Goldtarget
(AKA OldGT)
grubstake said:davent said:
Perhaps because the whole history of Egypt under the pharoahs is that of an intensely inward-looking, religion-focused civilisation, rather than an outgoing exploring/trading/conquering state? Or maybe because stone boats don't float very well.
I watched as much of the video as I could take, but lost confidence in the presenter when he pointed to the round patches of lichen overlying the glyphs on the stone and identified it as "moss".
And his Egyptian translators lost me when they talked about ocean-going exploration, but supported that claim with the length of the vessel, as though that is the deciding factor for sea-going voyages. Unless the pharoahs also dug the Suez Canal, Egypt is an enormous distance from the east coast of Australia, through some of the world's roughest seas, which is utterly unfeasible in a wide, shallow-draught, top-heavy, Nile-cruising barge like that shown in the video:
https://www.prospectingaustralia.com/forum/img/member-images/4012/1583135295_gg1.jpg
All good points. There would most definitely need to be more evidence to suggest the theory is plausible, and its that type of critical thinking that requires addressing.
Most studies on the vast majority of civilizations tends to suggest that long journeys through rough seas are more a modern phenomenon than an ancient one, however there are many good examples of seemingly impossible journeys that have clear evidence to in fact occured.
The DNA of Australian aboriginals has been found to be part of the dna in southern South American peoples, yet there is no study to suggest they had boats even capable of making the journey. Some of the lineage papers though have concluded they went from here and mixed there, not the other way around.
Were they sea faring? Did canoes get blown off shore in wild weather and some survived the journey? Noone really knows but there is at least three times in the last 2 millenia that seperate groups interbred with Southern South Americans, so from this 2 things can be deduced .
Most definitely successful (but possibly accidental) voyages were made, and the dna was not from anywhere but "modern" aboriginals, not far distant relatives that were the originators of the genus 10s of thousands of years ago.
It was only a decade or 2 ago Clovis first was considered mainstream, that has also recently suffered overturning. Whole careers of acedemics theory evaporated. Many of the worlds mysteries are yet to be uncovered/solved.
