• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Spanish Documents Suggest Irish Arrived in America Before Columbus

native americans in the southwest have tales of giants with red hair up to 7 feet tall. Their description is identical to europeans, mainly the vikings, but the timelines do not match viking entrance here. They have found remains of european like people all over this country, long before the vikings supposedly came here.

This likely might mean that europeans settled here long before even the vikings.

native americans also have tales of a flying lizard that lives in the sun and grant wishes, doesn't make it true, there are no european remains either, theres a few theories, myths and hoaxes out there, but there is no evidence of europeans in america, outside of the handful of small viking settlements in northern canada.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Columbian_trans-oceanic_contact_theories
 
I disagree, I think we should see history as we do science; something that is constantly evolving as our understanding of the past improves.

I'm not saying that we should discontinue Columbus day or anything. But we should continue to grow in our understanding of what really happened.

What is it you disagree with, science and facts, or that the discovery by Columbus had the most impact?
 
Meaning they weren't 'native' either.

Actually, there is some suspicion that they were preceded by an older people now gone the way for the weaker.
 
Actually, there is some suspicion that they were preceded by an older people now gone the way for the weaker.

I read that, but the 'evidence' is pretty weak. My point is, no one is 'native'. Unless , of course they live in Kenya. Then they're native.
 
native americans also have tales of a flying lizard that lives in the sun and grant wishes, doesn't make it true, there are no european remains either, theres a few theories, myths and hoaxes out there, but there is no evidence of europeans in america, outside of the handful of small viking settlements in northern canada.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Columbian_trans-oceanic_contact_theories

Actually there has been quite alot of evidence. For one the whelsh and the irish were reported in the tales by the vikings who settled in canada in newfoundland as better and more advanced at seafaring than the vikings.

The vikings also wrote about how the natives there used a language almost identical to whelsh, and that the natives were not surprised by white people and were used to them, indicating the irish and others very well knew. There is also testing done on mummies that show cocaine and tobacco in mummies, both substances were native to the western hemisphere.

There are also numerous roman and greek artifacts still found all over america, granted they could have arrives by sailers blown of course and landing in the americas. The odd part is ancient roman maps list florida and peru, and call peru perusta. Infact evidence has been credible enough to review that ancient egypt traded with south america, and evidence has been mounting up for a long time claiming ancient rome was travelling to the americas to both north and south america.

One recent find in december 2015 lists an ancient roman sword, ancient roman shields, and wrecked ancient roman ships, in an island off canada, with european burial mounds off the coast about 35 feet deep.
 
Actually there has been quite alot of evidence. For one the whelsh and the irish were reported in the tales by the vikings who settled in canada in newfoundland as better and more advanced at seafaring than the vikings.

The vikings also wrote about how the natives there used a language almost identical to whelsh, and that the natives were not surprised by white people and were used to them, indicating the irish and others very well knew. There is also testing done on mummies that show cocaine and tobacco in mummies, both substances were native to the western hemisphere.

There are also numerous roman and greek artifacts still found all over america, granted they could have arrives by sailers blown of course and landing in the americas. The odd part is ancient roman maps list florida and peru, and call peru perusta. Infact evidence has been credible enough to review that ancient egypt traded with south america, and evidence has been mounting up for a long time claiming ancient rome was travelling to the americas to both north and south america.

One recent find in december 2015 lists an ancient roman sword, ancient roman shields, and wrecked ancient roman ships, in an island off canada, with european burial mounds off the coast about 35 feet deep.

Let's see that ancient Roman map.
 
Actually there has been quite alot of evidence. For one the whelsh and the irish were reported in the tales by the vikings who settled in canada in newfoundland as better and more advanced at seafaring than the vikings.

The vikings also wrote about how the natives there used a language almost identical to whelsh, and that the natives were not surprised by white people and were used to them, indicating the irish and others very well knew. There is also testing done on mummies that show cocaine and tobacco in mummies, both substances were native to the western hemisphere.

