Comments by "Pottenger\x27s Human" (@LTPottenger) on "Metatron" channel.

  1. oi, mate! Did you pay for a resurrection loicense?
    10
  2. They didn't really have them in Africa at the time of hannibal, as defined by the Romans anyway. They had them in small but increasing numbers over time though. And nobody was 'integrated' like today in spite of what that idiot Mary Beard says. You had a few rich citizens and everyone else was dirt. Only later in the empire did large hordes get baptized as romans and the empire was toast after not much of that as the real Romans pretty much puffed out of existence.
    8
  3. As a lead pipe, I wholeheartedly agree. That guy is usually off base.
    3
  4. Finally a video after my own heart.
    3
  5. They don't know anyway, he's full of it and the archaelogists all guess about skin color and many genetic tests have shown light eyes in the region anciently. There has also been a ton of influx from africa and india and even mongolia since that time so the idea people in the levant were the same as modern iraqis is beyond ridiculous.
    2
  6. They won't if these lunatics keep getting their way.
    2
  7. Sorry to hear that, unfortunately political terror is becoming the norm.
    2
  8. They hate anything normal.
    1
  9. They want history rewritten, and with zero europeans in it. Which has gone on for centuries already.
    1
  10. You don't launch anything when you are just trying to survive the onslaught. France and England as we know them are both founded by vikings so who would be going?
    1
  11. Nice video.
    1
  12. Finland is another story. Clearly it does not exist. But seriously the deal with Finland is that people can be too dumb to understand the difference between a recognized nation and an area and a people, and nations like we think of it today are a very new thing. Finland had to deal with two naughty neighbors so was seldom recognized as truly independent, just like Poland that did not exist for centuries as its own state then poof it did so again.
    1
  13. I think you have many big assumptions in there that just don't hold water, especially regarding how a Jewish person is supposed to look from the era which is pure bs. When archaeologists do reconstructions, they have the exact same issue when it comes to eye, hair and skin color. Which they pulled entirely out of thin air in the few reconstructions we have of the time. Also, Jesus was from Galilee, which translates to basically 'foreign quarter'. This tribe was a hodgepodge group and had a lot of traditions nothing like the rest of the jews, such as burial mounds. Probably also where baptism and ritual cleansing originates if it's not with the phrygians up north. Israeli archaeologists are never going to say they were influenced by anyone, they have a huge bias and are in a position where they do not want to show that in any way. But obviously everyone is influenced by other cultures and obviously there were different tribes of jews in the bible. While Jesus was a descendant of David, it's just a giant assumption that the jews of 2000 years ago were the same as the original jews of the bible. Just like it's a giant assumption jews of today look like they did 2000 years ago. Adam means 'from the red' esau had red hair, blushing is also impossible unless you have fair skin, egypts showed the skin of jews in their art as being very fair, it goes on and on. It was also a multicultural area even back then, so you could easily have blonde people and there are many mummies of blonde people in egypt, and red haired people, some as much as 7 foot tall. You could also easily have black people in the roman era as well, anywhere in the entire roman realm, though they would have been rarer the further from africa you went. There's also DNA evidence of people with light eyes in sumeria and many statues with it all over north africa, and natives with red and even blonde hair today who have no european ancestors for many centuries. Everything you said is based on assumptions and has no basis in anything and we can't know for sure what he looked like at all.
    1
  14. All ancient DNA shows everyone in ancient med was the same, and very similar to modern italians. So not like a swedish man but nothing like an arab or subsaharan african. But the jews came to canaan they weren't born there. Anyone looked at in Roman times are not necessarily the original jews, who came from elsewhere because they had gone through captivity, and claim to be sumerians from Ur but may be froma different place of similar name in Turkey. There were no borders back then so the looks could be anything. The jews in the north (like jesus) did not go through captivity. Which could also change their genetics. And while Jesus was of the line of David, his blood had been in the north with the now lost tribes we know nothing about, so that is yet more confounders. So really the image they have is perfectly fine, he could be whiter though, or he could be much darker or even black for all we know.
    1