Ancient Egyptians: Nicotine and Cocaine?

[Harte]

13 hours ago, kmt_sesh said:

It says: "To make a potato p..." What's that last word?

Pudding. Both pages are pudding recipes.

Harte

[back to earth]

Well, this claim got debunked on soooo many levels     .  The other day, for some  reason , a person mentioned the 'cocaine mummies' another goes  ' ... and  ,  that showed the ancient Egyptians had trade with Sth America ."

Me;   "Not really. "

"Why ? "

 

<  unleashes avalanche of multiple counter evidences >     - thanks guys   !  

[docyabut2]

I `ve always contributive to the potato  for my long life of 74,  I am a meat and potato person  I guess its the Irish in me

Edited May 29, 2017 by docyabut2

[kmt_sesh]

12 minutes ago, back to earth said:

Well, this claim got debunked on soooo many levels     .  The other day, for some  reason , a person mentioned the 'cocaine mummies' another goes  ' ... and  ,  that showed the ancient Egyptians had trade with Sth America ."

Me;   "Not really. "

"Why ? "

 

<  unleashes avalanche of multiple counter evidences >     - thanks guys   !  

Yes, this one's been settled.

I'm not really surprised you meet people who mention the "cocaine mummies."  A visitor at the museum was asking me about them last weekend. It pops up for me now and then. Many people just aren't too well informed. Still, it's better than the grown adults who want to fawn over Ancient Aliens. I meet them, too.

[docyabut2]

35 minutes ago, kmt_sesh said:

Yes, this one's been settled.

I'm not really surprised you meet people who mention the "cocaine mummies."  A visitor at the museum was asking me about them last weekend. It pops up for me now and then. Many people just aren't too well informed. Still, it's better than the grown adults who want to fawn over Ancient Aliens. I meet them, too.

right kmt if there was this trade of  cocaine, of which there are no records,  there sure would be a whole lot more Egyptian mummies found addicted to it, not just a few   so some are saying  it was aliens bringing the cocaine, what a joke !!

Edited May 29, 2017 by docyabut2

[kmt_sesh]

54 minutes ago, docyabut2 said:

right kmt if there was this trade of  cocaine, of which there are no records,  there sure would be a whole lot more Egyptian mummies found addicted to it, not just a few   so some are saying  it was aliens bringing the cocaine, what a joke !!

Yeah, let's just keep aliens out of it. The "cocaine trade" by itself is implausible enough. But I admit it, I had to chuckle over your comment about a lot more Egyptian mummies "found addicted." Not too many mummies have to worry about getting addicted to controlled substances...because they're dead people. Maybe in life, but not in death.

It just reminds me of some fun questions I get in my museum work. One of my favorites from both kids and adults is: "Are those real live mummies?" I'll reply, "They're real mummies, all right, but they're not alive anymore."

[back to earth]

Thing is , kids today  (after all the movies   ) probably need that explained to them !  

 

[kmt_sesh]

Yes, I've no doubt. Young kids are very impressionable and easily influenced. Many is the time I've talked with little kids who've seen one of the Night at the Museum movies and are convinced our mummies will come to life. I try to ease their concerns by explaining it happens only during the night. LOL I'm terrible. It's probably best I'm not a parent because I'd be pulling practical jokes on my kids all the time.

[back to earth]

    remember this when I was still with ex (and her 3 little boys )   , I am telling them a 'story' and she goes past at this point ;

 

" .... and now , the monster under the little boys bed has got SOOO big , the bed has lifted up and the feet aren't even on the floor, the bed is all wibbly wobbly like its sitting on an exercise ball, and the boy....  "  

And she be all like   .....      "   So ....  you staying the night are you ....   in THEIR ROOM   to stop them freaking out all night !  "  

[kmt_sesh]

Oh, yes, that would be me! What fun! Hm, I wonder if it's too late to have kids.

