Rapa Nui

>taking something with you and perserving it is destroying heritage

Meanwhile in Syria

I guarantee the Catholic Church has destroyed more pre-christian European relics than any Muslim community has
False on several counts
....Have you seen Latin America

>I guarantee the Catholic Church has destroyed more pre-christian European relics than any Muslim community has

WTF? I love Islam and hate Europe now because of this anonymous comment on an imageboard!

>preserving it
That's another thing.
>false on several accounts
Not trying to be arrogant, but can you explain your point?

Taking something out of its context is destroying heritage. It doesn't matter how cool a person thinks something is, stealing artifacts is pretty fucked up. And illegal in most places.

Inca aren't ancient
There is no direct evidence of Amerind migration to Easter Island
There is not a shred of evidence Rapa Nui are anything but Polynesian pre-european contact

Pedro Sarmiento de Gamboa, Martín de Murúa, Miguel Cabello Balboa were chroniclers of the XVI century who wrote about Tupac Yupanqui, and all of them, using different sources, coincided on this:
Tupac Yupanqui, being the prince of the Tawantinsuyu, was sent to conquer septentrional lands. After beating the cultures of the Gulf of Guayaquil, he received news from "locals" about some far away isles that had gold, resources and exotic animals, these "locals" refered to the Galapagos Islands, and it wasn't possible to know about them without being over there.

Then he undertook the adventure. He used rafts and Totoras with a great number of expeditionaries from the north of South America. He arrived to an Island, which he baptised: Auachumbi.
These chronic doesn't specify the location of the island, however affirms its existence and the name of the island. Tupac Yupanqui taught the natives about Inca pottery, metallurgy and textillery.

He stayed a while but before coming back to America he arrived to another island baptised: Ninachumbi.

When he got back, Tupac left some of his people and brought "black" slaves. This is interesting, knowing that the islands that have black natives are the Melanesia islands.

Are people in this thread trying to defend OP by comparing him to ISIS? Or is he doing it himself? I'm so confused.

More importantly
OP, did you try the empanadas made on the local sort of fatty fish? I remember them being amazing, also, why are there horses just running around on the shores of the northern part of the island, i nearly got trampled

Oops, I forgot to greentext that post.
>This information was ignored till the XX century. In the 60s a cathedratic Hermann Buse de la Guerra recovered the data from the spanish chroniclers so he could study them scientifically. He published "Los peruanos en oceanía" and "Historia maritima del Peru - Epoca prehistorica"; the polinesian theory is fundamented on this compiled information.

>Federico Kaufmann Doig explains the basis of the polinesian theory on "Historia y arte del Peru antiguo".

>In other words, Tupac Yupanqui sailed the Pacific Ocean to some isles baptised Auachumbi and Ninachumbi,yet the isles aren't specified. The report affirms it was just two isles, and that's what the historians affirmed.

>So Jose Antonio del Busto, to prove the Inca presence on the Oceanic isles, proposed to look for some vestiges of Inca culture on the polinesian isles. There are a thousand of Polinesian Isles, so he started to study the Humboldt Current to prioritice the probable isles who got colonized by the Inca.

>He arrived to the Mangareva Island and learnt about a legend: King "Tupa" came from oriental lands and brought new technology, pottery, textillery and metallurgy. This legend is shared with oral tradition. Also, there is a strait called Tupa, and a regional dance is also called "Tupa". He found Totora plant, which was used by precolumbian cultures to build their "canoe"-like boats.

>Then he went to the Easter Island. There is a legend called: Mahuna-te Ra'a which means Son of the Sun. The island was called "Navel of the World" in native language. (Inca capital was called Navel of the World in quechua) He found buildings with a peculiar masonry. It was the same as the Incas, and it was unique on all Polinesian isles.

>Del Busto writes his findings on "Tupac Yupanqui - Descubridor de Oceania" 2006.

I forgot to note that the Incas were descendants of Manco Capac, who was the "Son of the Sun", according to the legend.

>Thor Heyerdahl, a norwegian adventurer wanted to demonstrate the precolumbian colonization to Polinesia, so he built a raft with the same Moche technology and set sail to the Pacific Ocean. He succeded. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kon-Tiki_expedition

And now just for you:
>The official history tells you that in 1722 a dutch discovered the Polinesian Islands. He found on the Easter Island sweet potatoes and Totora plants.
>Actually on Peru, the first explorer of Oceania was Alvaro de Mendaña y Neira. In 1567 he discovered the Salomon Isles. In 1605 Pedro Fernandez de Quiros discovered Vanuatu. Luis Baez de Torres discovers New Guinea and Australia.

