From: Rick McCallister
Message: 51520
Date: 2008-01-20
>__________________________________________________________
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: kishore patnaik
> To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 9:38 AM
> Subject: Re: [tied] Maya
>
>
> The scholars have no unified answer to the origins
> of Mayans. Nor no one knows conclusively why they
> are called Mayans and who called them so first. My
> guess that they are called so after Maya is as good
> and as scientific or imaginative as yours (that they
> are called after some city which itself belonged to
> the decaying times of Mayan).
>
> If Mayans did not call them so, can you please
> give me the original name/s of the civilization and
> the concerned references?
>
> The sanskrit influences on Mayans are beyond doubt
> and that influence is highly limited on them means
> they followed their own languages and their own
> traditions- just as Daityas, while staying in Indian
> Subcontinent,did.
>
>
> Give me better reasons and counter evidence to
> condemn my "dogmas"
>
> Kishore patnaik
> ============
> Mayans' name is irrelevant :
> You have two other languages named maya in
> Cameroun and Australia.
> ===
> People have doubted for years that any connection
> between the American continent and Pacific Oceana
> could have existed.
> It has only been recently accepted that Chickens
> reached South America before Spaniards set foot
> there.
>
> Your claim "beyond doubt" is absurdly incompetent.
> Unless "beyond doubt" means "no doubt it's wrong".
>
> I would not name your "ideas" "dogma" : it's
> nonsense.
> And to be frank,
> As far as this forum is concerned,
> it is not worth discussing : it is spam.
>
> Arnaud
> ==========
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Be a better friend, newshound, andhttp://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
>
>____________________________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
>
>
>