Discover the world's scientific knowledge
With 135+ million publication pages, 20+ million researchers and 1+ million questions, this is where everyone can access science
You can use AND, OR, NOT, "" and () to specify your search.
What are the most important theories and studies about the similarity of the hierarchical architecture in Mesopotamia and the countries of the Nile Valley and the Aztecs?
I've been taking to a young geneticist from New Zealand, at the beach in Formentera. She agreed with me, analyzing and comparing genetic codes for Yemeni 'pricky pears' tree and Mexican one, we should know from where proceed the plant, that way solving some historical mysteries:
- Were Aztecs and more extensively, all American Indians, too stupid to squash an insect (cochineal) between fingers to get bright red color ?
- How comes in the fresco representing Mexico city, the eagle looks more Roman (very similar to a one found in Merida, Spain) than Quetzacoalt? How comes it does not look like graphically the Aztecs bird representations?
- How comes the Spanish Royal color was of Arab origin? By Charles Quint's times, Spain wanted to be dissociated from its Arab past, so they wished a cochineal of their own offering a red color they could call truly Spanish.
- How comes there are no prickly pears in Amazonian forests, nowadays dominated by plants grown by pre-colombian?
- How comes in America, it does not grow on the sea level when it expanded so well in Mediterraneo at sea level it was used by Muslim sailors as an amer to know if you've already been in the place?
- How comes Napoleon III, 19th c. dreaming of an imperial army in red trousers (without being aware he transformed his soldiers in easy targets) and wishing to provoke in Mexico a commercial earthquake, refurbishing the old 'traditional' and 'historical' cochineal production on prickly pears tree, he had to both reintroduce cochineal and prickly pears tree in Mexico?
-How comes in Spanish 'prickly pears is called "higo de Barbarie" (North African fig) and not "higo de Chiapas"(Mexican fig)? Sure, officially Spaniards thought they were in India.
- The roman eagle eating snakes in 1900 years old https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2478904/Roman-sculpture-eagle-devouring-serpent-unearthed-London.html. Is the Mexico eagle eating snakes a more modern version, only 500 years old? https://www.ancientsculpturegallery.com/roman-eagle-mexican-eagle-clutching-the-snake-plaque.html . The ring of a roman legionary showing an eagle eating a snake.
All this, solved with only two genetics analyzes.
My published scientific proof that Einstein’s original “global c” was correct implies since mid-2008 that the running LHC experiment in Geneva is risking the planet at a delay of only years.
There is no single counter publication in the scientific literature, but the media balk. Why is CERN’s inability to defend itself against the public reproach of “attempted planetocide” shielded from the public?
The answer reads: Superstition. The media by keeping silence are betting the planet on a theory that was disproved a decade ago. This is much like what the old Aztecs did with their self-sacrifices, but they got disproved only afterwards and hence were more than excused. The superstition, this time around, is the Big Bang. All children are taught in effect that the Big Bang theory is worth dying for.
And the social-democratic party in Germany SPD agrees: They refuse to make the for nine years un-renewed planetary safety report LSAG a topic in the ongoing election campaign: the fact that the “Large-Hadron Collider Safety Assessment Group” LSAG is for nine years unable to pronounce planetary safety regarding the hottest resident spot in the universe created at CERN.
This is cute: The socialists could reap a landslide victory but rather prefer to lose – just as they prefer to die. Only logical, is it not?
August 8, 2017
Quezacoalt God promised to come back, bringing the red color to the Aztecs, which mean they didn't had bright red colorant. Joaquin Cortez, who conquered Mexico, was born in Melilla (actual Morroco), a zone where cochineals were raised, in order to do "kermes", the Arabic colorant for royal Spanish family (so Joaquin Cortez did not brought cochineal from America). As a matter of a fact, cochineal was even more valuable than gold in Europe, and did not showed off as much as gold: a brown almost dead insect thing you had to squash to get a bright red colorant. Spanish King didn't trust much Joaquin Cortez so he just allowed him 250 men to conquer an unknown territory. As far nobody believed in his project, imitating Hollanders, to raise cochineal in new territories, Cortez was rewarded the worst and sicker sailor men. Can you imagine those sick and feeble Europeans, in unknown Central America jungles, meeting an Aztec warrior and squashing with fingers a cochineal in front of his eyes, making the holy Quezacoalt color to happen? That's why Barbary (North-Africa) fig isn't called Chiapas fig, in despite of the roman-looking Aztec fresco describing an eagle on prickly pears.
