|
|
Post by asante on Jun 23, 2015 10:19:41 GMT -5
I'm going to tell y'all to be careful about the people on Egyptsearch! I recreated this thread over on the old Egyptsearch, which initially was praised by two veteran members (Clyde Winters). After a while the troll Lioness tried to interject some nonsense and after I destroyed her on her semantic based argument, my post towards her were instantly deleted and now my entire thread over on that forum is gone. I tried to do a googlesearch of the topic, and while the name of the thread appeared in the search engine it opened into another thread that was created by "Lioness", and when I went to the second page of the "ancient Egypt" section it was not found anywhere. This is not something not to be taken to be lightly. Though this current site is Egyptsearch-Reloaded it is still based on the ideals of the members from the original Egyptsearch. Over the years I have followed the post on Egyptsearch and while I was initially "impressed" at their fierceness in "debating" (which does not necessarily imply truth into their "logic") I have noticed over the years how much of a hamster wheel the dialogue and topics were. They refused to progress past the Hamitic theory and or Hamitic supremacy (the Horners created ancient Egypt nonsense and created thread after thread glorifying just them), which glorifies them for superficial purposes and essentially anti Niger-Congo speaker (hence subliminally promoting self hate among us THE MAIN VIEWERS OF THE INFORMATION and the need to find glory through our African "connection"/PN2 clade with Narrow nose Ethiopic African types). This thread completely destroyed that line of reasoning that Egyptsearch was founded on. The information and proclamations in this thread are bold and solid, and that is something that these double agents (on Egyptsearch) who promote self hate among our "Anu" people cannot refute. Therefore they deleted my thread. Understand that these "black people" with extremely "liberal" views (we are all equal no one is worse than other) are likely white people pretending to be "pro black". If you want to see how thousands upon thousands of REAL pro-black people think and feel about and Kemet and our situation in this World then join these facebook groups (Amen Ra Squad; Dr. Frances Cress Welsing*Addressing Mental Health In The Black Community; Melanin & Power; The Eye Of Heru; etc etc etc.) Now while facebook is controlled by the CIA and there are in fact infiltrators in these groups, at the very least you can get a glispe of how black people REALLY feel about our history and current situations. You will also see things that are actually written on the walls of Kemet (the actually ancient teachings), as opposed to trying to get a glimpse of the history through botched white authorized "scientific studies". This post is a wake up call to all who care. You must understand the nature of these Devils is DECEPTIVE!  |
|
|
|
Post by A Boy Named KING on Jun 23, 2015 11:58:21 GMT -5
Asante
It's not the Egyptsearch People Deleting.
altakruri who is the MOD on This Forum and Egyptsearch is deleting Posts and threads.
2 of my posts have been completly deleted by this dude.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tukuler al~Takruri on Jun 23, 2015 13:23:54 GMT -5
Petty people post personality patter still, in reply to muckslingers - I resigned from modding ESR years ago
(search for and read my ESR mod swan song) - Clyde is not a Class of 2008 ES vet,
he was but a sophmore when the vets graduated. - I, however, am an ES vet or so recogniozed by the Vets
one of whom, Charlie Bass is designer and owner of ESR - Brada Anasi, a super busy entreprenaur,
his hard ALONE has made ESR the resounding success it is today.
|
|
|
|
Post by asante on Jun 23, 2015 13:52:02 GMT -5
What is the purpose of deleting threads? No reasoning was ever given. If I didn't say anything then it just would have fell by the waist side. It has put me in a mind frame of who can we really trust and clearly it's not ES.
