The Mayans may Have been Hindu in Origin.

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

Very interesting video. Yes the edits are a little choppy, but give him a chance to flesh out the theory. Also, read this book, Hindu America by Chaman Lal published in 1940. It is available on https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.36440/page/n3

 

 

[Guest MormonGator]

I'm not going to watch the  video. Just remember that we need to be very careful when reading into things, and sometimes people go way out there. Just because there are some slight similarities between the Mayans and the Hindus hardly means that one influenced the other. I'm not saying there's no way it happened, just that we need to be careful before we start making assumptions. 

[Fether]

27 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

I'm not going to watch the  video. Just remember that we need to be very careful when reading into things, and sometimes people go way out there. Just because there are some slight similarities between the Mayans and the Hindus hardly means that one influenced the other. I'm not saying there's no way it happened, just that we need to be careful before we start making assumptions. 

Years ago I watched a video making this very point. I don’t remember specifics, but they “proved” that the Mayans (or some other ancient American race) were Chinese and worshipped elephants.

When looking for evidence, you can always find it. 

[Guest MormonGator]

18 minutes ago, Fether said:

When looking for evidence, you can always find it. 

Exactly.

I still know people who are 100% convinced that the Mona Lisa is really Da Vinci in drag. Even though it's been clearly proved that it's actually a woman named Lisa Del Giocondo.  

[Guest]

1 minute ago, MormonGator said:

I still know people who are 100% convinced that the Mona Lisa is really Da Vinci in drag. Even though it's been clearly proved that it's actually a woman named Lisa Del Giocondo.  

I could not dissuade my Shakespeare professor from preaching that ALL of Shakespeare's sonnets were letters of "praise" from Shakespeare to a certain Prince.  They weren't meant to be "love letters."

I made the point about many references to bearing children and various female functions.  But he would hear none of it. He insisted that many of the references that we take romantically simply weren't romantic back in the day of Will, the Bud.  Therefore anyone who thinks these are meant to be romantic is simply ignorant.

[Guest MormonGator]

15 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

I could not dissuade my Shakespeare professor from preaching that ALL of Shakespeare's sonnets were letters of "praise" from Shakespeare to a certain Prince.  They weren't meant to be "love letters."

I made the point about many references to bearing children and various female functions.  But he would hear none of it. He insisted that many of the references that we take romantically simply weren't romantic back in the day of Will, the Bud.  Therefore anyone who thinks these are meant to be romantic is simply ignorant.

My BA is in English-so I know what you are saying. When it comes to literary criticism, there is a lot of gray and not a lot of black and white. When you read The Waste Lands by TS Eliot four people will come up with four different interpretations. 

Edited January 11, 2019 by MormonGator

[Fether]

On a personal note, I still bitterly argue  that we don’t know for sure whether or not the Rich Young Ruler from the NT followed through with the command to give all his wealth away.