Recent DMR's

[Anaximander]

One thing he does point out that makes sense is the idea of self-censorship. And then there is the idea that people protect themselves and their lifestyles that he mentions.

If you find an artifact that dates to a point that it shouldn't and you have the gall to say so, then you are taking a risk if you are an archeologist. It might work and you might be correct, but if it doesn't then you have slipped up in a big way you can lose your meal ticket and it doesn't matter if you are correct or not - you're a nut now baby.

Better yet, say some young whipper snapper comes along and has evidence that would invalidate much (to even just some) the stuff I've been getting paid to say - well I'm going to go out of my way to crush that little bugger before he shits in my path. (Nobody will believe him when I'm done with him. I'm retired though, so I'm not saying I do this currently.)

Anyhow, hopefully, the new openness that the internet has brought the world will make it more difficult to bury new discoveries and will enable/encourage people to come forward without fear of being crushed and forgotten.

One thing that does bother me though is how any legit discoveries that give us cause to rewrite our history will always be compared to the zany wacked out crap that is on the internet only a lick or two away from the good stuff. Pisses me off man. Gotta take the good with the bad though, eh.

 

[dad2059]

Ancient Astronaut Theory was my introduction to "alternative science" many, many years ago and I never regretted reading Von Daniken, Sitchen and Cremo's writings. Although they have been berated, harassed and disparaged over the years, there is enough anecdotal evidence all over the world to support their theories and warrant further studies into their hypotheses, and to be broadcast by the mainstream History Channel (such as it is) sometimes validates this.

The point is that AAT is just as valid as other theories linked to UFOs, demons, cryptoterrestrials and other paranormal events that cross over from other dimensions. They should be embraced, not ridiculed.

 

[Kieran]

Well wasn't that a a fun butt-kicking?!

'Over-educated' is a negative thing? That's called anti-intellectualism....plain old dumbing down. My beliefs aren't narrow-minded and rarely feature on the forums. If I express a view, it's usually after a lot of reading up or a few years of thinking about the subject. I'll ignore the other generalisations, because I enjoyed reading them. Yeah I think you're talking out your ass about me, but it's cool to vent sometimes...

For years, I believed in a lot of the stuff you do. Bought the books and bored the shit outta friends with tales of Atlantis and lost civilisations. One passage in a Charles Berlitz book stood out one day and I started to check up on the stuff. Started reading academic history, studied a little at college and university. Read more. Learned more and informed myself. It's all a house of cards built on foundations of petrified horsecrap.

A lot of guys see Cremo as a hero showing the cover-up of science. With his collection of news snippets and 'sacred texts' showing advanced technology, giants and spark-plugs have been around for millions of years on Earth; he proves science has hidden it from us. Why has his research ended in the 19th Century? Why hasn't he applied the same approach to modern life? Why does he ignore evolutionary theory and keep his fans in the dark?

Possibly because he's a fundamentalist Hare Krishna follower? That his beliefs take the Bagavhad Gita literally and that anatomically modern humans walked (and flew) the Earth millions of years ago? Like Creationists, these ideas cannot stand in their literal meaning. We know that Earth wasn't created 6000 years ago and we know that Homo Sapiens Sapiens wasn't around millions of years ago. We also know that there's no evidence to support either position. So he scatters a ton of old news snippets and hearsay around and adds leading questions and special pleading to make his idea of reality slightly more plausible.

Like the Creationists, the quickest way to make your ideas seem plausible is to undermine anything that *doesn't* support them. In this case, it's science and particularly archaeology. So he goes on the attack with innuendo and aspersions that the international science community is 'hiding the truth' and that Smithsonian historians are burning the evidence. By smearing normal guys, just doing their jobs, with a veneer of dishonesty and conspiracy, he seeks to bolster his belief system.

It's easy to share his views as a lot of people feel hostile to scientists and archaeologists. His targets are other people's targets too. The crazy thing is, he isn't ragging on science so you can have space aliens building the pyramids. He isn't clearing the way to show NASA has lied or that your Tuatha Dé Danann were space visitors. He wants to piss all over science and pervert education so is beliefs in Vishnu aren't challenged and he doesn't have to think about the cognitive dissonance.

Your mixing up the two, I would hope people would look to educate themselves as much as humanly possible. But in Life, I personally have seen the over-educated be overly negative about some of the mysteries of the World. It something you come across as I have, you met lot of those people in work and outside of work, I put it down to a number of things, not just they have had their hands on a book and their hand stuck in one, real education in my opinion can only be gained when you put that knowledge to work practically, and unfortunately lot of over-educated people, have been thought a skill, but don't no how to use it in the real world. It pains me to see how the over-experienced and overqualified get marginalised today for this in the work place.