|
|
|
|
Post by samuel on Oct 14, 2015 17:48:18 GMT -5
Here were some good linguistic similiarities noted by Asar Imhotep back ES. Out of curiosity why didn't they build monumental architecture like they did in Egypt ? One of the reasons that Egyptian monumental architecture is so famous is that it all still stands due to the dry climate. The Parthenon in Greece used to be huge but because of the climate there is basically nothing left. AE is far grander than any other civilization on earth in terms of what they left behind. Art, tombs, temples, etc etc. Everthing in Mesopotamia and Persia are in ruins but Egyptian stuff still stands. Is this because AE was better at what they built? Or due to the climate and knowledge of the yearly floods of the Nile?? Even the coliseum in Rome is in ruins. Or just new stuff is built on top or it. I still believe that one of the reasons all this is possible is because of how conservative Egyptian society was. Whereas the near east and Europe are more progressive in dealing with change. |
|
|
|
Post by asante on Oct 16, 2015 6:16:07 GMT -5
Out of curiosity why didn't they build monumental architecture like they did in Egypt ? You are ignorant of African history.   |
|
|
|
Post by truthteacher2007 on Oct 16, 2015 12:35:42 GMT -5
Here were some good linguistic similiarities noted by Asar Imhotep back ES. Out of curiosity why didn't they build monumental architecture like they did in Egypt ? One of the reasons that Egyptian monumental architecture is so famous is that it all still stands due to the dry climate. The Parthenon in Greece used to be huge but because of the climate there is basically nothing left. AE is far grander than any other civilization on earth in terms of what they left behind. Art, tombs, temples, etc etc. Everthing in Mesopotamia and Persia are in ruins but Egyptian stuff still stands. Is this because AE was better at what they built? Or due to the climate and knowledge of the yearly floods of the Nile?? Even the coliseum in Rome is in ruins. Or just new stuff is built on top or it. I still believe that one of the reasons all this is possible is because of how conservative Egyptian society was. Whereas the near east and Europe are more progressive in dealing with change. Remember what I said to you in a previous post. Just because you are not aware of something doesn't mean it doesn't or didn't exist. With regards to Egypt. There are several reasons why they retained more monuments than other places. #1. Building materials. The use of stone as versus wood or other materials which disintegrate over time. You should take into consideration that the overwhelming majority of Egyptian structures did not survive because they were made of mud bricks. For example, none of the royal palaces or homes have survived because they were made of mud brick, neither have most of the most ancient temples. There are exceptions, the pyramids being one, but note, they were made of limestone. #2: Time. As to the temples, the best preserve have survived because they were built at a later stage in Egypt's history. For example Phile, Komombo and a few others were built in the Greco-Roman period. #3: environment. A great deal of the surviving monuments were totally or almost entirely buried in sand. For example, if you visit the temple of Luxor, you will notice a mosque adjacent to the top of the temple complex. That was where the street level was at the time of excavation. Same holds true for Abu Simbel. Also keep in mind that the tombs were never intended to be found. All of those paintings we see were never supposed to be seen. They weren't works of art as we understand art today. They were made to serve a spiritual purpose. The original builders would have been mortified had they known that years later their contents would be put on public display and people visiting their tombs. The fact that they were hidden is what enabled them to survive and the fact that they are now on display is what is contributing to their disintegration. For example, a replica of King Tut's tomb is being made because all of the moisture from the breath of tourists is causing the paintings to peel off. In fact, many of the tombs are no longer accessible because of the rapid state of deterioration they were sustaining. #4: People tend to recycle. This is true of every society, even in Egypt. There were many ancient structures that they themselves dismantled for building materials. Take into consideration that Akhenaton's City is nothing but a flat plain now. Why do you think that is? They scavenged what thy could for other projects. Even the pyramids were scavenged to build later structures. The colosseum in Rome looks the way it does because after the fall of the Empire the new generations used it as a quarry for marble, limestone, bricks and whatever else they needed to make modern structures. What we see now is what is left. #5: Monumental structures are a reflection of the world views and cultural values of the people who make them in the context of the period of time they lived in. They were not art for art's sake. Therefore, if the societies of other African nations don't have permanent structures to boast it is a reflection of their world view. In other words, there was no perceived need for them. Their ideas of who they were and their role and place in the universe, their philosophies and spiritual ideals were different. Doesn't mean they were incapable, but a reflection of what they thought was more important. If you believe that there truly is no death, and that this life is merely a stage in your eternal evolution, why hold on to the material trappings of this incarnation? You came here for a purpose, you either fulfilled it or will return to finish what you started. It's like if you're reading a book, you move on to the next chapter, you don't keep reading page one. Egyptians had a different view of things and so what they built was a reflection of the fact that they believed it was necessary in order to live in the next world. Perhaps the biggest mistake that