Re: edit, it was an addition, wasn't trying to imply your meant to be sneaky, just confirming I saw it.
The main theory surrounding Aryans that recognizes them as white people traces migration from India (disputed, but think 5000bc) to Iran to Caucasian mountains (black sea area). IIRC they were the ruling class in India, over the Dravidians... Would make sense there were others like that
Scythians seem to be more of an offshoot tribe (way after the India settlement). The Alan's, which are similar, is the direct line (name wise it means the same thing... there's also a variation of Alan that popped up in China or whatever)
Skeptical about ghengis khan, but it isn't outside possibility. Swastika use isn't indicative of the writer being Aryan but definitely is strong evidence there was contact. Re: Russia, if you're referring to the UNESCO site in Georgia then yes.
Lastly, giants I believe, but if they were ever referenced as gods than the author had about zero clue in theology.
Yes exactly they had a habit of taking the fittest men of a middle generation and sending them off to find a new land to settle down in and start their own "tribe," so it's a sprawling people and they would usually set up a caste system where they ruled and taught the native populations about astrology, farming, animal domestication, etc.
So you'll have a whole culture that looked one way with white red haired rulers with green eyes.
The pharises (I think?) Meant "foreign rulers," Buddha had red hair green eyes, Muhammad red hair, ghengis khan red hair green eyes.
They were the first to use horses and they spread them all over the world.
They went to South America and that's where they were called gods. Quezracotyl I think was one? Or cokylcan (sp), I mean I am clearly just a guy who's watched atlantian gardens present the information and am regurgitating, but man it is hard to not see he is clearly correct.
Now genetics is an area I am NOT just repeating what I heard. I finished my graduate degree in Biological sciences and know genetics intimately.
That I can go look at verify what he's saying.
Let me tell it is unambiguous. The out of Africa theory has completely fallen apart and in fact eastern Africans have a large percentage of non Human DNA from a closely related hominid species, likely homo erectus, so a certain type of African is quite different than say, white Scandinavian people. There is a large and measurable difference in IQ, and a behaviorally observed difference in the ability to plan and delay immediate satisfaction for long term benefits. Like these people never had to farm, so there was no development of intricate stories representing the celestial cycles to help everyone remember the different cycles and dates, no brilliant stone calendars that led to building temples and later architecture, no push for saving for winter, they simply went and killed a meal when they needed to eat. I am not making a judgment I am describing reality.
To say that the african people turned into modern ethnically white, asian, or other people simply isn't true.
Believable, but I'm unaware of any documentation supporting that
> red heads with green eyes
The Aryans (actual first reference, from the vedas) does not describe them that way. Gold headed, no mention of other features
> horse masters
Yes, although IIRC that was a little later than the India stuff.
> Quetzalcoatl/Cokylcan
The only real theories I'm aware of that ties into Americas relies on pyramids and statues with blue eyes. You'd find user JustTheNews that I referenced earlier to have some cool insight about that. I'll have to watch the video you referencing... Not sure how they would try and tie feathered serpents into the whole deal, but I stand by my previous comment that anyone attempting to tie a race to the concept of God really doesn't know what they're talking about.
Also, a big hurdle in the concept is that the astrology of the Americas is quite different than that of the ancient world.
Re: the rest of your post, I agree the out of africa theory is bunk.
You getting caught up with the name. It is absurd to say the veda is the only description, there are thousands throughout history... like I said man, this was about the RACE of people that eventually became "Europeans".
You keep going back to the Vedas being all we have. I'm going to start saying indo European, or I'll just say fuck and say early white man, because that's who they were
Also there are great accounts of those "gods," they're men, when they died they "ascended as gods," which is right in line with the astral religion a lot of the indo white men worshipped.
And plummed serpent is from symbology in that religion. The serpent is knowledge and the wings are something else that made no sense to me but that you see over and over.
The other thing, if you don't have a gold understanding of the occult and of the traditional teachings ot mystery religions history makes no sense.
Re: edit, it was an addition, wasn't trying to imply your meant to be sneaky, just confirming I saw it.
