Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
Big Bad Voodoo

Eskimo-missing puzzle

89 posts in this topic

Thank you for sharing a great story on the Eskimo. I found it a very interresting read,

Thanks a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tells a person who even doesnt knoe what history is.

Jay, you seems like smart person. If you want to use word history you might first learn what does it mean and what actually history is.

Also to participate in alternative history debate you must first know what is history to spoke about alternatives.

As one said before you must first know sided of the box to talk about out of box. Which obviously you dont know.

Well, allow me to educate you. History is science.

And if you ever want developed lecture I will be here to help you about it.

Dont take this as insult. ;)

No offense, L, but as to the nature of history, I'm going to trust the academic historians I know, work with, and were taught by over you. Feel free to look up my credentials, which appear elsewhere on this site, but telling me I don't know what history is the very soul of the sort of arrogance you decry.

--Jaylemurph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "Oera Linda Book" thread is about language and etymology, and that for several years now.

You stay away deliberately, right?

Why?

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to trust the academic historians I know.

Same here. Obviously only NY historians have diffrent view then rest of the world. I personally know several historians who teach me that is science.

But you dont need academics to tell you that. Use logic and common sense. What is science? Organized knowledge. If history isnt organized then I dont know what is.

History is science and therefore is self correcting. You might think its not because there is no white uniforms and lab. Allow me to inform you that history is best lab we have. Its only lab where you can test idea. Or as Etienne Gilson said "History is the only laboratory we have in which to test the consequences of thought."

I dont know how do you call it in your country but in my country we call it Humanistic science. And if you want to study history you go to college of Humanistic science.

Same thing in Germany (historical science) and so on. Also when historians gather to discuss open things its called Congress of historical science.

I realy think that maybe its US thing. I remember Shadowsot claimed once that history is method. Whatever that means.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same here. Obviously only NY historians have diffrent view then rest of the world. I personally know several historians who teach me that is science.

But you dont need academics to tell you that. Use logic and common sense. What is science? Organized knowledge. If history isnt organized then I dont know what is.

History is science and therefore is self correcting. You might think its not because there is no white uniforms and lab. Allow me to inform you that history is best lab we have. Its only lab where you can test idea. Or as Etienne Gilson said "History is the only laboratory we have in which to test the consequences of thought."

I dont know how do you call it in your country but in my country we call it Humanistic science. And if you want to study history you go to college of Humanistic science.

Same thing in Germany (historical science) and so on. Also when historians gather to discuss open things its called Congress of historical science.

I realy think that maybe its US thing. I remember Shadowsot claimed once that history is method. Whatever that means.

Science is the application of the scientific method. You can't apply the scientific method to history, ergo history is not science.

History is the study of the written records of mankind. Modern historians do indeed apply critical methodology to examining and synthesizing texts, and do indeed draw on archaeology (especially for older periods) in addition to written records, but that's not enough to make it scientific.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inuit writer Rachel Attituq Qitsualik:

“The Inuit cosmos is ruled by no one. There are no divine mother and father figures. There are no wind gods and solar creators. There are no eternal punishments in the hereafter, as there are no punishments for children or adults in the here and now.“

" Eskimo belive that animals as humans have souls. By killing animal or human is almost same. Spirit of killed person animal could hunt you down. Who know what those people think in freezing thriller when they saw aurora borealis or northern lights, some might think thats their pass away family members some thats gods, spirits, giants ..."

Your statement is in direct conflIct with your reference quote.

What are your sources for this research?

Your comment about Theresa Lee was rude and uncalled for.

Describing your hyper-ego as solipsistic was kind. You don't discuss, you just proclaim

Everyone else wrong.

Instead of getting defensive just present your evidence, your sources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Science is the application of the scientific method. You can't apply the scientific method to history, ergo history is not science.

History is the study of the written records of mankind. Modern historians do indeed apply critical methodology to examining and synthesizing texts, and do indeed draw on archaeology (especially for older periods) in addition to written records, but that's not enough to make it scientific.

Thats not what I have learn. Its just your view as Jays.

While you repeating your mantra which you learn as you learn letters do you mind to answer a questions which I raised in post you quoted?

You ignore facts.

They are:

In my country as in others its called science (such as Germany-They call it Historical science). Maybe it isnt in yours but same thing as doctors in USA have diseases which doesnt exist in my culture at all. In my country is called Povjesna znanost. Meaning Historical science. And its called Humanistic science. I do agree that common people say: He studing a history. But common people also think that Vikings have had horns on helmet.

Maybe you are also historian who never heard about meeting when historians from all the world gather which is called Congress of historical science. There people gahter to discuss open historical debates. And where they agree on things or do not agree.

As I said use reason not mantra. What is science? Organized knowledge. And if you think that history isnt that then ...

Your logic is this: Chemistry is study of elements therefore it isnt science. Which is bizzare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

cant we all just get along? do the inuit consider themselves "red" people? forgive my ignorance. i like the topic but i like when peace reigns supreme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

L they repeat their mantra, the same way you repeat yours. However you're both wrong and both right.