[back to earth]

24 minutes ago, kmt_sesh said:

Yes, I've no doubt. Young kids are very impressionable and easily influenced. Many is the time I've talked with little kids who've seen one of the Night at the Museum movies and are convinced our mummies will come to life. I try to ease their concerns by explaining it happens only during the night. LOL I'm terrible. It's probably best I'm not a parent because I'd be pulling practical jokes on my kids all the time.

 

A bit of a   ' Mr Appleton '  are you  ? 

 

 

I love Mr Appleton !     

[Peter Cox]

4 hours ago, kmt_sesh said:

Yeah, let's just keep aliens out of it. The "cocaine trade" by itself is implausible enough. But I admit it, I had to chuckle over your comment about a lot more Egyptian mummies "found addicted." Not too many mummies have to worry about getting addicted to controlled substances...because they're dead people. Maybe in life, but not in death.

It just reminds me of some fun questions I get in my museum work. One of my favorites from both kids and adults is: "Are those real live mummies?" I'll reply, "They're real mummies, all right, but they're not alive anymore."

Aliens? It could not have been the Aliens, as they gave modern man the ability to time travel, and this is clearly the work of time travelers. I think my next business idea will be to go back to Ancient Egypt and open a rehab center for cocaine addicted mummies. (well hope they not mummies when I get there as that would be to late then lol) 

[Harte]

13 hours ago, kmt_sesh said:

Yes, this one's been settled.

I'm not really surprised you meet people who mention the "cocaine mummies."  A visitor at the museum was asking me about them last weekend. It pops up for me now and then. Many people just aren't too well informed. Still, it's better than the grown adults who want to fawn over Ancient Aliens. I meet them, too.

I think that if you have heard of the cocaine mummies, you're somewhat more informed than the average person.

Harte

[Khaemwaset]

      Dutiful in their frugality, the work house kitchen had been ordered to use the ground up mummy bits now stored in the basement, the major portion of which the beadle supplied to the colourists who manufactured some fugitive but lovely brown paint for portraitists at the academy.  The gritty leftovers were thus very cheap and therefore perfect for cooking the gruel which the institution fed to the children; all that was elsewise required was to add some river water and a little dried bread.  For some reason, the children seemed to like it better with the cheap powdery addition, so it was continued.

Oliver Twist (eyes shining and pupils dilated):  "Please sir, I want some more."

Mr Bumble (looking up from his Sack laced potato pudding) :  "More?"

 

Consequences

Edited May 29, 2017 by Khaemwaset

[Hanslune]

11 hours ago, Peter Cox said:

Aliens? It could not have been the Aliens, as they gave modern man the ability to time travel, and this is clearly the work of time travelers. I think my next business idea will be to go back to Ancient Egypt and open a rehab center for cocaine addicted mummies. (well hope they not mummies when I get there as that would be to late then lol) 

Beware of those mummies they are all cheapskates and will stiff you for the money.

[Peter Cox]

13 hours ago, Hanslune said:

Beware of those mummies they are all cheapskates and will stiff you for the money.

They keep taking my cartouche that has my name and address on it so I keep getting lost. 

Either that or that spike my drink with cocaine... not sure....

[Hanslune]

A report on a 'intermediary' trading culture - of the type we were referring to  that may have controlled/aided trade between parts of Asia

http://www.thenational.ae/uae/evidence-of-4000-year-old-trading-post-uncovered-on-sir-bani-yas-island

Dilmun

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dilmun

When I lived in the ME I sent to Dilmun sites in Saudi, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar and the UAE - especially the one whether the Danish archaeologists were working!

http://archive.archaeology.org/9705/abstracts/magan.html

http://en.unipress.dk/udgivelser/b/bronze-age-architecture,-the/

http://cphpost.dk/news/danish-archaeologists-find-3500-year-old-gemstones.html

Magan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magan_(civilization)

 

 

 

 

[kmt_sesh]

On May 29, 2017 at 1:47 PM, Hanslune said:

Beware of those mummies they are all cheapskates and will stiff you for the money.