Extra info:
The polinesian god, Tiki didn't exist until the arrival of Tupac Yupanqui. The Tiwanaku culture, which fell in the 1000AC has a statue called Kon-Tiki (pic related). And the complete invocation of Wiracocha, the god creator is: APU KON TIKSI WIRACOCHA PACHAYACHACHIQ

Wow what a degenerate, destroying heritage and bragging about it. Seriously though that's pretty fucked up OP shame on you.

And finally:
>In the genomes of 27 living Rapa Nui islanders, the team found dashes of European and Native American genetic patterns. The European genetic material made up 16% of the genomes; it was relatively intact and was unevenly spread among the Rapa Nui population, suggesting that genetic recombination, which breaks up segments of DNA, has not been at work for long. Europeans may have introduced their genes in the 19th century, when they settled on the island.

>Native American DNA accounted for about 8% of the genomes. Islanders enslaved by Europeans in the 19th century and sent to work in South America could have carried some Native American genes back home, but this genetic legacy appeared much older. The segments were more broken and widely scattered, suggesting a much earlier encounter—between 1300 C.E. and 1500 C.E.

Incas colonized Easter Island.

Post a picture with your dick on it.

Thanks for the info dump. Was pretty interesting.

Sadly, this information isn't avaliable for most english speakers. I hope you enjoyed it.

I also enjoyed it

Pedro Sarmiento de Gamboa, Martín de Murúa, Miguel Cabello Balboa were chroniclers of the XVI century who wrote about Tupac Yupanqui, and all of them, using different sources, coincided on this:
Tupac Yupanqui, being the prince of the Tawantinsuyu, was sent to conquer septentrional lands. After beating the cultures of the Gulf of Guayaquil, he received news from "locals" about some far away isles that had gold, resources and exotic animals, these "locals" refered to the Galapagos Islands, and it wasn't possible to know about them without being over there.

1. Inca conquered people who supposedly travelled elsewhere

Again Inca had nothing to do with it, Inca were new.

2. Eastern Polynesia was/is almost completely lacks in the geology to have gold save for islands of recent volcanic history of which most gold was inaccessible and minimal

3. Black is not a static word, blackness could involve a number of variations without meaning literally black skinned individuals who by the way were all the way in Fiji.

Tell me how do you have any evidence that locals using balsas sailed all the way to Fiji and back with enough people to sell as slaves without picking up banana, breadfruit or other key Polynesian crops?

3. Resources are vague, clarify

4. Exotic animals is contextual, islands by definition carry many niche evolutionary examples of birds.
Peruvano nationalism with not a single peer reviewed study to back this.
Thor's theories have been completely oblivated in regards to Oceania, he was an adventurer who made stories and ideas to get finance.

You know I come from an island that is descended in part from people who travelled across the Indian Ocean and even I can recognize your "evidence" isn't anything concrete.

Genetic mixture of such a small amount is not a sign of conquest, it shows stable small intermixture through steady contact.

Was it loud?

In that case please post more :).

>1. Inca conquered people who supposedly travelled elsewhere
Explain yourself how this exterminates the adventures of Tupac who was supposed to be 25yo (1466) when he sailed out to the Pacific Ocean.

>2. gold
1 detail less to acknowledge

>3.black is not a static word
The problem of the thousand possibilities due to the numerous islands, it was noted and Del Busto started to "filter" which isles were more probable to be colonized by them studying the Humboldt Current.
>Peruvano nationalism with not a single peer reviewed study to back this.
>"I reject this because others rejected this"
The argument would be clarifying the impossible circumstances.
>Thor's theories
Irrelevant. He proved he could go to polynesian islands with just a simple precolumbian balsa.
>You know I come from an island that is descended in part from people who travelled across the Indian Ocean and even I can recognize your "evidence" isn't anything concrete.
I would like you to check the arguments then.

The oral tradition of these two Mangareva and Easter islands, resembles incredibly the Inca mythology and religion and its names, the Easter Island islanders even tell you that they killed their "oppresors" and put those statues after that, coi. [they were carved in the period 1100–1680 CE (rectified radio-carbon dates).]
>Inca men wore gold or silver plugs in the ears, which indicated their nobility. Their stretched piercings, which could reach the size of two inches, later inspired a Spanish nickname for the Inca people: orejones ("big ears").
The legend of the killing of those "big ears" and the statue origins. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanau_epe

The resemblance of the Easter Island structure to the Inca's is almost perfect and it wasn't replicable on the whole polinesian islands. The commom crops and animals is polemic. I'll check some things and go back.

