, full and good; and seven ears, withered, thin, and blighted by the east wind, sprouted after them, and the thin ears swallowed up the seven good ears." (I Mos 41.14-24) Joseph explained the meaning of the dream, but was that really what he thought about the dream? Now let me try a different explanation. If the daughters of men were beautiful and the sons of God were ugly, the daughters of the dauhgters of men and sons of God probably were not as beautiful as their mothers. What a disappointment! Did the sons of God regret the abductions? Well, if they had such dreams as Pharaoh, they probably did even if they would not admit. In addition, the cows (lactose-intolerance) and the ears (glutalin-intolerance) is haunting. All of these I construed into the text, I am raving as it seems.


Jewish and 'Jewish'

Who were the hebrews? Hebrew means alien, stranger, foreigner. Why did the Egyptians call the Jews hebrew, why not Jews? You call the foreign language French, German, Spanish after you have identified it. Some people call certain extraterrestrials Pleiadians, Taurians, and such instead of aliens because they 'know' where those come from. I am pressing the meaning the Egyptians did not have the slightest notion where the Jews came from. Probably the majority if not the whole of Jews neither had the slightest notion what was going on. (No, the Jews were not extraterrestrials. Extraterrestrials are coming later.) A mysterious nation or rather a coalition of nations invaded the Mediterranean around BC 1200. They ravaged the coasts and states including Egypt, however, they were defeated in BC 1220 and BC 1180 by the Egyptians. And this was the era when the Iron Age began. Did these seafarer foreigners use iron weapons? I do not know, but I know looking at the relief on Medinet-Habu they sailed ships without oars. The Mediterranean Sea had poor winds and all Mediterranean nations such as the Phoenician and the Egyptians equipped ships with oars. Maybe this was why the aliens lost the sea battle in BC 1180 as there was calm, and you cannot manoeuvre by sails in calm. There is a relief from the reign of Sethie in Karnak showing similar prisoners. What if the Jews were the prisoners of the sea battle? Some people say the whole birth of the state of Jews including the Exodus were mere fiction created after the Babylonian Captivity, and one evidence is the anomaly the Pentateuch mentions iron several times at dates before the Iron Age. But this fact may prove something else if the aliens were the ones who brought iron (orichalcum?) to Eurasia. Pharaoh Necho entrusted the Phoenicians with major naval expeditions around BC 600. The Phoenicians sailed Lybia (Africa) around, some people say they also hit Austalia, some other people said they also hit South-America. The some other people claimed to have found a stone of epitaph scripted by castaway Phoenicians. Some academics say this stone does not exist as well its finders. I do not doubt the stone does not exist any more when academics speak so. I quote from the epitaph and the comment of the Last Mysteries: "Then we were separated by the hand of Baal... So we have come here, 12 men and three women, into 'Island of Iron.'" "For the state of Minas Gerais, near the stone was allegedly found, contains enormous iron ore reserves - and 'brzl' in Old Semitic denotes iron." We cannot be sure whether the Phoenicians called America because of those iron reserves in Brazil or because of the aliens who brought iron having come from America. There is no anomaly if a nation which used iron overseas since unknown time mentioned iron in Her history book at dates before the Iron Age. Why did the Jews wait until the end of the Babylonian Captivity with the writing of their national history? The Babylonians were Semites, and the Jews used Semitic script. Were the Jews illiterate before the Babylonian Captivity similarly the megalithic people were? The topic on Jews is getting the more exciting! Let's take a closer look at the historical facts about the birth of Israel. Some people, the ones who are pointing on the anomaly of iron, say there are no historical records either in Egypt or anywhere about the Jews and their Exodus in spite the Egyptians recorded everything with an obsessive precision. How come the chronicles suffer an odd fault between the Bronze Age and the Iron Age historians call it a dark era of 200-300 years, namely we have blank chronicles about existing populations. A magical sleepiness! Some historians had a good idea: they assume the so called Third Intermediary Period in the kings' list of Egypt (after Ramses XI) shall be shortened by 250 years because there were parallel rulerships in Egypt, and according to this corrections, the dark era (around Ramses III) shall be shortened, actually resolved. I have sure gone crazy because I do not understand! Such a correction only shifts the blank period by 250 years in my crazy mind. At the first step some unknown people at some unknown time erased 250 years from history, and at the second step some people at these times are erasing the blank period itself by 'corrections'. So we can take even the closest look at the facts only to see nothing, and we have to leave alone the Jews for a while.