The main theory surrounding Aryans that recognizes them as white people traces migration from India (disputed, but think 5000bc) to Iran to Caucasian mountains (black sea area). IIRC they were the ruling class in India, over the Dravidians... Would make sense there were others like that
Scythians seem to be more of an offshoot tribe (way after the India settlement). The Alan's, which are similar, is the direct line (name wise it means the same thing... there's also a variation of Alan that popped up in China or whatever)
Skeptical about ghengis khan, but it isn't outside possibility. Swastika use isn't indicative of the writer being Aryan but definitely is strong evidence there was contact. Re: Russia, if you're referring to the UNESCO site in Georgia then yes.
Lastly, giants I believe, but if they were ever referenced as gods than the author had about zero clue in theology.
Yes exactly they had a habit of taking the fittest men of a middle generation and sending them off to find a new land to settle down in and start their own "tribe," so it's a sprawling people and they would usually set up a caste system where they ruled and taught the native populations about astrology, farming, animal domestication, etc. So you'll have a whole culture that looked one way with white red haired rulers with green eyes.
The pharises (I think?) Meant "foreign rulers," Buddha had red hair green eyes, Muhammad red hair, ghengis khan red hair green eyes.
They were the first to use horses and they spread them all over the world.
They went to South America and that's where they were called gods. Quezracotyl I think was one? Or cokylcan (sp), I mean I am clearly just a guy who's watched atlantian gardens present the information and am regurgitating, but man it is hard to not see he is clearly correct. Now genetics is an area I am NOT just repeating what I heard. I finished my graduate degree in Biological sciences and know genetics intimately. That I can go look at verify what he's saying.
Let me tell it is unambiguous. The out of Africa theory has completely fallen apart and in fact eastern Africans have a large percentage of non Human DNA from a closely related hominid species, likely homo erectus, so a certain type of African is quite different than say, white Scandinavian people. There is a large and measurable difference in IQ, and a behaviorally observed difference in the ability to plan and delay immediate satisfaction for long term benefits. Like these people never had to farm, so there was no development of intricate stories representing the celestial cycles to help everyone remember the different cycles and dates, no brilliant stone calendars that led to building temples and later architecture, no push for saving for winter, they simply went and killed a meal when they needed to eat. I am not making a judgment I am describing reality.
To say that the african people turned into modern ethnically white, asian, or other people simply isn't true.
> sending for men to start new tribes
Believable, but I'm unaware of any documentation supporting that
> red heads with green eyes
The Aryans (actual first reference, from the vedas) does not describe them that way. Gold headed, no mention of other features
> horse masters
Yes, although IIRC that was a little later than the India stuff.
> Quetzalcoatl/Cokylcan
The only real theories I'm aware of that ties into Americas relies on pyramids and statues with blue eyes. You'd find user JustTheNews that I referenced earlier to have some cool insight about that. I'll have to watch the video you referencing... Not sure how they would try and tie feathered serpents into the whole deal, but I stand by my previous comment that anyone attempting to tie a race to the concept of God really doesn't know what they're talking about.
Also, a big hurdle in the concept is that the astrology of the Americas is quite different than that of the ancient world.
Re: the rest of your post, I agree the out of africa theory is bunk.
You getting caught up with the name. It is absurd to say the veda is the only description, there are thousands throughout history... like I said man, this was about the RACE of people that eventually became "Europeans". You keep going back to the Vedas being all we have. I'm going to start saying indo European, or I'll just say fuck and say early white man, because that's who they were Also there are great accounts of those "gods," they're men, when they died they "ascended as gods," which is right in line with the astral religion a lot of the indo white men worshipped. And plummed serpent is from symbology in that religion. The serpent is knowledge and the wings are something else that made no sense to me but that you see over and over.
The other thing, if you don't have a gold understanding of the occult and of the traditional teachings ot mystery religions history makes no sense.
Veda is the *earliest description, & from where there the term Aryan originates
> Indo european
You're referring to PIE which is a linguistic analysis, which nullifies a lot of your argument
> men as gods
You're driving into retardation
/> symbology
https://youtu.be/lG_OezlTZ1A
> you don't have an understanding
You'd be surprised