you are making is to assume that monumental architecture is a measure of a societies level of sophistication. It is not. The level of their advancement or lack thereof is to be found in the intangible things. Their world view, their philosophies, their skill at social organization and governance. Those are the things that truly make a civilization a civilization. Just consider the root of the word CIVIL. Look up what that word means. Egypt may have more monuments that have survived to the present, but there were other societies in Africa that were far more advanced than they were in terms of CIVILIZATION based on the criteria I mentioned. The reason we don't know about them is because we tend to focus exclusively on the superficial material things and we ignore the intangible things. Just consider for example, that the West African Empires were able to peacefully govern an area much larger than Egypt, in fact, much larger than Wester Europe. That is no small feat. But we tend to over look things like that because we are more impressed with gold artifacts, which was the driving force behind archeology and to a great deal, still is. We marvel romantically over Egypt's spirituality and yet the spiritual philosophies of some West African societies are not only older, but still intact to this day. However, it is the assumption that the rest of Africa has nothing of value work examining that is the chief culprit. The lion's share of attention goes to Egypt while the rest of the continent is ignored. We have no idea what is still waiting to be found because no one is looking. It was only by accident that it was discovered that the oldest examples of pottery technology in Africa came not from Egypt, but Mali. What else is there that has yet to be brought to light we don't know. Also consider that in Congo, 19th century explorers reported people doing brain surgery and performing cesarian sections in which both the mother and child survived. Not only that, but they knew the importance of sterilization and used palm wine to clean their hands before and after surgical procedures. They didn't have big buildings to look at, but they had knowledge of human anatomy and physiology that was not paralled in Ancient Egypt. Not only that, but the Egyptians never reached their level of technical ability with the use of iron. You have a lot to learn. Keep learning. Don't make assumptions of superiority or inferiority of any society just based on what you can observe with your naked eyes. Until you get to know a people and a society, you have no idea how advanced or primitive they truly are. Instead, cultivate the idea that every human society has mastered a set of skills which has or is capable of making a contribution to the world. |
|
|
|
Post by zarahan on Oct 16, 2015 20:59:49 GMT -5
To the world's largest earthwork above, could be added perhaps the largest single stone sculptures on Earth, found in Ethiopia, which is in Sub-Saharan Africa. QUOTE: ""The early Askumites built in stone. They erected massive carved monoliths
over the graves of their leaders (one was 33 meters long and weighed over 700 tonnes,
arguably the largest single piece of worked stone ever hewn."(John Reader, 1998. Africa: The Biography of the continent. pg 208).  ^^The tallest and largest oblelisk is greater than the above, at 97 feet tall.  "Perhaps the most spectacular achievements of the Aksumite kingdom were the construction of the great monoliths, of which the example taken by the Italians was the finest. Over 100 such monoliths once stood in Aksum. Carved from hard granite-like rock, the obelisks were erected as funerary markers, or stelae, for deceased members of the aristocracy. The seven largest and most intricately carved obelisks were erected by Ezana, the King of Aksum who converted to Christianity in 325 CE. The carvings depict windows and doors to create the illusion that the obelisks were, in fact, buildings. Funded by trade in such luxuries as turtle shells, ivory, obsidian, rhino horns, emeralds, cattle, and gold, the obelisks are testament to the skill of the Aksumite quarrymen, engineers, and stone carvers, as well as to the power of their rulers. The prosperity and reputation of Aksum was such that, by the third century CE, the Persian philosopher Mani described it as one of the four greatest kingdoms in the world, along with Rome, China, and Persia."www.elginism.com/similar-cases/what-are-the-axum-obelisks/20050707/161/#sthash.rx8PgodH.dpuf "n an expansive field on Aksum's northern edge stand the ancient city's most renowned surviving monuments, a group of memorial obelisks, or stelae, erected between the third and fourth centuries A.D. Although other Aksumite stelae fields such as the Gudit field are known, none possess the great variety of form and scale present here, ranging from relatively rough-hewn stone blocks of three feet in length to a now fallen tour de force intended to tower ninety-seven feet high. The stelae were carved mainly from solid blocks of nepheline syenite, a weather-resistant rock similar in appearance to granite, and are believed to have come from the quarries of Wuchate Golo several miles to the west of Aksum. After being cut from the rock walls there, they would have been dragged by organized manpower to the site of their installation, where finer carving awaited a few of the stelae. The impetus for this organizational effort appears to have been commemorative: there are many burials in this area and elaborate tombs are situated near the foremost group of the largest stelae. The wide variation in size and carving sophistication is most likely due to the varying degrees of social status and wealth of the deceased. Although the identities of the persons who sponsored them are not known, the tallest stelae probably commemorated royalty while smaller works were most likely commissioned by local elite."www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/aksu_2/hd_aksu_2.htmAnd of course, the ancient Kingdom of Kush, is itself in part a sub-Saharan entity with its own writing system, iron technology and monumental building.  |
