Modern Man Lost in Time

[captain81503]

I was fooling around on the internet today and came across a few articles about how in a few places across the world, ancient foot prints have been found in rock that at one time was mud... the only thing is that these ancient foot prints are supposedly made by someone with the the stride and structure of a modern homo sapien.

I'm sure many things might explain this: The rock isn't as old as it seems, millions of years of erosion have altered the prints made them look modern, its some kind of elaborate hoax, etc. The mystery of these footprints intrigues me. As much as I would like to believe they are the foot prints of a modern man lost in time or the prints of a person from an ancient civilization, my logical mind makes me lean towards the theory that they are footprints of something altered by erosion. However, my not so logical mind leads me to other... possibilities.

We are familiar with the theory of ancient civilizations predating ours. However, what if the ancient alien in the ancient alien theory is us? Maybe we came from the stars? Maybe we found this planet and set up a colony or colonies. Then, something happened and the colonies failed. They either all died or were forced to evacuate. Perhaps all tech or structures were removed by this ancient civilization before they left or if they died, anything left behind would surely be eroded away by Mother Nature after millions of years... except for these mysterious footprints of course.

What if some of those thousands of people who go mysteriously missing across the world every year were somehow lost in time? Maybe time travel is the pastime of the future and some poor soul's trip became a permanent one because of some unfortunate problem. Did any of these poor hypothetical souls survive for long? We'll probably never now, but they survived enough to leaves these footprints we see today.

What if the footprints are an artifact from another universe where modern man shared the planet with dinosaurs and somehow they have fallen through the cracks and wound up on this universe's version of Earth?

Ok... I'm just rambling here, throwing ideas out. Anyone else intrigued by this enigma? Anyone else hear of other theories?

 

[Charlie Prime]

I'm a Conspiracy Theorist who enjoys examining various theories of how people conspire together to accomplish things, so I like Michael Cremo's thesis.

Forbidden Archeology - Michael A. Cremo

Read Cremo's book: Forbidden Archeology: The Hidden History of the Human Racec

His thesis is basically this:

Archeological evidence exists which show that humans have inhabited the earth for millions of years, not the 100 thousand or so that current, orthodox theory says.

When such evidence is discovered, the high priests of Academia hide it, so it never enters the scientific literature. Young students never see it in journals, or hear about it during their classwork, and so begin work in the field thinking it "unscientific" to consider such ideas.

As evidence of this conspiracy he cites hundreds artifacts that are ignored, thousands of artifacts that have been removed from museums and locked away in warehouses, and scores of academics who have had their funding removed for attempting to publish the evidence.

The reason this conspiracy exists is that in the early 20th century scientists were so desperate to have Darwin's theory of evolution accepted that they hid any scientific evidence which could have been used by religious authorities to question it.

The evidence of global catastrophe 10,500 years ago and megalithic structures dating to over 20,000 years ago is growing more difficult to suppress.

The orthodox theory that humans didn't develop civilizations until 5,000 years ago is looking more ridiculous all the time, but orthodoxies don't change until the old farts who spent a lifetime selling it to students in lecture halls as The Truth die off.

 

[trainedobserver]

...
The reason this conspiracy exists is that in the early 20th century scientists were so desperate to have Darwin's theory of evolution accepted that they hid any scientific evidence which could have been used by religious authorities to question it.

The evidence of global catastrophe 10,500 years ago and megalithic structures dating to over 20,000 years ago is growing more difficult to suppress.

The orthodox theory that humans didn't develop civilizations until 5,000 years ago is looking more ridiculous all the time, but orthodoxies don't change until the old farts who spent a lifetime selling it to students in lecture halls as The Truth die off.

It seems like there would have to be more to it than just "scientists so desperate to have Darwin's theory of evolution accepted." The Catholic Church and others have had a big steak in the controversy as well. Any information that highlighted the fictional nature of the history presented by the main religions "sacred texts" and their false gods weren't tolerated and that certainly precedes Darwin.

 

[Charlie Prime]

There is a LOT more to it than just the installation of logical positivism.

It gets mixed with shifting political ideologies, power fights among various billionaires, all kinds of stuff. Those intrigues and machinations are interesting history, but it takes decades to sort through it.

However, the main obstacle to be overcome was the religious texts which had always been presented to the tax livestock as historical, rather then metaphorical. Simple people have to be fed simple narratives.

This is why it's important to ridicule any deviations from orthodoxy. Anomalies confuse the uneducated. They aren't equipped to deal with them. It's better to condition them to revert to knee-jerk hatred of any deviations that emerge. Things run smoother.

 

[Muadib]

Perhaps I'm missing the point here but I don't see how the theory of evolution could possibly be a barrier to the idea that civilization is much older than current accepted scientific theory allows. Since the vast majority of evolutionary biologists agree that modern homo sapiens has been around for at least 100,000 years, and some like Richard Dawkins believe that we've been around far longer, to the tune of 250,000 years, I don't see how the problem has anything to do with evolution, which doesn't posit any official timelines, just the mechanism by which species differentiate.

As for Cremo, I find his work interesting but there are many, many problems with it as smarter men than myself have pointed out. Review: Forbidden Archaeology's Impact | NCSE

You also have to recognize that he has a bias in favor of a religious interpretation for the genesis and evolution of mankind, specifically one based on Hindu Creationism:

Cremo is a member of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness and the Bhaktivedanta Institute. He has written several books and articles about Hindu spirituality under the name Drutakarmā dāsa. He has also been a contributing editor to the magazine Back to Godhead and a bhakti yoga teacher. Cremo told Contemporary Authors that he decided to devote his life to Krishna in the early 1970s, after receiving a copy of the Bhagavad Gita at a Grateful Dead concert. In the end of 1990s he authored a paper on the official ISKCON statement on capital punishment.[7] His work on "Puranic Time and the Archaeological Record" was published in ISKCON Communications Journal[8] and Time and Archaeology.

It seems to me that your problem lies with the officially established timeline of human civilization that has been gleaned from archaeology, not evolution. As the author of the article I linked to points out, evolution has nothing to do with the study of stone age tools and artifacts, so I don't see how Cremo, or anyone else for that matter, could possibly hope to disprove evolution by analyzing artifacts that have nothing to do with it.

 

[Charlie Prime]

Perhaps I'm missing the point here but I don't see how the theory of evolution could possibly be a barrier to the idea that civilization is much older than current accepted scientific theory allows.

It isn't.