There are also numerous roman and greek artifacts still found all over america, granted they could have arrives by sailers blown of course and landing in the americas. The odd part is ancient roman maps list florida and peru, and call peru perusta. Infact evidence has been credible enough to review that ancient egypt traded with south america, and evidence has been mounting up for a long time claiming ancient rome was travelling to the americas to both north and south america.

One recent find in december 2015 lists an ancient roman sword, ancient roman shields, and wrecked ancient roman ships, in an island off canada, with european burial mounds off the coast about 35 feet deep.

check the link i posted it lists all of those theories, unfortunately it will never truly be known because western europeans burned all their books as "heresy" destroying virtually every version of history they wrote down, so we will never truly know. Personally I beleive that mansa musa's kingdom traveled to south america regularly and traded with them. The japanese, korean and Polynesian theories are quite believable as well.

unfortunately white supremacist groups and mormons, are the main groups (outside of anthropologists and other real academics of course) who focus on Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact theories. Which is why the vikings and welsh theories get vastly more attention and funding. the kennewick man and the solutrean hypothesis are good examples. Meanwhile polyenesian sweet potatoes or the theory that columbus' own voyage was setup to prove claims of a new world that africans had already made, receive much less attention
 
Let's see that ancient Roman map.

macrobius-map-514x355.jpg

Early New World Maps | ancient america

That is a later roman map, there was one showing almost the same from 200 years prior, but I can not find it now. Notice how they label it as india, next to the caspian sea, which by modern standards we know is far from true. I also need to find the old greek maps that show similar, and list parts of the new world as china. It seemed both rome and greece sailed west like columbus and was so sure they would find no new continent before hitting asia that they labeled the new world as part of asia, and the caspian sea as what is now known as the pacific, which shows they were very good at mapping out terrain but poor at pinpointing coordinates.
 
check the link i posted it lists all of those theories, unfortunately it will never truly be known because western europeans burned all their books as "heresy" destroying virtually every version of history they wrote down, so we will never truly know. Personally I beleive that mansa musa's kingdom traveled to south america regularly and traded with them. The japanese, korean and Polynesian theories are quite believable as well.

unfortunately white supremacist groups and mormons, are the main groups (outside of anthropologists and other real academics of course) who focus on Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact theories. Which is why the vikings and welsh theories get vastly more attention and funding. the kennewick man and the solutrean hypothesis are good examples. Meanwhile polyenesian sweet potatoes or the theory that columbus' own voyage was setup to prove claims of a new world that africans had already made, receive much less attention

I read the link, all those theories have strong evidence, and only one was rejected, and not because evidence, but because the historians did not like that it agrees with their theories, which was the one on cocaine in mummies.

I do not like to lock myself into an interperatation of history, history is massive, and probably 99.9 percent of it has no trace, leaving the preserved .1 percent to tell us what happened. Alot of the solid absolute evidence would be gone today, we assume everyone in history with importance had to build massive stone structures, but a civilization who would have used wooden houses and simple buriels would leave no trace today.

I also believe that it is impossible that until the late 1400's, no one ever stumbles across the americas. Like the indian stories of red haired giants and the indians having to kill off blond and red haired people to take their land, their stories are close to uniform. Archaeologists now think that was very possible, If a bridge of land an ice existed between siberia and america during the ic age, it likely existed between europe and canada, which means it was very possible europeans had walked over here tens of thousands of years ago, and were later over run by asians.

Also those white supremist versions of history are junk, everyone knows that.
 
I read the link, all those theories have strong evidence, and only one was rejected, and not because evidence, but because the historians did not like that it agrees with their theories, which was the one on cocaine in mummies.

I do not like to lock myself into an interperatation of history, history is massive, and probably 99.9 percent of it has no trace, leaving the preserved .1 percent to tell us what happened. Alot of the solid absolute evidence would be gone today, we assume everyone in history with importance had to build massive stone structures, but a civilization who would have used wooden houses and simple buriels would leave no trace today.

