1421

[Guest guest]

The book and the theory may be bogus, but there is indeed a mystery about Asian dogs in Peru. I ran across it years ago, thought it would make an interesting article. I squirreled away the reference and now can't find it readily. But I'll check, Joe, and report back.

best,

phoebe

*******************************

www.phoebewray.net

pwray@...

Member of Broad Universe

********************************

************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

[Guest guest]

The book and the theory may be bogus, but there is indeed a mystery about Asian dogs in Peru. I ran across it years ago, thought it would make an interesting article.

Supposedly this author is "full of bunkem" but even so, even if the details are wrong or spurious, the story/myth itself makes sense whether it's the Chinese, the Hebrews, the Greeks (ever heard of The Mystery Stone of New Mexico?), the Norwegians, the Polynesians -- or the Atlanteans, for that matter. In spite of the Eurocentric history of the "new world," that world was hardly empty and was only new to (some) of them. It has a history that we'll never be able to discover fershure, lacking development of a time travel machine. One thing I'd really like to know is why the Navajo and the Tibetans look so similar, have such similar art forms (sand mandalas) and clothing styles, etc. Anybody know if there's also a linguistic connection?

Sorry if this has gotten to be off topic but I'm still curious about the astrological influences that might have occurred in the time frame of about 500-600 years ago. Even if the 1421 book is bunk, that seems to have been a very active century.

Blissings,

SamSee what's free at AOL.com.

[Guest guest]

Joe, all,

The problem of eurocentric history is not countered by anything other than

non-eurocentric history. It hardly matters what are the historical details

of non-european activity in our American hemisphere if they are only

rewoven eurocentrically.

But, then, myth, whether one psychologizes myth or reifies myth, is

primarily understood by us eurocentrically in any case. Right? We impose

our categories learned recently in the scheme of things since we've

differentiated myth from the magical participation in myth. Twas a

european move, that.

***

To step back and appreciate only the material evidence, evidence of the

array which also includes myth and histporical inferences, (see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_pre-Columbian_trans-oceanic_contact,)

is to understand how hard it is to let the gaps in our knowledge just be

gappy.

!

Meanwhile, the work of population genetics is extremely fit to the task of

understanding semblences. (I recall this has been picked up here several

years ago.) (See:

http://www.cambridgedna.com/genealogy-dna-genetic-genealogy.php if you

want to see where you stand in line.)

Also:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/12/1212_021213_journeyofman.html

http://www.nature.com/news/2004/040927/pf/040927-10_pf.html

Etc.

We all come from Africa.

***

Eurocentricity may well have as much to do with the fortune provided by a

temperate location than any other founding factor.

***

There's no reason dogs couldn't have come over the Bering bridge. From Asia.

regards,