nothing new, but it’s not being more widely publicized – the middle kingdom may have been the first to “discover” the americas:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/books/01/13/1421/index.html
thoughts?
There have been at least 2 claims of Chinese explorers getting to the New World before Columbus or the Chinese fleet mentioned in the article.
- Hsi and Ho @ 2640 BC
- Hui Shun @458 AD
Check out this, http://news.independent.co.uk/world/science_medical/story.jsp?story=358001 perhaps when the Chinese got here they saw white faces???
didnt they “discover”/ reach south africa before the dutch too?
they also invented BJJ before the brazilians too 
lol @ Crimson Phoenix
Like the Rabid Sinophiles on this forum need any encouragement in their campaign to have Chinese culture recognized as the Uhr-culture of all humanity.
The only thing I really disliked about that story was Menzie’s assertion that “it’s unarguable that China got to the Americas before the Europeans did.'” Since when are Vikings not European? Many people beat Columbus but most of those weren’t interested in establishing longstanding colonies. Plus many of the previous groups weren’t the nuts for maintaining a written record that he was and so… kids are still taught 1492 and Columbus as the discovery despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
The Norse made it to North America about 1000 years before Columbus.
The Chinese made it on the Pacific side at about the same time.
The problem is the European history record which is always favouring the Spanish, The British, The French and the Portugese.
Now in their own time they were certainly big on exploration, but when held up to the reality of times message they were just mere secondary players to the true ancient explorers.
cheers
For those interested in doing a little internet research here is a partial list of expleditions that some historians claim predate Columbus’:
-
Hsi and Ho (Chinese) 2640 BCE
-
Votan, Wixepecocha, Sume, and Bochia (Indian) 800-400 BCE
-
Hui Shun (Chinese) 458
-
St. Brendan (Irish) 550
-
Bjarni Herjulfson (Norse) 986
-
Leif Ericson (Norse) 1003
-
Thorvald Ericson (Norse) 1004
-
Thorfinn Karlsefni (Norse) 1010
-
Prince Madog Ab Owain Gwynedd (Welsh) 1170, 1190
10)King Abubakari II (Malian) 1311
11)Paul Knutson (Norwegian) 1356
12)Johannes Scolp and Joao Vaz Corte Real (Danish and Portuguese) 1476
Some seem to be more credible than others.
Well, the Welsh claim is bogus and was used in the 1600’s in order to for the British to lay claim to the lands over the Spanish or the French by making the claim.
But, we all know how that turned out in the end
cheers
Whether Chinese explorers made it to the new world or not is pretty irrelevant as a matter of historical importance. Colonization and cultural fusion began in earnest with the Spaniards and Portuguese and later other Europeans. And in terms of what actually went down, that’s what matters.
It’s like saying that the Dogon people knew about that binary star in Sirius. Yeah, they did. But so what?
WELL GUESS WHAT GENIOUSES
The AMERICAS were discovered even long before that.
because of the NATIVE PEOPLES ALREADY LIVING THERE.
you Morons.
duhhh oh geee we never thought of that:rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Kill the savages.
you Morons
Actually I did make reference to aboriginal people living in America, so save your name calling and thumbs down for another thread.
The question, in light of that article, is whether the Asians crossing the landbridge between Asia and Alaska were the first. That article would have one believe that Caucasians from Europe somehow arrived long before the Asia to America migration. It would definitely put a spin on things if the “Native Americans” aka American Indians did the same thing to the original(?) Caucasian inhabitants that was later done to them.
oh yeah a “reference”
being part indian i can safely say that all this crap about who discovered america first and who was here way before him or her or whomthe fuk ever is MORONIC and totally Naive.
ill bet they have threads in europe about who discovered europe first,,the aliens or the atlantians.:rolleyes:
WHO GIVES A SH!T?
(CSN posted here and i dont think he is a moron,just to make that clear:D )
historians?
Nobody is even using the word ‘discovered’ without quotation marks around it for the very fact that we know that people were here when the explorers arrived. You have to learn to calm down, read, and ask questions before assuming you know what people do or do not know.
being part indian i can safely say that all this crap about who discovered america first and who was here way before him or her or whomthe fuk ever is MORONIC and totally Naive.
The man with the 13000 year old skull of a Caucasian women found in the Americas would have something to say about that since the previous “oldest skull discovered in North America” had Mongoloid characteristics and was 2000 years younger.
I never said the research was spot on, and I expected casual conversation about the theory. What I didn’t expect is that enormous chip on your shoulder.
Way to be pleasant. :rolleyes:
willow-
part “indian”?
I’d just like to say that the world is older than any culture and it will be here and we will all change again and again.
cheers
The man with the 13000 year old skull of a Caucasian women found in the Americas would have something to say about that since the previous “oldest skull discovered in North America” had Mongoloid characteristics and was 2000 years younger.
There is a sucker born every minute;)
Says the former Shaolin-Do guy
Willow Sword,
I keep re-reading this thread, and I honestly can’t figure out what set you off?
I’ll say it again, nobody used the word <discover> without putting it in quotes, those weren’t typos. That meant that the word <discover> was not to be taken literally (a silent way of acknowledging that they couldn’t discover that which had already been discovered). It was a pleasant conversation throwing about intermingling odd historical legends and facts regarding exploration of the Americas. The mention of the 12000 year old skull was introduced as theory not fact, and I intentionally referred to the theory as the “author’s beliefs”.
You call me a moron for not knowing that the ‘indians’ (as you call them) were present in the Americas prior to the arrival of any of the explorers mentioned in the thread. Not true, I 've known it for quite some time and I even posted a link in this thread that mentioned that the ‘indians’ showed up 10000 years ago @8000BCE which is a lot earlier than anybody on the list (2640BCE being the oldest).
You call me naive, even though I warned that the credibility of some of the expeditions mentioned on the list is questionable.
You called me a sucker, when I posted that the 12000 year old skull was just one man’s theory. In fact, I never once said that I believed that the skull proved anything, instead I referred to the “author’s beliefs”.
So I never disrespected you or your ‘indian’ heritage, but you went out of your way to disrespect me and then stuck with it, instead of being big enough to say, “I’m sorry, I read more into the posts than was there.”
What’s the problem?, because it isn’t in this thread.