|
|
|
Post by asante on Oct 17, 2015 10:34:24 GMT -5
"They extend for some 16,000 kilometres in all, in a mosaic of more than 500 interconnected settlement boundaries. They cover 6,500 square kilometres and were all dug by the Edo people. In all, they are four times longer than the Great Wall of China, and consumed a hundred times more material than the Great Pyramid of Cheops. They took an estimated 150 million hours of digging to construct, and are perhaps the largest single archaeological phenomenon on the planet." —Fred Pearce    My point however is even outside of the Eastern Sub Saharan Africa there is a wealth archaeological and historical achievements. This should not be surprising considering that these people descend from the Nile Valley, and carried the ingenuity and cultural traditions with them to other parts of Africa. We as our own collective group do not have to look toward other ethnic African groups for this connection. |
|
|
|
Post by samuel on Oct 17, 2015 19:32:53 GMT -5
Out of curiosity why didn't they build monumental architecture like they did in Egypt ? One of the reasons that Egyptian monumental architecture is so famous is that it all still stands due to the dry climate. The Parthenon in Greece used to be huge but because of the climate there is basically nothing left. AE is far grander than any other civilization on earth in terms of what they left behind. Art, tombs, temples, etc etc. Everthing in Mesopotamia and Persia are in ruins but Egyptian stuff still stands. Is this because AE was better at what they built? Or due to the climate and knowledge of the yearly floods of the Nile?? Even the coliseum in Rome is in ruins. Or just new stuff is built on top or it. I still believe that one of the reasons all this is possible is because of how conservative Egyptian society was. Whereas the near east and Europe are more progressive in dealing with change. Remember what I said to you in a previous post. Just because you are not aware of something doesn't mean it doesn't or didn't exist. With regards to Egypt. There are several reasons why they retained more monuments than other places. #1. Building materials. The use of stone as versus wood or other materials which disintegrate over time. You should take into consideration that the overwhelming majority of Egyptian structures did not survive because they were made of mud bricks. For example, none of the royal palaces or homes have survived because they were made of mud brick, neither have most of the most ancient temples. There are exceptions, the pyramids being one, but note, they were made of limestone. #2: Time. As to the temples, the best preserve have survived because they were built at a later stage in Egypt's history. For example Phile, Komombo and a few others were built in the Greco-Roman period. #3: environment. A great deal of the surviving monuments were totally or almost entirely buried in sand. For example, if you visit the temple of Luxor, you will notice a mosque adjacent to the top of the temple complex. That was where the street level was at the time of excavation. Same holds true for Abu Simbel. Also keep in mind that the tombs were never intended to be found. All of those paintings we see were never supposed to be seen. They weren't works of art as we understand art today. They were made to serve a spiritual purpose. The original builders would have been mortified had they known that years later their contents would be put on public display and people visiting their tombs. The fact that they were hidden is what enabled them to survive and the fact that they are now on display is what is contributing to their disintegration. For example, a replica of King Tut's tomb is being made because all of the moisture from the breath of tourists is causing the paintings to peel off. In fact, many of the tombs are no longer accessible because of the rapid state of deterioration they were sustaining. #4: People tend to recycle. This is true of every society, even in Egypt. There were many ancient structures that they themselves dismantled for building materials. Take into consideration that Akhenaton's City is nothing but a flat plain now. Why do you think that is? They scavenged what thy could for other projects. Even the pyramids were scavenged to build later structures. The colosseum in Rome looks the way it does because after the fall of the Empire the new generations used it as a quarry for marble, limestone, bricks and whatever else they needed to make modern structures. What we see now is what is left. #5: Monumental structures are a reflection of the world views and cultural values of the people who make them in the context of the period of time they lived in. They were not art for art's sake. Therefore, if the societies of other African nations don't have permanent structures to boast it is a reflection of their world view. In other words, there was no perceived need for them. Their ideas of who they were and their role and place in the universe, their philosophies and spiritual ideals were different. Doesn't mean they were incapable, but a reflection of what they thought was more important. If you believe that there truly is no death, and that this life is merely a stage in your eternal evolution, why hold on to the material trappings of this incarnation? You came here for a purpose, you either fulfilled it or will return to finish what you started. It's like if you're reading a book, you move on to the next chapter, you don't keep reading page one. Egyptians had a different view of things and so what they built was a reflection of the fact that they believed it was necessary in order to live in the next world. Perhaps the biggest mistake that you are making is to assume that monumental architecture is a measure of a societies level of sophistication. It is not. The level of their advancement or lack thereof is to be found in the intangible things. Their world view, their philosophies, their skill at social organization and governance. Those