The Colonisation Theory

There is hardly an exciting theory without Atlantis and extraterrestrials involved, and I promise the theory of Pharaoh's Dream is such, but first let me suppose other things too. As my treatise above suggests, I believe the Mongoloid race for one is degenerated somewhat. This is a blatant generalisation because it cannot be applied on individuals of the race, and it is the individuals who actually contain the topical genom and not the race. The race is a collective if not invalid concept. I made comparisons with the Europid race as healthier, so I owe you further treatise how much the Europid race may be degenerated. The Genesis talks about people, including Adam the First, who lived some hundreds of years up to 969. Some people explain this anomaly by a lunar calendar, and reduce the mythical life-spans to the norm topping 120 years. Then one of these men spawned the first child at the age of 8. If the human species in fact had life-span of 1000 years, all the races now are degenerated. The human species lacks the ability to produce vitamin C. Fortunately plants tend to conserve their bodies by this anti-oxidant, so this degeneration is not lethal. By the way, I could not be surprised if some people happened to have the ability to produce vitamin C just as any other animal. Who knows what other defects Europids also have? I mean the Europids are not the daughters and sons of men for sure, but the corrupted spawns. Was the degeneration of the human races the result of a nasty pitfall of the evolution? Possibly. But what else is possible and what is probable? All the nations of the Mongoloid race have to come from a certain place of minor range if I suppose they had the same teacher and if I suppose Earth was full of white man. The place is yet to be found, and maybe it cannot be found at all. Did they come from a land that disappeared through a catastrophe or rather did they come from another planet? Did they come from both?


The Colonists

An interstellar travel may probably cost a lot of fuel. There is a saying in Sahara "Two jeeps are just as enough as ten jeeps," because the eight jeeps carries the gas for the ten jeeps. Anyhow, the colonists have to be many while the travelers have to be few for a successful colonisation and the cheapest trip. And the ship may as well be automatic without actual travelers. Arthur C. Clarke described a colonisation in a novel of his. The personnel of the colonisation was a store of conserved zygotes. I cannot tell how long the journey to Earth was. It might be hundreds or thousands of years. Did the conserved zigotes go bad? Did the colonists expect lots of the zygotes to go bad anyway? If so, that could explain the degeneration of the children of God. The fictional Man was created, that may mean genetical engineering to restore the damaged human genom and to give birth to the human being. But first things first! It is obvious such an engineering needs apparatus and infrastructure, and that cannot be without workmen and operators. Probably many zygotes were damaged so much they contained lethal defects, but the people with viable degeneration were fitting workers. Another thing to note is the workers did not have to learn and know everything because their job was to work and not to know and instruct. And they were retarded anyway. The Book of Enoch says Adam was superior by intellect to angels. So there was probably a colonisation site on Earth, the cradle of all civilisations which could be Atlantis. Was Atlantis Greenland or Antarctica? Or a lost continent? So what happened?


Atlantis

The legend of Atlantis was probably born by Athenian nationalism, but the skeleton of the story might be real. The skeleton says there was a civilisation outside of the Mediterranean Sea, and Her people lost their way to gods and sought domination and wealth. They finally invaded and partly conquered Africa-Eurasia. They had superior 'technology', for example they knew the 'rituals' to make orichalcum (iron?), but in spite of that they lost against the Athenians which part of the legend may as well be ignored. One thing is sure: the peace on Earth broke, and religion and warfare began to reign. If the Egyptians were of these dominators, it is no wonder they knew about the legend of Atlantis. Another anomaly is the Egyptians had proper naval knowledge but they sat where they were by the Nile. No nation gets proper naval knowledge by sitting. The instructors of the colonisation might lose control or rather the instructors, in order to be able to follow the long term progress, kept visiting the colonisation between cryogenic naps. In the instructors' absence of a hundred or thousand years the workers invented corrupt ideas about the tasks of colonisation and overthrew mankind. In this meaning history is but the tragic progress of the colonisation of Earth.


The Winged Serpent

There may be a colonisation industry on a faraway planet which has the logo of a serpentine schematic DNA with wings. The logo represents life that soars over distant planets. Maybe it was the 'badge' of the instructors only, who were devoted to the project after all.


Jewish and 'Jewish' Part Two

Were the Jews 'Aryan'? As ignorant I am, I can say so. There is an interesting episode in the Genesis suggesting some nations might want to join the Jews (I Mos 34). Semites were all around except Egypt. Did Semites join nationally or it was just a matter of religion? Did the instructors send the Jews from America to the joint of Africa and Eurasia so they should have grown an empire and restored the world order from that strategic point? Even if so, the Jews were pressed away and fled northward, to Europe, and they founded dynasties and kingdoms. Maybe I have seen too few portraits of kings (Merrowing, Habsburg, Anjou among more), they did not look like Semites. Now did these aristocrats mix with other nations or they did not mix with Semites? It seems the instructors' plan failed the double because the Egyptians interrogated the hebrew prisoners and crossed the ocean for America. Thinking of the Holocaust I hope the instructors have better methods to reduce degenerated nations than by murdering the deseased individuals.