Due to its cinematographic History, we know very little about vanilla medicinal properties, apart from its supposed aphrodisiac power, that just may come from its unique exotic taste. Traditional vanilla knowledge have been totally wiped off. Aztecs considered it as a way to make divine food for Gods. Montezuma, the Aztec emperor, when getting aware Quetzalcoatl God was reigning in Madrid, the world center for red color (color of the Spanish Royal family and Quetzalcoatl), decided to offer Hernan Cortez one of the most precious Aztec treasures, more than gold, a priceless orchid that gave the divine taste to all aliments. None of them knew it was only fecundated thanks to a small wasp, just available in Central America's jungles. The orchid goes on boat with other treasures and gold, heading Madrid. Just what French pirates in west Indies were waiting for. They kill all the Spaniards, take the boat, take the gold, and do care the orchid, heading to La Reunion (Indian Ocean), a French pirates' nest, where they plant the orchid, that develops fabulously, with wonderful smelly flowers but as no small Mexican wasp, no fecundation and no vanilla (pirates weren't aware of the nature of Montezuma's gift). Vanilla Orchid turns an ornament plant, until a young slave, in love with a red-hair mistress, smashes and destroys her favorite flowers, that way letting pollen meet stigma. (what a psychoanalytic tale around food!) The legends says vanilla, the fecundated stigma of a Mexican orchid, was born that way in La Réunion, Indian Ocean. Now, they grow it in French Polynesia, Madagascar and other countries. It is still hand-fecundated, as far the small wasp refuses to leave Mexico, men have to do her job. But I wonder: why Mexico, the original country of the vanilla orchid, does not produce vanilla? Did the small wasp, the only being with humans able to fecundate the orchid, yet disappeared? Whatsoever, there's enough for a very good movie, vanilla-tasting.
Aztecism holds when a society bets its existence on a commonly held belief which entails this society’s own annihilation – as the old Aztecs did.
This statement belongs into the field of the professional historians. However, it in addition also possesses an uncanny actuality to date. For all of us – the whole world – have ever since 1929 learned to live with the scientific conviction that there once existed a Big Bang and that the universe is still young and expanding to date. All high school kids and all newspaper readers across the world share in this belief which got reinforced by some ten Nobel medals over the decades. To place doubt in their conviction automatically raises pitiful eyebrows.
This self-righteous common belief is, of course, based on a majority consensus maintained for 90 years. It could in principle still turn out to be mistaken, but such a case has never occurred in modern history before.
“Do you really place doubt in a planet-wide scientific consensus acquired by the best minds and the most prestigious societies over 9 decades?” is the question. “If so, something is bound to be ticking wrongly with you. Presumably, the Moon landings are also put in question by you,” so every pupil is ready to laugh out loud.
The notion of Aztecism stands for an irrational conviction held by a whole society. So much more for the worse if I now confess to the reader that I do adhere to the outrageous conviction of Zwickyism.
May I elaborate? I begin by admitting that I am the first author on quite a few unchallenged scientific publications which claim to prove that maverick astronomer Fritz Zwicky was right in 1929 with his ridiculed so-called “tired light theory” of the cosmos. The whole world is chuckling because it appears highly unlikely that we all live in an Aztec society for 90 years – or do we?
The kids who follow me can stop reading here. What I will continue to say next is only of interest to adults who have experience with how to deal with ingrained ideologists. In other words: this is a case for the psychologist?
Unless it deserves to be shreddered, the present text presents a very disturbing message. We all have heard the story of the ghost driver who complains about the flood of ghost drivers encountered by him. On the other hand, this is also the secret dream of every scientist: to for once come into a situation in which you determine the direction of further scientific progress. Provided, of course, that you are not deluded. Therefore the above scenario is a very rare event to reckon with in reality – much too rare for it to occur in a lifetime, right?
But the unlikely does sometimes apply. The famous science of Thermodynamics from more than a century ago does not stand alone anymore for a few years, for example. It has acquired a sister science which had been overlooked for more than a century, called Cryodynamics. Cryós in Greek means cold, thermós means hot. A side effect of the existence of the new science is that there was no Big Bang, as this was first seen by Zwicky in 1929.
“But if you lean yourself as far out of the window as you just did,” so you will reply, “then further implications of a sensational character are bound to be announced by you in a minute?” Yes Sir, do I respond meekly, there is especially one point: “No CERN safety for earth anymore.” The for 11 ½ years non-renewed official planetary safety report LSAG of CERN’s comes to everyone’s mind here as a historical fact.
After my having just made this accusation, you will understand why I have for a decade become an outlaw in the scientific community, one who is unworthy even of the benefit of the doubt. Imagine: to claim that ten thousand living scientists (at CERN) are deluded in sync along with 9 decades of mainstream science – this is an absolutely ridiculous claim of mine, is it not? And to proclaim in addition that this new view puts the continued existence of earth at risk if it is not addressed, is bound to be a case of irresponsible fear mongering. Although this is exactly what a today unknown crackpot once tried to convince his fellow Aztecs of.
I sympathize with your unavoidable logical skepticism: Cryodynamics clearly is “too big a jump” to be easily absorbed by the community. I would nonetheless be very glad if there were a few high school students on earth ready to give me the benefit of the doubt, Greta Thunberg included. So far, the very existence of her movement points to the existence of a subconscious connection between my a decade old results and the heroic Friday movement of today.