are the things that truly make a civilization a civilization. Just consider the root of the word CIVIL. Look up what that word means. Egypt may have more monuments that have survived to the present, but there were other societies in Africa that were far more advanced than they were in terms of CIVILIZATION based on the criteria I mentioned. The reason we don't know about them is because we tend to focus exclusively on the superficial material things and we ignore the intangible things. Just consider for example, that the West African Empires were able to peacefully govern an area much larger than Egypt, in fact, much larger than Wester Europe. That is no small feat. But we tend to over look things like that because we are more impressed with gold artifacts, which was the driving force behind archeology and to a great deal, still is. We marvel romantically over Egypt's spirituality and yet the spiritual philosophies of some West African societies are not only older, but still intact to this day. However, it is the assumption that the rest of Africa has nothing of value work examining that is the chief culprit. The lion's share of attention goes to Egypt while the rest of the continent is ignored. We have no idea what is still waiting to be found because no one is looking. It was only by accident that it was discovered that the oldest examples of pottery technology in Africa came not from Egypt, but Mali. What else is there that has yet to be brought to light we don't know. Also consider that in Congo, 19th century explorers reported people doing brain surgery and performing cesarian sections in which both the mother and child survived. Not only that, but they knew the importance of sterilization and used palm wine to clean their hands before and after surgical procedures. They didn't have big buildings to look at, but they had knowledge of human anatomy and physiology that was not paralled in Ancient Egypt. Not only that, but the Egyptians never reached their level of technical ability with the use of iron. You have a lot to learn. Keep learning. Don't make assumptions of superiority or inferiority of any society just based on what you can observe with your naked eyes. Until you get to know a people and a society, you have no idea how advanced or primitive they truly are. Instead, cultivate the idea that every human society has mastered a set of skills which has or is capable of making a contribution to the world. What's kinda fucked up. Is that in a few thousand years people are going to think that here in the U.S. There weren't even people because of all the cheap materials we use. Think about 9 11 how easy it was for those towers to come down. The only thing left from our existence will be plastic and lots of metal. Glass maybe. Where as Egypt will still be there with all of its monuments. It never rains there which is another reason the monumental architecture is intact. |
|
|
|
Post by asante on Oct 17, 2015 20:10:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by truthteacher2007 on Oct 17, 2015 21:52:15 GMT -5
Remember what I said to you in a previous post. Just because you are not aware of something doesn't mean it doesn't or didn't exist. With regards to Egypt. There are several reasons why they retained more monuments than other places. #1. Building materials. The use of stone as versus wood or other materials which disintegrate over time. You should take into consideration that the overwhelming majority of Egyptian structures did not survive because they were made of mud bricks. For example, none of the royal palaces or homes have survived because they were made of mud brick, neither have most of the most ancient temples. There are exceptions, the pyramids being one, but note, they were made of limestone. #2: Time. As to the temples, the best preserve have survived because they were built at a later stage in Egypt's history. For example Phile, Komombo and a few others were built in the Greco-Roman period. #3: environment. A great deal of the surviving monuments were totally or almost entirely buried in sand. For example, if you visit the temple of Luxor, you will notice a mosque adjacent to the top of the temple complex. That was where the street level was at the time of excavation. Same holds true for Abu Simbel. Also keep in mind that the tombs were never intended to be found. All of those paintings we see were never supposed to be seen. They weren't works of art as we understand art today. They were made to serve a spiritual purpose. The original builders would have been mortified had they known that years later their contents would be put on public display and people visiting their tombs. The fact that they were hidden is what enabled them to survive and the fact that they are now on display is what is contributing to their disintegration. For example, a replica of King Tut's tomb is being made because all of the moisture from the breath of tourists is causing the paintings to peel off. In fact, many of the tombs are no longer accessible because of the rapid state of deterioration they were sustaining. #4: People tend to recycle. This is true of every society, even in Egypt. There were many ancient structures that they themselves dismantled for building materials. Take into consideration that Akhenaton's City is nothing but a flat plain now. Why do you think that is? They scavenged what thy could for other projects. Even the pyramids were scavenged to build later structures. The colosseum in Rome looks the way it does because after the fall of the Empire the new generations used it as a quarry for marble, limestone, bricks and whatever else they needed to make modern structures. What we see now is what is left. #5: Monumental structures are a reflection of the world views and cultural values of the people who make them in the context of the period of time they lived in. They were not art for art's sake. Therefore, if the societies of other African nations don't have permanent structures to boast it is a reflection of their world view. In other