The Conspiracy Theory

There is a method to genocide such as killer bees, gnats, tze-tze flies, fleas: they release degenerated specimens that infect whole populations with bad genes, and sooner or later the populations of the target species are going extinct. Did extraterrestrials infected humankind with bad genes to take the planet from us? Such a degenerated insect are never going to realise its degeneration and danger, but what about man? Will a degenerated individual say: "Everybody shall be degenerated since I am degenerated"? If he is retarded enough in addition, he may indeed.


Gattaca

This is a movie about genetical engineering which can solve problems of degeneration. If parents are too degenerated to have a healthy child, they should be granted the right to have at least one healthy child to 'worship'. I have seen many parents in Europe who do not deserve a kid. Alchoholics, brutes, or just simply careless ones. I was blamed years ago when I confessed I do not believe in family, each child should be put in the proper nest. Europeans tend to choose life without children. Europe wanes as it is said. Europeans do not make surplus children. If white man is so superior as some say, why does he not care to multiply? I mean would other races not adopt blonde little children if Europe had surplus? I am chewing on this adoption thing because human genetical engineering is still taboo. How much longer? I do not care too much if this malled enough world gets even more malled, but the idea degenerated children may anytime die by the consequences of eating a piece of bread just hurts me. Can we do anything about it? I am sure the visions of Gattaca are giong to happen in states such as Japan and China first, and not in the EU or USA. By the way, the movie itself tried to represent genetical engineering as a dubious thing. I wonder why.


Lash and Crook

The emblems of enslavement in the pharaoh's hands prospect an ominous future. History is not over yet. Some people want to destroy the European milk-industry by spreading rumors about cow-milk. I found an article in a magazine trying to convince consumers cow-milk is wrong for nutrition because it is actually a lethal poison, it causes diabetes, cancer, and heart-attack. All this presented in a scientific style and supplied with legerdemain and lies. And such ruses have been going for years. There is an ancient goldsmith work showing two pastoral warriors intercepting a mounted Mediterranean warrior who killed their vital food basis, a cow. Just an analogy. Well, I smell a global conflict near, and this post is really the only thing I can do to avoid the worst. History must not be a competition between races as there are no races. Being superior and feeling superior are different. Superiors in various aspects also can feel superior if they are inferior in wisdom. All nationalist (racist) evil deeds have been urged by the feeling of superiority and not the being of it. Inferiors should not be afraid of real superiors, but they should seek help from them. Inferiority is not a sin, but annihilating both superiority and fake inferiority is. Superiority is ability, fake inferiority is beauty. Annihilating damnations in life is an act of care (love). If we have to realise the reality of the Pharaoh's Dream Theory one day, there shall be a lot of errors to correct. If the Pharaoh's Dream Theory is reality, everybody has the right to know it. That's all, folks!

[Csabi_B]

The Return of the Winged Serpent

Whether did the Winged Serpent decide to abandon the plan of colonisation and creation of mankind due to the mishap between the sons of God and the daughters of men? A tale has usually a beginning and an end, and the tale in the Book of Enoch has also an end when the sinner has to wait until the judgement:
"And on the day of the great judgement he shall be cast into the fire." This is an odd end. Why did the Most High not cast the sinner into the fire at once? May this mean the Most High provided the sinner some time to escape the fire? One way to escape is to grow old and vanish from existence before the day of judgement.

The religions of the Egyptians have indeed a judgement day though in a different meaning. Did the Egyptians misunderstand the Winged Serpent? If they denied the reality and invented corrupt ideas about the judgement day, they have erred again for the future generations. Was the original commandment "Go extinct through birth-control before the great day of judgement?" May the origin of human sacrifices be the commandment to reduce population of the 'sinners'?

May there really be a great day of judgement? It would be a generous act to tell the sinners the date so they could tell how much time is left for them. There is an odd calendar, the Aztek Calendar, which has a counter called the Long Count with a fixed end. I am not convinced if the Long Count is a counter, it may as well be just a brief form of date to express both the 260-day and the 360-day date of time. But what if the Long Count is really the indicator of the judgement day coming?

Some people say the Long Count ends at midwinter in 2012. There are only three years left. The population of the 'sinners' makes some billions. The error of the ancient generations may turn the Most High into a mass murderer as it seems. Will the Winged Serpent insist to the contract? God only knows...