What do you want to know?

No. poltards fear to condemn the acts of OP, because they believe people love muslims and are capable to use double standards against OP, and tolerate muslim history destruction.

You have to give it to a museum dude

This

Do you know nothing at all about Christianity's spread through Europe?

Yes, it was in fact mostly bloodless, at least for the pagans.

bump for the truth

Good post.

>Thor's theories have been completely oblivated in regards to Oceania, he was an adventurer who made stories and ideas to get finance.
One of my professors in undergrad was one of Thor Heherdahl's proteges. He had a lot of stories about the guy, and clearly admired him, but readily admitted he was kind of crazy, and pretty much wrong about everything. Apparently, that really got to him in his later years and he got super bitter about it, and even more emotionally invested in trying to prove mainstream academia wrong.

>thor's theories
They are irrelevant to the post he is replying to though.

How? Heyerdahl was originally brought up by a person who was claiming Incas settled Easter Island. That's part of what Heyerdahl was trying to prove, and that poster was obviously implied that Heyerdahl's success meant that Easter Island had been settled by the Incas.

Heyderdahl's being proven conclusion wrong about his theory (South Americans settled Polynesia) shows that the original poster was using spurious logic.

Nope. The fact that he succeeded in reaching the polynesia is enough to prove his point. Thor's theories, again, are irrelevant.

>fact that he succeeded in reaching the polynesia is enough to prove his point.
No, it isn't, because Heyerdahl was proven wrong. And most importantly through genetics, as the other poster pointed out. Again, Heyerdahl was originally brought up as supposed proof that South American settlement had happened, but the obvious issue with that argument is that Heyerdahl was wrong, despite succeeding in his experiment.It doesn't matter that Heyerdahl succeeded, and bringing him up was obviously a piece of intellectual dishonesty from the person who was acting like his experiment proves settlement happened, when further research has shown that to not be the case. It's perfectly relevant to bring up that point up.

>genetic
Lack of hybridization isn't proof of no-colonization. The cultural references on the Easter Island and the dates of the structures are pretty clear.

The same argument about lack of hybridization isn't enough to disprove this possibility and consideration.

Any recommendations to read up on Incas? I can read in spanish.

Maria Rostworowski. There are a lot of texts and reports from the s.XVI that historians have skipped or didn't check. She has conpiled those texts and published books with recent info about them.

Are you the malagasy guy?
I've argued with you before, I see you making the same mistake here, read this:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hoc_hypothesis

>Are you the malagasy guy?
No. And nothing I've said is ad hoc; I just shows up to add an anecdote about Thor Heyerdahl because I thought people might find it interesting, and I got roped into defending someone else's point for some reason. The only ad hoc reasoning that was going is is that someone was arguing that the debunking of Heyerdahl's claims doesn't matter because his experiment showed that something COULD have happened, despite evidence indicating otherwise.

That legit makes me angry. Priceless relics of the past destroyed because some dumb fucks couldn't get their shit together

Evidence didn't show otherwise. He told you that lack of hybridization isn't proof of no-colonization.

Bump for the truth

Easy there Indy

>lack of hybridization isn't proof of no-colonization.
Are you really going to lecture someone about logical fallacies and then talk about proving a negative? Present evidence suggests there's no reason to think that Incas settled on Easter Island (and in fact the opposite - that Polynesians could have made it to South America), so there's no reason to assume that it did. That's just the way arguments work in history (and science for that matter); arguments require proof. Again, that's where the ad hoc reasoning was coming in: someone brought up a point, it was refuted, then someone else was claiming that the refutation doesn't matter because of what could have happened and how negatives can't be proven.

>i don't have to prove a negative
You made the statement that it's not possible for it to happen. That's not true.

Now:
Culture and legends from both sides affirm the trip of Tupac from SA to that island, also, the Mangareva island also makes references to the same trip.

Also, the dates from the carvings and the legends coincide specificaly. You cannot deny the immense cultural resemblance between those two. The trip from polynesians to SA, there is literally nothing cultural nor verbal tradition to make that assumption.

Otherwise, the trip from SA to those two islands, Magareva and Rapa nui, is pretty much probable to happen.

You tried to draw attention from those facts, you failed horribly.

Incas colonized Rapa nui and Magareva.

Bump for the truth

Veeky Forums is some random guy keeping it.

It could have been completely bloodless and that still wouldn't magically mean the Christians didn't destroy a fuckton of temples and literature.