Well, the average mummy is very stiff. It's in their nature.

By the way, interesting post above this one. I haven't read much about the Magan in a very long time, I don't think. Other than the Middle East did you also work in Atlantis? You're not that old, are you?

 

[Hanslune]

2 hours ago, kmt_sesh said:

Well, the average mummy is very stiff. It's in their nature.

By the way, interesting post above this one. I haven't read much about the Magan in a very long time, I don't think. Other than the Middle East did you also work in Atlantis? You're not that old, are you?

 

Magan - yes not much I wonder if it went out of favour? I viewed a number of purported sites in Oman.

Not quite but Rupert did of course. He thought their child laboulaws really sucked. He liked to hire lots of 9 year old's as executives - paid them in candy and made all the real decisions himself. But a bunch of liberal bleeding hearts thought the young darlings should be going to a proper apprenticeship, living with their parents, being taught or learning how to drive the popular Vectron space ships, you know Atlantis kid stuff.

[Peter Cox]

7 hours ago, Hanslune said:

Magan - yes not much I wonder if it went out of favour? I viewed a number of purported sites in Oman.

Not quite but Rupert did of course. He thought their child laboulaws really sucked. He liked to hire lots of 9 year old's as executives - paid them in candy and made all the real decisions himself. But a bunch of liberal bleeding hearts thought the young darlings should be going to a proper apprenticeship, living with their parents, being taught or learning how to drive the popular Vectron space ships, you know Atlantis kid stuff.

and that ladies and gentlemen is where all the trouble started.

[C L Palmer]

Why all this resistance to trans-oceanic contact? People have been traveling a lot more than we give them credit for. Somehow the aborigines arrived in Australia. Somehow the face of the whole earth, with very few exceptions, was peopled. We quibble about how, but what does it matter? Why do we insist the Old World and the New World had no communication until Columbus (or an isolated trip by Leif Ericson)? The Polynesians used boats to explore and settle much of the Pacific Ocean. We know they had some contact and trade with South America according to crops such as the yam. Is it really so hard to believe that Egypt could obtain items from the Americas? I don't get the animus and hard-headedness that emerges whenever evidence for diffusionism is discovered. Why are some people so invested in these old models of the peopling of the world?

[Harte]

1 hour ago, C L Palmer said:

Why all this resistance to trans-oceanic contact? People have been traveling a lot more than we give them credit for. Somehow the aborigines arrived in Australia. Somehow the face of the whole earth, with very few exceptions, was peopled. We quibble about how, but what does it matter? Why do we insist the Old World and the New World had no communication until Columbus (or an isolated trip by Leif Ericson)? 

There is no insistence that there was no contact.

There is insistence that there is no evidence for contact.

No Anthropologist or Historian has suggested it is impossible.

Why do you believe this?

1 hour ago, C L Palmer said:

The Polynesians used boats to explore and settle much of the Pacific Ocean. We know they had some contact and trade with South America according to crops such as the yam. Is it really so hard to believe that Egypt could obtain items from the Americas? I don't get the animus and hard-headedness that emerges whenever evidence for diffusionism is discovered. Why are some people so invested in these old models of the peopling of the world?

Why do you believe there is any valid evidence?

For a piece of evidence to indicate a previously unknown contact, there must be no other reasonable explanation for the evidence other than that contact.

Due to the fact that  no such evidence exists, there is no valid evidence for pre-Columbian contact between the Old and New Worlds (with the exception of the Vikings, as you noted.)

This particular thread has shown that the "evidence" in this case can be explained more readily in other ways. So why leap to the conclusion of contact when it's not necessary?

After all, even if it was true that the cocaine was ancient and came from the Americas, there's no evidence at all to corroborate such contact. And such theories need corroboration for acceptance.

Even the scientists that discovered the cocaine in the mummies stated very clearly that they didn't consider it evidence for transatlantic contact.

Harte

[Hanslune]

1 hour ago, Harte said:

There is no insistence that there was no contact.