words, there was no perceived need for them. Their ideas of who they were and their role and place in the universe, their philosophies and spiritual ideals were different. Doesn't mean they were incapable, but a reflection of what they thought was more important. If you believe that there truly is no death, and that this life is merely a stage in your eternal evolution, why hold on to the material trappings of this incarnation? You came here for a purpose, you either fulfilled it or will return to finish what you started. It's like if you're reading a book, you move on to the next chapter, you don't keep reading page one. Egyptians had a different view of things and so what they built was a reflection of the fact that they believed it was necessary in order to live in the next world. Perhaps the biggest mistake that you are making is to assume that monumental architecture is a measure of a societies level of sophistication. It is not. The level of their advancement or lack thereof is to be found in the intangible things. Their world view, their philosophies, their skill at social organization and governance. Those are the things that truly make a civilization a civilization. Just consider the root of the word CIVIL. Look up what that word means. Egypt may have more monuments that have survived to the present, but there were other societies in Africa that were far more advanced than they were in terms of CIVILIZATION based on the criteria I mentioned. The reason we don't know about them is because we tend to focus exclusively on the superficial material things and we ignore the intangible things. Just consider for example, that the West African Empires were able to peacefully govern an area much larger than Egypt, in fact, much larger than Wester Europe. That is no small feat. But we tend to over look things like that because we are more impressed with gold artifacts, which was the driving force behind archeology and to a great deal, still is. We marvel romantically over Egypt's spirituality and yet the spiritual philosophies of some West African societies are not only older, but still intact to this day. However, it is the assumption that the rest of Africa has nothing of value work examining that is the chief culprit. The lion's share of attention goes to Egypt while the rest of the continent is ignored. We have no idea what is still waiting to be found because no one is looking. It was only by accident that it was discovered that the oldest examples of pottery technology in Africa came not from Egypt, but Mali. What else is there that has yet to be brought to light we don't know. Also consider that in Congo, 19th century explorers reported people doing brain surgery and performing cesarian sections in which both the mother and child survived. Not only that, but they knew the importance of sterilization and used palm wine to clean their hands before and after surgical procedures. They didn't have big buildings to look at, but they had knowledge of human anatomy and physiology that was not paralled in Ancient Egypt. Not only that, but the Egyptians never reached their level of technical ability with the use of iron. You have a lot to learn. Keep learning. Don't make assumptions of superiority or inferiority of any society just based on what you can observe with your naked eyes. Until you get to know a people and a society, you have no idea how advanced or primitive they truly are. Instead, cultivate the idea that every human society has mastered a set of skills which has or is capable of making a contribution to the world. What's kinda up. Is that in a few thousand years people are going to think that here in the U.S. There weren't even people because of all the cheap materials we use. Think about 9 11 how easy it was for those towers to come down. The only thing left from our existence will be plastic and lots of metal. Glass maybe. Where as Egypt will still be there with all of its monuments. It never rains there which is another reason the monumental architecture is intact. Actually it does rain. Depends on where you are. On the north coast it does rain a few times a year, as well as Cairo. Never pleasant and the city comes to a stand still as they have no sewer system to deal with the rain fall when it does happen. If you'll remember, Cairo got a blanketing of snow last year. Not unheard of. Upper Egypt also gets hit with torrential rain fall periodically. But the fact that they made their monuments primarily out of stone does help. Although of recent, the rise in the water table is contributing to the erosion of some of the monuments. |
|
|
|
Post by samuel on Oct 18, 2015 0:05:07 GMT -5
Yuck. Where does all their poop and urine go? I didn't mean never ever rains. It rains maybe one day a year. If that. Very very rarely. As compared to Greece Rome etc etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by asante on Oct 18, 2015 8:35:02 GMT -5
Yuck. Where does all their poop and urine go? Well your recent caveman European predecessors use to just throw there " poop and urine" in the middle of the unpaved village walking paths, because they didn't know any better. The city of London was a filthy ish lined cesspool where a third of the population were killed from one episode of an outbreak of the plague (caused from fleas on rats). |
|
|
|
Post by samuel on Oct 18, 2015 11:58:07 GMT -5
Out of curiosity why didn't they build monumental architecture like they did in Egypt ? You are ignorant of African history. Impressive but pale in comparison to ancient Egypt. But everything compared to Ancient Egypt is pale in my opinion. Abu Simbel alone is like Mount Rushmore, which was created in the past century. Karnak is almost completely intact. Monuments that were ancient even to the Romans are still standing whereas Roman monuments now appear older than the ones in Egypt. Who knows. People 5 thousand years from now are going to look at Las Vegas and see the similarities between Egypt and are going to believe it was the same civilization. Dry weather preserves stone constructions. |
|