You have now seen my worried soul, my dear adult reader. Please, do not hate me too much for my driving my lonely scientific car in an allegedly non-ghostly direction. And forgive me if I love your children more than I see you do in case I am not mistaken.
Otto E. Rossler, a chaos researcher
November 29, 2019
Please help me describe this condition
Please take a section each, with references, if possible
Humour will be appreciated
'What do we, the Mayans and the Aztecs have in common? The answer is our love for chocolate! Some people like it sweet or milky, while others like bitter or without milk additives. Dark chocolate is one such popular chocolate that does not contain any milk additives. Today, it would pretty difficult to find someone who does not love chocolates. It has always topped the charts of comfort foods since it is quite healthy too. In this article, we are going to take you through this sinfully mouth-watering treat, and try to find out what does dark chocolate really contain.
A good dark chocolate is one with a high cocoa content in it. One cannot talk about this chocolate without talking about its health benefits. Dark chocolate has no milk in it; this gives it a rich brown color. The content of sugar varies making it either sweet, bitter, or semi sweet. We have often seen statements like 30%, 75%, or 80% dark chocolate. These percentages signify the cocoa content in the chocolate, which attributes to the bitterness in the taste of the chocolate.
It goes without saying that soul of all the ingredients in dark chocolate lies in cocoa. Without cocoa, there would be no chocolate. Then we have sugar, cocoa butter, and vanilla essence as the other ingredients. Chocolate has a substance known as lecithin. Lecithin benefits our heart by breaking down the cholesterol, thus, preventing heart diseases. The ingredients are packed with antioxidants known as flavonoids, which help control blood pressure and protect the heart. It is known as one of the foods that lower the blood pressure. Other than the body, dark chocolate also affects the serotonin levels in the brain. It is known to instantly uplift one's mood and induce a feeling of well-being and elation. This is because of the presence of alkaloids like theobromine and phenylethylamine, which release the feel-good hormone in the brain. Amongst the many other benefits of chocolate, it is known to have anti-diarrhea properties. Another good news for all the girls out there, acne is in no way connected to eating chocolate, so munch away on as many as you want!'
Remember the bromide is bad for canines...
I really should have posted my second comment on the other thread here, instead. I would prefer to devote the first thread to comments regarding that topic. I apologize for any confusion.
Our inability to decrypt and decipher Linear A leaves a great big hole in our understand of History through. perhaps, millennia.
Bathymetric research has shown that the global sea levels dropped as much as 125 meters during the last two glacial maximums and probably every glacial maximum of the Quaternary Period. This reduced the Mediterranean to two relatively dry basins, intersected by the Tunisia/Sicily/Italy land bridge. The Black Sea was reduced as well. The Nile was equally reduced. The Red Sea was also mostly dissipated.
The Glacial Maximums were not just cold, but extremely dry in many areas. Many climate patterns were altered. The Sahara would have been at its greatest expanse during these periods. Egypt would have been entirely arid. The African savanna would have suffered as would all its biological dependents. And Mankind would have been on the move.
It is a reasonable consideration that Europe may have been directly populated from North African Tunisia rather than some round about Mid-Eastern route. It is equally reasonable to consider that Arabia was populated by a direct migration across the southern portion of the Red Sea. As the Mid-East was probably arid, other migrations probably pushed on to the North.
Some of the European branch may have actually inhabited the Mediterranean Basins close to what rivers existed at the low points. These would have remained in cultural contact with those that moved directly into Europe.
Bathymetric research has been slowly investigating, now offshore, Neolithic sites. This is an area that deserves more funding to expand our historical and Archeological understanding.
I submit that it is reasonable to entertain the consideration that these neolithic Abeuropeans and neolithic Libyans were the same "race"
We do know that, later, the first people of the Nile Delta were unrelated to the people that overwhelmed them from the south. We are also given to understand that the delta dwellers had red hair while Narmer's invaders were dark-haired. It is reasonable to entertain that these "Upper" Egyptians were of neolithic Libyan extraction and that the Delta dwellers may have even been a proto-Sumerian advance.
My Achaean, Caucasian, ancestors did not make an appearance into Europe until about 2000 BC. Given the above, I cannot accept any Indo-European or Mid-Eatern genesis for the original Europeans. There is much consideration that there was a Neolithic European contribution to the populating of North America. Many Native people are up in arms about this. They need not be. The Europeans that were involved no longer exist and are no threat to their land claims. Those Abeuropeans were even more thoroughly reduced by the succession of Caucasian migrations than the Native Americans were by the modern "Europeans" They may live on in European genetic contributions, but that is immaterial in this case. The Basques may be the greatest repository of such genetic inheritance, but I am assuming that Caucasian contributions have watered that down as well.
If we consider Neolithic Europe as analogous to the Neolithic Americas we might also consider Crete as the cultural summit as the Incas and Aztecs were the Americas cultural summits. The Pelagassian Mainland must have derived the greatest association with and benefit from the rising Minoan culture.
Enough for now.