I also believe that it is impossible that until the late 1400's, no one ever stumbles across the americas. Like the indian stories of red haired giants and the indians having to kill off blond and red haired people to take their land, their stories are close to uniform. Archaeologists now think that was very possible, If a bridge of land an ice existed between siberia and america during the ic age, it likely existed between europe and canada, which means it was very possible europeans had walked over here tens of thousands of years ago, and were later over run by asians.

Also those white supremist versions of history are junk, everyone knows that.

your talking about the si-te-cah tribe and ive got bad news for you thats another hoax....its completely fabricated by the paranormal conspiracy theorists, shapeshifters, Atlantis, area 51, ufos, etc. Even the existence of the indian tales themselves arent even real theyre another group that likes to spread nonsense about this, because it shows that aliens contacted humans and built the pyramids in egypt, central america, and asia

The red hair is true, but simply because the pigment in dark hair nearly always turns red after centuries of burial in certain temperatures and soil chemistry. This is evident in mummies from all over the world, and even evident in ancient Native American scalps. There is no science-based reason to suspect that the Lovelock Culture had red hair; it was almost certainly black, like all native Americans.

The cannibalism is also true, but based only on a very few human bones found at Lovelock Cave that had been split for the removal of their marrow. All others had not. The rarity of such bones there suggests that it was an exceedingly uncommon practice, probably only in times of great famine, and was certainly not the norm.

So where did this idea come from that the Lovelock Culture was a tribe of red-haired cannibalistic giants? Most sources claim it is a Paiute oral tradition. So I did my best to read as much Paiute legend that I could find, having no actual Paiutes on hand to recite oral traditions for me. I found their lore to be speckled with occasional mentions of lone giants in fanciful tales, I found no mention of a tribe called the Si-Te-Cah, a tribe of giants, or any red-haired anybody, cannibalistic or not. The Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe maintains an active web presence and archives a number of tales, and although you'd think such a prominent urban legend would be mentioned in what they publish, it is not.

What I found, in fact, is that every mention of the Si-Te-Cah appears only in paranormalist books and websites that promote the claim that a Paiute oral tradition says the red-haired giant cannibals were real. Every mention of the Saidaku appears in scholarly books and articles about the Lovelock Culture, with no mention whatsoever of red hair or gigantism. If you're looking for the legend, search for Si-Te-Cah; if you're looking for the true history, search for Saidaku.

https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4390
 
Last edited:
your talking about the si-te-cah tribe and ive got bad news for you thats another hoax....its completely fabricated by the paranormal conspiracy theorists,, shapeshifters, Atlantis, area 51, ufos, etc the existence of indian tales themselves arent even real theyre another group they likes to spread nonsense about this because it shows that aliens contacted humans and built the pyramids in egypt central america and asia



https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4390

I believe there was a tribe in arizona wth a similiar story. There are also stories of chasin blond and red haired people out of the land they later inhabited.

When it comes to giants I look at it logically rather than ufo alien sense. The average size of man back then was alot shorter than now. A group of people lets say 5 foot tall would consider a group averaging 7 foot tall as giants. This is crow magnons averaged 6.6 foot, and many got much taller. Anatomically they are very similiar to people of norther europe, and many people of northern europe were quite taller than average around the world. So even vikings could be considered giants compared to the indian tribes they contacted.
 
I believe there was a tribe in arizona wth a similiar story. There are also stories of chasin blond and red haired people out of the land they later inhabited.