[hdhuffman]

Csabi e-mailed me about his post above, with these words:

Hi,

I wrote an odd essay about the 'love affair' of sons of God and daughters of men. You can find it on the Legendarytimes forums in the Alternate History/Forbidden Archeology section, called Pharaoh's Dream. I may doubt your theory (or your fact) about the Great Design, but I do not doubt you did deep research in mythology and anything else. The reason I recommend my post is I miss your ideas about that 'love affair'. My theory is based on simply on the obscure lines in the bible, Book of Enoch, and some sumerian lines taken from RiaanBooysen's site. I am not a researcher obviously.

You are a very interesting figure to me. You are in disagreement with orthodox scientists, you foresee a new paradigm... The new paradigm may be the permittance to 'Heaven', the kingdom, the New World Order, and anything we call it. Our present paradigm is based on communication. Can be the new paradigm based on thinking? How was it said? Hear by hearing but do not be told. See by seeing but do not be shown. (My askew translation.) Are gods mute?

Well, I cannot give you money for your research, however, I trust your mere devotion and curiosity are going to reveal some interesting things about the Great Design or rather Srewed Up Colonisation.

And one more thing. I suspect there is a great machinery going on to erase and alter history and forge science. So the orthodoxy in orthodox science may mean other things too: inquisition, for example. I mean you should be a bit more paranoid than you seem to me. You know there are many pharisees and literators, the dogs lying in the manger before the cattle who bite you when you want to eat. Actually they are planning to kill all cattle and 'cattle', but this is just a conspiracy theory, not a fact. Good luck! (You are going to need it.)

Csabi
---------------------------

Now, I know a good deal about the paranoia shown by man throughout history, from my research, which has uncovered the single source of all the earliest ancient beliefs, the "ancient mysteries" of man on Earth [see http:theendofthemystery.blogspot.com to learn more of this]. Since I made the decision, before coming out with the revolutionary results of my research, to be as open and public as possible, I am responding to Csabi here, rather than by e-mail to him alone:

There is no single paradigm, or authoritative belief, shared by all mankind on Earth, although the idea of One God, in religious thought, and of a single, overarching true history, in scientific thought (the theory of evolution being the currently favored story), marks the leading edge of human aspirations--the universally felt need for a coherent overall explanation. The current process (toward a more universally held paradigm) is therefore more than just communication, it is one of individuals and whole peoples first clashing, then overcoming the divisive ancient tribal beliefs, the "holier than thou" attitudes and coercive religious judgments, of oneself and of others, which are in fact the incomplete, misunderstood, and long-misused fragments of the original source of all those earliest religious beliefs, the only complete copy of which is embodied in the great design of the "gods". The way forward, for both science and religion, is to study that design; it is a whole new field of study for man, even though it is older than recorded history (and older than every divided belief from every age of man).

At the beginning of my book I wrote, "...the presentation of these facts, after millennia of ignorance and religious division, is likely to be as much a test of our willingness to accept them as it is an opportunity to free ourselves of the worst consequences of that ignorance."

At the end of the book, I wrote: "Has mankind grown up enough, and grown back enough of its backbone and its common sense, to walk with even 'gods' without short-circuiting the mind provided us by Prime Creator? Or will we cling to the superstitions that lead inexorably to mindless dogma, 'an eye for an eye', and ritual human sacrifice? Knowledge of the Great Mapping is tied to a full knowledge of the past, and it is a test for mankind; that is why I have dared to confront the failures of both science and religion [in the last chapter of the book]. Will we face it as a task we are prepared to meet, or will we drop down on all fours and howl for blood and forgiveness in equal portions? The Wise await our decision -- for now."

My advice: be very slow to accept as literal truth the stories written by any "ancient" people, and don't let their paranoias cling to you. The Sumerians, the Egyptians, any of the earliest known peoples--these are not the true ancients, and they did not know the truth, only fragments, largely misunderstood images and symbols. Look to the source of all those later stories, from long before the beginning of known history and the divisions of mankind. Look to the design behind it all, and remember, knowledge is light, the only way to meet any perceived threat. Don't let ancient shadows haunt your life; they are in fact unreal.

Thanks for the opportunity to write about this. And I know, I probably haven't answered your specific questions, to your satisfaction.

Harry Dale Huffman

[Csabi_B]

Fortunately I mispelled the bad word (Srewed Up) in my e-mail. Folks, I deny responsibility for any forbidden word I tend to use in my personal messages and e-mails. I permit you to publish ANY message sent by me but be aware I never insist to the protocol of publications in my private expressions.