Like i said, you and OP dont even know what you are arguing against. Either you didnt read the book or had a ardent biased perspective while yall did because you are posting shyt this man never said. Those who acsribe to the theory and really study this subject made no claims that the natives were happless nitwits who couldnt tie their own shoes.
Show me once in the book where Van Sertima claims africans taught natives how to grow crops. You cant, he instead points to how certain crops that weren't indigenous to America but were grown in africa are found there during the supposed contact period. Show me in the book were he claimed the africans taught the natives how to build. Again you cant, he chose to write about the diffusionist theories that shows the influence africans had on how and why and structures like the pyramids and oblesks would be constructed in Precolumbian America.
The link that
@Mess World posted earlier in this thread deals with all of this. Van Sertima most certainly maintains that what we now consider to be Olmec civilization popped off after direct contact with Egypto-Nubians. I'm starting to question whether or not YOU'VE read the book. When people make the same claims about Arabs and Europeans influencing Africans people like you are quick to cry "CAC!," but when you try and do the same thing with indigenous american cultures (real ones) you dress your language up in an entirely different way, ie; here you call it a "confluence of cultures." Please.
Here is the link again just in case you missed it:
http://www.unl.edu/rhames/courses/current/vansertima.pdf
I don't know what else you need.
Van Sertima was from Guyana, he himself was part macusi indian, he had no interest in shytting on natives to prop up africa.Olmecs, incas, and mayans delveloped great civilizations, only a fool would deny that. Dude had always maintained the claim that there was a confluence of cultures with african contact. Not one group cilivizing a group of savages. He repeatedly reinforces that claim throughout the book.
Regardless, saying africans influnced the natives does not belittle them. Every culture was influeced by ones that existed before it. That's no different than Egypts influence on Rome and Greece, the same as how Nubian culture influeced Egyptian culture. It is historical fact that cultures learn from other ones they are in contact with. It seems only to be an issue and denied when the african is in the role of teacher.
Contact and cultural exchange between Egypt and Greece can be documented and verified. Same with Egyptians and Nubians. Contact with pre-colonial mesoamerican cultures cannot...not by any stretch of the imagination. It's true that these peoples developed great, and highly cultured civilizations, but they did so on their own, period. Not every culture on the planet necessarily had to be influenced by another, ethnocentric opportunists, African, European, Indian, Chinese, whatever need to just accept it move on. It's disgusting that people who may be legitimately interested in African history will be flooded with links to this type of garbage when attempting to do research.
I PM'ed a fairly popular poster here a while ago asking for some book recommendations on ancient Ethiopia, preferably pre-christian. He said he couldn't because he wasn't really aware of any. Why is it that it's so hard to find information on that, but right now there are over 10,000 sites online talking about bullshyt Africoid Olmec fantasies? I shouldn't have to tell you why that's absurd.
BTW, you didn't answer my question: why hasn't genetic evidence in the past several decades proven any of Van Sertima's claims to be correct?
@Mess World