When it comes to giants I look at it logically rather than ufo alien sense. The average size of man back then was alot shorter than now. A group of people lets say 5 foot tall would consider a group averaging 7 foot tall as giants. This is crow magnons averaged 6.6 foot, and many got much taller. Anatomically they are very similiar to people of norther europe, and many people of northern europe were quite taller than average around the world. So even vikings could be considered giants compared to the indian tribes they contacted.

the vikings werent tall or all that blond either thats a myth

Misconception: The Vikings were all big and blonde The Vikings are often shown as big, bulging guys with long blond hair, but historical records show that the average Viking man was about 170 cm (5’7”) tall which was not especially tall for the time. Blond hair was seen as ideal in the Viking culture, and many Nordic men bleached their hair with a special soap. But the Vikings were great at absorbing people, and many people who had been kidnapped as slaves, became part of the Viking population in time. So, in Viking groups, you would probably find Italians, Spaniards, Portuguese, French, and Russians — a very diverse group built around a core of Vikings from a particular region, say, southern Denmark or an Oslo fjord.
Top 10 Misconceptions About The Vikings - Listverse
 
View attachment 67203632

Early New World Maps | ancient america

That is a later roman map, there was one showing almost the same from 200 years prior, but I can not find it now. Notice how they label it as india, next to the caspian sea, which by modern standards we know is far from true. I also need to find the old greek maps that show similar, and list parts of the new world as china. It seemed both rome and greece sailed west like columbus and was so sure they would find no new continent before hitting asia that they labeled the new world as part of asia, and the caspian sea as what is now known as the pacific, which shows they were very good at mapping out terrain but poor at pinpointing coordinates.

LOL.

It's a peninsula.

The Romans never made it to India, much less understood that Florida is East of India by about half a globe, one continent, and the largest ocean on the planet.

Besides....the ask was for the map showing 'peru'.
 
the vikings werent tall or all that blond either thats a myth

Top 10 Misconceptions About TheÂ*Vikings - Listverse

Yes that is true they were not all tall, but they were above average, and for a legend to start it does not take much, if a hundred vikings land on your shore, one is 7 foot tall, two are 6.6 and the rest 5.7-6 it would easily get stretched into a story of giants in your land.

Historically there have been people called hobbits because they averaged 3 foot tall( no not lord of the rings) to pygmie tribes within africa and south america who average below 5 feet in height, it is certainly no stretch to assume any race of shorter people would call vikings or even any western or northern europeans giants.
 
LOL.

It's a peninsula.

The Romans never made it to India, much less understood that Florida is East of India by about half a globe, one continent, and the largest ocean on the planet.

Besides....the ask was for the map showing 'peru'.

Umm the romans traded quite frequently by land and sea with india, but their trade with india by sea was limited to the later east roman empire, the rest by land through trading caravans. And no the romans did have no idea that florida or mexico was in the atlantic, as far as the maps show, they thought they landed in china or india by traveling west, columbus did the exact same, thinking he would find india going west, and instead found the new world.

Peru is on the same map, it is listed as perusta or pervsta, and listed as a continent south of africa. The geographical features resemble peru, but it's location is a far cry off, ofcourse they thought the caspian sea was the pacific, and india east of china, so yeah better at getting there and mapping it out than writing it's exact location on a map.
 
Yes that is true they were not all tall, but they were above average, and for a legend to start it does not take much, if a hundred vikings land on your shore, one is 7 foot tall, two are 6.6 and the rest 5.7-6 it would easily get stretched into a story of giants in your land.

Historically there have been people called hobbits because they averaged 3 foot tall( no not lord of the rings) to pygmie tribes within africa and south america who average below 5 feet in height, it is certainly no stretch to assume any race of shorter people would call vikings or even any western or northern europeans giants.

actually the average height difference between northern eurpeans and native americans is less than a centimeter, in fact the indians in the great plains were a bit taller

https://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/tallind.htm
 
actually the average height difference between northern eurpeans and native americans is less than a centimeter, in fact the indians in the great plains were a bit taller

https://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/tallind.htm

I knew the great plains ones were taller, but did not know the average was similiar. The great plains makes sense, they had bountiful buffalo, which meant easy access to protien.
 
Umm the romans traded quite frequently by land and sea with india, but their trade with india by sea was limited to the later east roman empire, the rest by land through trading caravans. And no the romans did have no idea that florida or mexico was in the atlantic, as far as the maps show, they thought they landed in china or india by traveling west, columbus did the exact same, thinking he would find india going west, and instead found the new world.

Peru is on the same map, it is listed as perusta or pervsta, and listed as a continent south of africa. The geographical features resemble peru, but it's location is a far cry off, ofcourse they thought the caspian sea was the pacific, and india east of china, so yeah better at getting there and mapping it out than writing it's exact location on a map.

That's some creative writing, man.
 
That's some creative writing, man.

So what is your argument against tobacco pipes being found over the roman empire. despite tobacco being native to the western hemisphere. Or about corn pineapples and pumpkins being over the eastern world despite them being exclusive to the western hemisphere..

The map fairly closely matches mexico and florida, with the rest of the golf coast. How they identified it was a mystery, but most likely they confused it for india, the exact same thing columbus did. But if you like to refute, give some counter arguments, explain how those theories are wrong. So far they have not at all been refuted or rejected by the scientific comunity, just not absolutely proven. Archaoeologists today still use all this evidence, from roman greek and phenecian maps to pottery and coins uneartherd all over north and south america, the fact they are not refuted holds them as valuable.
 
So what is your argument against tobacco pipes being found over the roman empire. despite tobacco being native to the western hemisphere. Or about corn pineapples and pumpkins being over the eastern world despite them being exclusive to the western hemisphere..

The map fairly closely matches mexico and florida, with the rest of the golf coast. How they identified it was a mystery, but most likely they confused it for india, the exact same thing columbus did. But if you like to refute, give some counter arguments, explain how those theories are wrong. So far they have not at all been refuted or rejected by the scientific comunity, just not absolutely proven. Archaoeologists today still use all this evidence, from roman greek and phenecian maps to pottery and coins uneartherd all over north and south america, the fact they are not refuted holds them as valuable.

Gish Gallop.

This is the 'history' section, not the fantasy section.

But if you have a credible reference, it will be considered.

And that map...it could match The Malay peninsula, Kamchatka, or some imaginary place the Romans never visited...because AFAIK, they never even made it to China.
 
Gish Gallop.

This is the 'history' section, not the fantasy section.

But if you have a credible reference, it will be considered.

And that map...it could match The Malay peninsula, Kamchatka, or some imaginary place the Romans never visited...because AFAIK, they never even made it to China.

Umm rome traded with china as well as india, through the silk road, and rome and china made numerous attempts to expand that trade, but was halted by hostile territories inbetween. But you also claimed rome never reached india, with the fully did, and sailed ships there to trade with them.

Also that same penisuala appears on portuguese maps as well prior to columbus settling the new world, then later it dissapeared, wich fuels the theory they were traveling to the new world the entire time, but they thought it was india or china.
 
Umm rome traded with china as well as india, through the silk road, and rome and china made numerous attempts to expand that trade, but was halted by hostile territories inbetween. But you also claimed rome never reached india, with the fully did, and sailed ships there to trade with them.

Also that same penisuala appears on portuguese maps as well prior to columbus settling the new world, then later it dissapeared, wich fuels the theory they were traveling to the new world the entire time, but they thought it was india or china.

It's doubtful any Roman made it to China.

But if you want to pretend a random peninsula on an ancient map must be Florida, have fun.
 
It's doubtful any Roman made it to China.

But if you want to pretend a random peninsula on an ancient map must be Florida, have fun.

Rome and china sent diplomats back and forth, and no rome did not directly enter china, which was because the parthians were hostile to rome and the intermediate country on the silk trade.

Rome however had trade with india near china, and still had trade with china, including maps and an understanding of where china was. Were it not for the parthians rome and china would have traded directly, as rome had an addiction for chinese silk, and china an addiction for roman wine and gold.
 
Back
Top Bottom