 

Yeah, what he said. Personally I believe the Polynesians did push on and reached the Americas but were absorbed or destroyed by the larger cultures there. So far no evidence that they made it has been found. The sweet potato - and its story - still remains a mystery!

I went to conference once and one discussion I remember clearly was about whether a Roman ship going to Cadiz, or the Cornish tin mines, or down the NW coast of Africa could have made it to the Americas. Yes it could especially if it was wine carrying ship, and the crew could survive that long a period at sea. It was possible for European/Asian ships - with difficulty - to get to the Americas, yes but they left no trace of having done so - on either shores. The Americas had a truncated maritime ability but even they MIGHT have traveled across - but again no evidence.

I would also note that the Inuits and Aleuts tended to discover, and rediscover, the Americas and Asia on a weekly basis for thousands of years.

 

Edited October 17, 2017 by Hanslune

[C L Palmer]

On 10/17/2017 at 5:43 PM, Harte said:

 

For a piece of evidence to indicate a previously unknown contact, there must be no other reasonable explanation for the evidence other than that contact.

Due to the fact that  no such evidence exists, there is no valid evidence for pre-Columbian contact between the Old and New Worlds (with the exception of the Vikings, as you noted.)

 

Do we apply the "no other reasonable explanation" requirement to every other discipline? That would at least be consistent. However, if that were the case we wouldn't be hearing about new "early humans" all the time. It's much more reasonable (and likely) that most of these finds are branches of primates that have gone off in other directions. Also, who gets to define "reasonable?" From what I've seen, if it agrees with you, it's reasonable, and if it doesn't, it's unreasonable. 

So, a reasonable explanation is that the scientists were doing lines of cocaine and chewing tobacco while they opened up the mummies (okay, maybe right before), and every other similar finding has a similar explanation. Why? That doesn't challenge my Bering-first, Bering-only paradigm, so it must be the explanation.

"There is no valid evidence for pre-Columbian contact..." Do you even read the articles on this site? The problem is that every time evidence comes up, the same criteria is used to dismiss it (it doesn't have corroboration), so there's never any other evidence because each piece is summarily dismissed. If you look at all of the evidence that has been dismissed for no other reason than being an exception, it begins to appear that the exceptions might be the rule. 

No real scientist would deny evidence because it contradicts his favorite theory. He would welcome the evidence and relish the adventure of finding a theory that fits the new information. That's the difference between science and dogma.

[Hanslune]

3 hours ago, C L Palmer said:

Do we apply the "no other reasonable explanation" requirement to every other discipline? That would at least be consistent. However, if that were the case we wouldn't be hearing about new "early humans" all the time. It's much more reasonable (and likely) that most of these finds are branches of primates that have gone off in other directions. Also, who gets to define "reasonable?" From what I've seen, if it agrees with you, it's reasonable, and if it doesn't, it's unreasonable. 

So, a reasonable explanation is that the scientists were doing lines of cocaine and chewing tobacco while they opened up the mummies (okay, maybe right before), and every other similar finding has a similar explanation. Why? That doesn't challenge my Bering-first, Bering-only paradigm, so it must be the explanation.

"There is no valid evidence for pre-Columbian contact..." Do you even read the articles on this site? The problem is that every time evidence comes up, the same criteria is used to dismiss it (it doesn't have corroboration), so there's never any other evidence because each piece is summarily dismissed. If you look at all of the evidence that has been dismissed for no other reason than being an exception, it begins to appear that the exceptions might be the rule. 

No real scientist would deny evidence because it contradicts his favorite theory. He would welcome the evidence and relish the adventure of finding a theory that fits the new information. That's the difference between science and dogma.

Please list the evidence for pre-columbian/Norse contact you feel is being ignored and should be reevaluated as 'proof' or evidence of said contact.

Additionally in your opinion what do the follow up examinations of other Egyptian mummies demonstrate?

 

Edited October 19, 2017 by Hanslune