Results 1 to 1 of 1

Thread: The Atlanteans

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    alphaknave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Last Online
    Tuesday, November 16th, 2010 @ 04:54 AM
    Status
    Prolonged Absence
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Country
    Confederate States Confederate States
    State
    Virginia Virginia
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Computer Engineer
    Religion
    Philosophical Paganism
    Posts
    192
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post

    Post The Atlanteans

    Ok, I have recieved negative feedback before whenever I bring up Varg Virknes. To bad, because I want to addess the idea of "Atlantis". Here is an interview with Varg Virknes and what his view is, followed with my ideas. I would like anyone to give their opinions on Varg's and my reasoning. Please be reasonable and understand I am not very scientific, nor have much to back my theories up with. They are just locial conclusions. Please let me know how close I am to "the dot" in your opinions.

    “[Q:] Another question by Durbwakh from Russia: European nations were descended from Hyperboreans. How do You think who were Hyperboreans descended from?

    [A:] Well, I wouldn't use the term "Hyperboreans", but I guess that is irrelevant. Obviously I cannot say for sure, but it seems the Hyperboreans, to stick to Your term, came from Atlantis to Europe, when Atlantis was covered with ice, some 80.000 years ago. The ruins of Atlantis most likely lie under the ice of Antarctica (thus it sank into "a sea" of ice), and a natural disaster forced the Hyperboreans to move to other parts of the world (it must be a misprint, because Hyperborea was in the Arctic - ed.). Some places they settled in uninhabited lands, and some places they settled in parts of the world that were inhabited by other races. Some tribes were assimilated by larger populations of other races (like in America, some 10.000-20.000 years ago), others perished, and the only tribe that survived "unpolluted" was the one that ended up in Europe. This tribe is the origin of all the European (that is "white") peoples - and this is of course the tribe I am talking about when I say we all had the same language and religion in the past.

    [Q:] According to the modern researches ancient Aryans came to India from the territory of The North Urals and brought their belief - later called Hinduism. Then they moved to the West and explored Europe and North Africa. Do You see straight connection between Hinduism, Buddhism and German/Scandinavian beliefs?

    [A:] No, I don't, and I have to tell that the theory regarding the Indo-European "invasion" of Europe is highly dubious. The Aryans were people who came to the Indus valley, alright. They had a European origin and they brought their culture to the Indus valley. After a while they were assimilated by the larger population of natives, and then their high-culture collapsed. In other words the Aryan tribe disappeared due to race mixing. We still see that the highest caste (meaning "colour", by the way!) has some Aryan blood left, as sometimes there are still children born with blue eyes or blonde hair in this caste.

    What You are talking about is a theory that there was a migration of Indo-Europeans, or "Aryans", into Europe some 4.000 years ago. They base this theory on the spread of bronze weapons, that is the spread of a certain type of bronze axes (battle axes). This might sound reasonable, but it is actually nonsense. There was no "invasion" into Europe by the Aryans. What we saw was a spread of the bronze technology, that was quickly adopted by all the European (the other "Aryan") people.

    The theory of the "Battle Axe People" and their invasion into Europe some 4.000 years ago is actually very silly. We can compare what happened to the spread of feudalism in the Middle Ages, and obviously that was not an invasion of a new and different tribe either - but the spread of a new way to organize society. Nor does it mean that the spread of "Microsoft" all over the world is due to the fact that some American tribe conquered the Earth in the 80-ies and 90-ies, as could be implied by future archaeologists using the same logic trying to explain the worldwide spread of what happened when all the European tribes suddenly began to produce artifacts of bronze. Archaeology is a very inaccurate science and more than often their conclusions are extremely ignorant.”

    I think this idea that all Europeans came from a single source (Atlantis) that was in the north, which contributed to our light features, strong body features, and high intellect is a more possible one than that we are just more evolved forms of some other older type of human, like a Negro man. But, I think it is probable that the early humans wandered up to Atlantis and developed there before spreading to Europe, which is why the “White” idea is so steady throughout Europe, even in the areas that are particularly warm and “tropical” like the areas where dumber races developed. The reason that people have varying skin tones as you get more South in Europe could be from two things (in my opinion): One, they “de-adapted”, or adapted to the warmer climate, which less intellect is needed, and darker pigmentation is needed because of more sun influence. Two, they were reduced from admixture with non-European peoples. I think it is probably both. The “de-adapted” idea is probably more associated with the middle Europeans (in Germany and Poland for example) where Alpinid, Borreby, and other less Nordic peoples. The borders of Europe, however, could have experienced mixing with other races. This is probably more evident in the Southern European countries (Italy for example) where Mediterranid types are prominent.
    Last edited by alphaknave; Tuesday, October 11th, 2005 at 10:53 PM. Reason: Spelling...

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •