Re: A China-Sumer connection

phippsmartin_at_hotmail.com
Date: 03/04/05 

Date: 4 Mar 2005 05:10:31 -0800

Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> Neither I nor Martyn
> "flamed you first" or at all.
>
> Unless you consider requests for evidence to back you statements
> "flaming."

When they have already provided the evidence you are asking for in
parallel posts, yes, that is flaming, especially when you are calling
them "kooks" and "loons". It was immature of Comm to reply with the
"arrogant bastards" and "too White" comments, but understandable. It
was presumptuous of PKM to dismiss everything in that Indo-European
Journal as "tainted" but a reasonable reaction by someone who's ideas
are being dismissed by people on this group.

Let's recap. I came on here asking if there was any reason to suppose
that China and Sumer, two civilizations that developed in parallel,
might have had contact that resulted in their simultaneous and similar
advances. Coom and PKM both said "Yes", at first with Comm arguing for
a Turkish link by land and PKM arguing for a Malay link by sea. Comm
and PKM quickly found common ground and for that they were labelled as
"kooks" and "loons" and accused of not providing any evidence, even as
they provided plenty in the form of quotations of old Sumerian myths
about sea faring "fishmen". Comm also provided a weblink that pointed
to the "silk road" being in operation before the Roman era and I,
myself, was able to find a link that claimed that the Sumerians had
contact with the Turks by land and the Indians by sea. It really does
seem to me that 5000-6000 years ago there was plenty of contact between
the Turks, the Sumers, the Indians, the Malays and the Chinese, perhaps
even enough to satisfy sceptics into believing that there was enough
knowledged shared amongst everybody in the "region" that the parallel
growth of civilizations in those areas at that time was no coincidence.
 So what's the problem? As I said before, we're not talking about
aliens or Atlanteans or Gods or Demons but men learning from each other
over great distances over large periods of time. Why is any serious
discussion of ancient civilizations east of the Euphrates river
automatically going to be labelled this way?

Martin

Quantcast