Yes, history is an actual science. (which is what you keep "mantraing" about)

However, history is part of those sciences, in which data is provided primarily from past events and for which there is usually no direct experimental data, such as cosmology, astronomy, astrophysics, geology, paleontology and archaeology. (Which is what you accuse Jay and Everdred to "mantra" about)

One can draw a distinction, between research directed towards identifying laws and research which seeks to determine how particular historical events occurred.Having said this, nobody ever said that the proverbial line between these sorts of science can be drawn neatly and evenly

And last but not least, historical claims are as much empirically verifiable than any other sort of claims.

So quite honestly, you ignore quite a few facts yourself. Mr; Pot, meet Mr. Kettle......

Edited by TheSearcher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tornits or Saumen kars are Inuit Yeti. So againt in cold snowy area we have creature that people say they saw in Tibet and China.

Here is sketch of Polo map.

MapWithShip.jpg

Question : Did Marco Polo actually create a map?

Question : or did Marco Polo give information which cartographers used to make their maps, for example the Fra Mauro Map.

answer this and let us discuss.

by the way, that isnt a map made by Marco polo you have posted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

cant we all just get along? do the inuit consider themselves "red" people? forgive my ignorance. i like the topic but i like when peace reigns supreme.

I do not think they do, but you would have to ask one yourself. Having said, this I know that the Canadian government does make a legal difference between Eskimo and First Nation. Not sure if this was by request by one group or the other, or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Searcher,

for my mantra I gave reasons. I didnt see them refuting those reasons.

I think that Im right and they wrong. This next is just speculation. I think that reason for our different opinion is because US citizens are tought differently.

Unless someone proove me that history isnt organized or that isnt knowledge I will think on history as science.

When I heard about Congress of historical methods/studies I will change my mind.

Whats the different between my and Jay view? Thats main question. What does it change? Perhaps fact that history is self correcting? also speculating.

Also sciences isnt just experiments.Judging on that we need to discover time machine and go in history then observe. We can done thought experiments although.

But to be good historian beside good expression and communication skills you need to have insights and travel in your mind to the past. You must use imagination in sense.

You must be able to do thought experiments. But what you can do in present is observation. Observation of many things related to history. Obesrvation is scientific method.

Ofcourse also you can study old manuscripts. And yes history use archaeology, geology, astronomy,...Same as physics use math.

What you mean by this: "historical claims are as much empirically verifiable than any other sort of claims."?

There was a time before scientists. Their meaning evolve. What is scientists? Whats historian then? Natural philosopher? Observer? Methodologist? Cmon.

Edited by the L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question : Did Marco Polo actually create a map?

Question : or did Marco Polo give information which cartographers used to make their maps, for example the Fra Mauro Map.

answer this and let us discuss.

by the way, that isnt a map made by Marco polo you have posted.

No one knows for sure.

What is known that FBI studied that map for 50 years and that originate from Venecie and that it was called Map with Ship.

That isnt map of Polo but if you wanted I can upload original Map with Ship aka Marco Polo s map.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Theres no evidence that the "Map with Ship" map was made from marco Polo's own maps.

Are there any maps made by marco polo himself?

Hell, he was famous and anyone can hitch on to his bandwagon and they did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PP L, do you have references, sources for your info????

I'm sure he's ignoring me... Avoidance.

Avoidance doesn't make the issue go away.

Theresa Lee Clark says she is Inupiaq. This would be a great opportunity to learn and debate, if she comes back, but you choose to insult her instead. Why?

Your arguments consist of a lot of, "you're wrong I am right". Show proof.

I've learned how important this is on this forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well L, lets agree to disagree, because you telling me to shut my mouth and like your post, when I obviously disagree with your post and the rather arrogant way you just answered, just cost you a lot of respect in my book.

And left me wondering how you managed to find this respect in the first place.

L, Jaylemurph is an historian. In the real sense, though he's only highly schooled in a specific area of history, IIRC.

You, on the other hand, continually exhibit to anyone that cares to look that you are completely innocent of any real knowledge of history.

It was a real joke when you said what you said about Jaylemurph. My advice is that you might want to pre-emptively apologize, as Jaylemurph has one of the most barbed tounges and savage wits on this forum.

Harte

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And left me wondering how you managed to find this respect in the first place.

L, Jaylemurph is an historian. In the real sense, though he's only highly schooled in a specific area of history, IIRC.

You, on the other hand, continually exhibit to anyone that cares to look that you are completely innocent of any real knowledge of history.

It was a real joke when you said what you said about Jaylemurph. My advice is that you might want to pre-emptively apologize, as Jaylemurph has one of the most barbed tounges and savage wits on this forum.

Harte

second.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And left me wondering how you managed to find this respect in the first place.

L, Jaylemurph is an historian. In the real sense, though he's only highly schooled in a specific area of history, IIRC.

