Opinionated B*****d Forum America. New World or Old News..

The most commonly accepted origin of America's name is it's derivative from the name Amerigo Vespucci, a Seville ship chandler who came to the New World in 1499, seven years after the arrival of Christopher Columbus. A less widely accepted view, often spat upon by conventional historians, is the name being A Merica. The Mandaeans were a Gnostic sect (an esoteric religious movement with it's climax during the 2nd and 3rd centuries BC with several ties to the origins of the modern day society of Freemasons) found in the regions south of Baghdad with beliefs in a land to the far west marked by a star titled 'Merica'. This star is often identified as Venus which is both the morning and evening star.
"In 1492 Christopher Columbus sailed to ocean blue." discovering the New World by landing in the Bahamas in '92, Puerto Rico in '93 and Cuba in '94. Consequently this new land was already occupied so the "great explorer" wasn't the first there obviously but was he the first European? Corn alone proves otherwise.
In the southern regions of Scotland is the village of Roslin where the Rosslyn Chapel rests, a location connected to early Christianity, early Masonic/Templars and the Celtics. Construction of this chapel began in 1441 and ended in 1486. In this chapel are carvings of the maize plant, corn, which was unknown outside of America. Not only was this chapel finished six years before Columbus's expedition was launched but Columbus having never stepped foot on the mainland wouldn't have known about maize in the first place.
Just southeast of Newport in the UK is a city by the name of Bristol, held within this city's archives are records dating to the early 1400's of a man by the name of John Cabot. This Mr. Cabot is said to have been trading goods with a land across the Atlantic. Knowing there is only one land across the Atlantic this means that even before the construction of the Rosslyn Chapel there were European Mariners trading with the Americas.
For more evidence of pre-Columbian European settlements let's look to America itself:
In Newport Rhode Island exists the Newport Tower believed in conventional history to be the remains of a 17th century mill. The rounded stone architecture and arched openings at the base of this tower are believed by many to be of more Romanesque, or typical with Templar architecture, than that common with 17th century American mills. Something else suggesting the tower is older than the conventional 17th century theme are the 1524 maps of Giovanni da Verrazano, an Italian navigator, who marked the location of this tower as a pre-existing Norman Villa nearly a hundred years before it's supposed 17th century construction.
In 1960 at L'Anse aux Meadows on the northern tip of Newfoundland Canada an archeological dig exposed several dwellings and tools common to Vikings around 500 years before the birth of Christopher Columbus. This is the only fully authenticated European existence in the Americas, meaning that conventional historians agree upon it's authenticity. This location alone proves how conventional historians will often times contradict themselves.
There are several other locations and artifacts to be found such as the knight's carving in Westford Massachusetts (having looked over several pictures of this stone I fail to see the image of a knight myself but I never was very good at those 'hidden picture' posters) who is dressed as a European Templar knight and whose shield depicts the image of a ship sailing towards the westward star Merica. There is the Kensington Rune stone founded in 1898 near Kensington Minnesota though it is still highly disputed weather this stone is authentic or a fraud (I'm open to either suggestions). The 15th century Vinland map, purportedly copied from an early 13th century map, shows parts of Africa, Asia, Europe and sections of a landmass across the Atlantic ocean identified as Vinland (a section of the American continent described by the Icelandic Norseman Leif Eiriksson approximately 1,000 AD.) Though the authenticity of this map is also in great dispute.
Screw archeology then, let's turn to anthropology:
The majority of Native American remains are identified as having more Asiatic attributions than Caucasian which supports the theory that modern Natives are descendants of Asian nomads having crossed a Bearing Straights landmass several thousand years ago but there are exceptions.
There is the ever famous Kennewick man discovered near Kennewick Washington in July 1996, this body was found to be more Caucasian than Asiatic though instead of being considered an early European explorer (European explorer dated as nearly 9,000 years old) it is described as being a relative of the Ainu peoples of Japan who are another anthropological paradox involving Caucasian skeletal structures as opposed to the expected Asiatic structures found in remains in every direction for thousands of miles.
There are also Amerindians of the central Great Lakes region with trace lineages founded in Europe but not in Asia. This would mean that thousands of years ago a group of nomadic hunter-gatherers ventured across the planet's largest landmass and settled in the central regions of North America without having left any traces of their journey behind or that ancient Europeans had in fact traveled across the Atlantic, through Canadian waters and inland by means of various rivers and lakes. The controversies over this lineage has landed it the title of the X-lineage found only in the Great Lakes region.
I could ramble on for hours about this subject but I believe you get the general idea: Conventional History is so full of holes, missing links and inconsistencies that it may as well be published next to pulp novels.
For further reading look into Uriel's Machine by Christopher Knight and Robert Lomas, Lies My Teacher Told Me by James W. Loewen and/or Forbidden History Douglas Kenyon. You can also look up any of the above mentioned subjects on Wikipedia.com

Riveting, I never realized how "in the dark" I really am until now.

Ever want suggestions of websites or DVD's or books pointing out the inconsistancies of American history, just let me know. Above all I would say a good place to start is definitely 'Lies my Teachers told me.'