You, on the other hand, continually exhibit to anyone that cares to look that you are completely innocent of any real knowledge of history.

It was a real joke when you said what you said about Jaylemurph. My advice is that you might want to pre-emptively apologize, as Jaylemurph has one of the most barbed tounges and savage wits on this forum.

Harte

Awww how sweet...

You and questionmark made perfect couple so it isnt surprise that you think same. What is surprising is that you two (so called sceptics) agreed on totaly fringe idea.(Jays)

And what what did I say about Jay? That he doesnt know what he is talking about when he say that history isnt science? Yup. I said it. And it aint funny. That could only be funny to ______ (say what ever you like) person. Such as you and Qustionmark.

Harte I already told you several times. I will repeat it again.

I dare you to quote me and respond to my particular part of post which you dont agree or keep quite. Its easy to attack person but attack my arguments if you dare.

I double dare you?Lets value your knowledge? What do you say? Please stop hiding behind sceptic mask whos tactic is hit and run.

Somehow I doubt that you will respond. Same as Jay. Because you know that there is nothing smart you can say as counter argument.

Jay might be historian. But he defenetly doesnt know what history is. Sorry if your world is crumbled. Maybe you look at Jay as on Holy Cow but thats your psychological problems which you need to get over with. Lets stick with old mistake rather then hear new voice.

With all due respect (yes Im still have respect to you and dignity to discuss with you even you show some traits which would usualy made to put you in ignore list) you should stop giving advice. You should first say something as counter argument to my arguments.

Why would I apologize? Because you and others affraid to look trough telescope? Now...thats joke.

second.

As usual. You are spamming and trolling.

Edited by the L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PP L, do you have references, sources for your info????

I'm sure he's ignoring me... Avoidance.

Avoidance doesn't make the issue go away.

Theresa Lee Clark says she is Inupiaq. This would be a great opportunity to learn and debate, if she comes back, but you choose to insult her instead. Why?

Your arguments consist of a lot of, "you're wrong I am right". Show proof.

I've learned how important this is on this forum.

Where did I insulted her?

On which you want proof? I claimed many things in this thread. Quote me. Its button under each my post and it said on it "Quote"

I dont have issuses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Theres no evidence that the "Map with Ship" map was made from marco Polo's own maps.

Are there any maps made by marco polo himself?

Hell, he was famous and anyone can hitch on to his bandwagon and they did.

I think Map with ship is Chinese origin.

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_rel_module=post&attach_id=57826

Here is map

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_WL_aeESeqQI/SVvW4FIIoUI/AAAAAAAAALA/mviWtK2oges/s1600-h/rossi.jpg

Notice Chinese (?) letters

Here is article

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Did-Marco-Polo-Discovered-America-200-Years-Before-Columbus-62347.shtml

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is on more link

http://memory.loc.go...g7800 ct001372r))

Place names in Arabic. Chinese in two columns, on right side of map. Text in Venetian Italian.

Further description of map appeared in article: Bagrow, Leo, 1948. The maps from the home archives of the descendants of a friend of Marco Polo. Imago Mundi, vol. V.

I dont know why link wont work. After you click on it add in tab two )) and then press enter.

Edited by the L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Suddenly conversation cooled.

Harte I wait for your post. Dont be like Questionmark. :st

Edited by the L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inuit writer Rachel Attituq Qitsualik:

“The Inuit cosmos is ruled by no one. There are no divine mother and father figures. There are no wind gods and solar creators. There are no eternal punishments in the hereafter, as there are no punishments for children or adults in the here and now.“

" Eskimo belive that animals as humans have souls. By killing animal or human is almost same. Spirit of killed person animal could hunt you down. Who know what those people think in freezing thriller when they saw aurora borealis or northern lights, some might think thats their pass away family members some thats gods, spirits, giants ..."

http://en.wikipedia....Inuit_mythology

Ofcourse they have had belives and myths. But they were different from others myths. First quote I found interesting.

Edited by the L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where did I insulted her?

On which you want proof? I claimed many things in this thread. Quote me. Its button under each my post and it said on it "Quote"

I dont have issuses.

All of it.

Your opening quote is in conflict with much of what you wrote.

And the insult, post #20 "I doubt that Theresa Lee Clark will ever show up because obviously she realized that there is no misconceptions here."

It sounds very arrogant.

What's obvious is that you can't know a culture until you've immersed yourself in it. Researching online only is not complete. What you have is interesting information, but choppy and needs backing up. Especially if you're called on it and you are being called on it several times.

I hope Theresa Lee Clark comes back so we can all learn the discrepancies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Searcher,

Good to see you back. I think that in part it has always been a political issue, the Inuit people did not have any representatives present when the treaties were signed.When it became more financially viable for gov't and industry to develop the resources,and of course the military and NORAD. When it came time to negotiate a treaty with the Inuit people that the gov't (and we know how frugal they are,haha)felt it would affect the treaties that had been originally signed with the Aboriginal people,so they were given a classification that isolated them as a distinct and different culture.

jmccr8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.