I not battling Intellectual thinking, that is not me, I do have to come up out of the shadows though, when I see people use their education as a tool to dismiss something they can't agree on, even though there is ample or interesting evidence for another scenario to be possible.

I see it as a form of debunking not a educated guess on their part. Todays education is all about the belief in another womens or mans ideas. I personally, tend to give lot of applause to the people who investigate a topic, not the people who teach it, that is just me, now that doesn't automatically mean I believe everything they say literally, but i do process and take-in the information received and check does it makes any sense, if it does I will form my own theories based around the information i take in.

I'm sorry, if you thinking I am digging at your side for something to gain. I am not, i personally believe your either naive, or you, just don't want to face up to the possibility that you have not been told everything there is to know!

I can see how my views would get your unique temper going or your blood going to boiling point, but you probably tell me that never happens, well I have to disagree I experienced your dogmatic approach with the Egyptian Pyramid discussion, and you couldn't even contemplate there is a mystery yet unsolved about the place in the world!

Why have you brought up creationism I don't understand. I think it is shabby belief system that has no place in the modern World, the earth is billions of years old in the making, i have no problem with that. Attacking this belief system doesn't support your argument in anyway.

Plato never claimed Atlantis was never true, He used dialogues to express his beliefs. You have just confirmed that you bought the books that other people wrote and Atlantis was discussed. And you said you started telling your friends and they were basically not interested ( why lack of wonder on their behalf what was it do you think? ) Moving on.... and you went of after reading one passage in Charles Berlitz book, and started researching this stuff at college or University (am i right so far?)

I honestly don't no what you were expecting to find, were you expecting to find meaning for the passage that you read, some factual confirming of the given passage? I've never read this book by Charles Berlitz, but you always have to be careful accepting another person's interpretation of tales, which date back thousands of years of history. It may be true, what Charles claimed who knows, Atlantis for the most part is speculation, but there is some interesting points, you'd should not overlook, and here is some of my own ideas about the subject based on the evidence.

If your uncle or aunt told you something even, if it was beyond the pale for you personally, would it not effect you deeply, i ask you that! and I often wonder was Plato informed about this legend as young boy from his uncle and not this character Kritias, he just needed to the tell the story? But like I said above nowhere, does Plato claim Atlantis never existed, these tales read to me like he was describing an actual place, that perhaps once existed and was destroyed. He does often describe actual landmarks that were yet undiscovered at least to our accepted knowledge or view of history.

Nobody finds it all strange he says this land (island) ( lies to the west past the pillars of Hercules) which is basically past Spain and Portugal, and what do we have a enormous landmass in the Atlantic, and in the Pacific called the Americas, which we are told in our text-books was undiscovered land back during the classical times.

I believe he Plato was speaking of some race of people, that was in and around that region in the Atlantic. But before you shoot this down friend, remember Plato never once again claimed Atlantis was imaginary or not real, that is the viewpoint from which you should always start your research and then progress from!

I can't reply to everything you brought up in your posting, but i will try to iron out some points with you that, I consider valid. We don't have to look very far to find real mysteries scattered around the world today, a mysteries that are not hidden, and that are above ground and not lost forever!

How about "Balbek Turkey for example, have you ever adequately explained, and your required to at least try, how were "1,000 Thousand Ton Stones" moved from one large distance to another, and placed with precision to form structures like temples, without having modern equipment to help them?

Please explain your theory for all us simple minds to read, based on your knowledge of what was available at the time to these ancient people, tools and equipment so on!

If you can't answer that one please explain the structures at Pumu Punku!

Non of these places have ever been explained in a adequate manner by academics EVER" and you are foolish person, if you have the believe that those two places in general, have been explained fully inside the pages of the history and science text books available today to students.

Cremo, is presenting information and evidence sometimes with tangible stuff that you can feel and touch, so why do you presume he is making it all up to sell a certain theory or theories to an audience?

I believe your clouding the issue with your views on reality, were you should be looking at what he has found and form a conclusion based on those details.

He is of course an author of a book promoting a theory we might have been around longer, but if he had not found anything, a would his theories just fall down after a while, and his research would hold less importance to many!

That fact he has found items that are extremely weird, and out of place, and the fact that one lady who was doing archaeological did in Mexico I believe? discovered a site that was after she dated it, was old as 250,000 years, and she lost her job because of bringing it to the attention of her peers, tells me there is a cover-up or silencing of finds, that don't fit in with the parameters of human origins decided by the mainstream. If this is an example of what is going on, what else has been denied or covered up?

Lastly and your ignorance shows. The Tuatha Dé Dannann legends are based on texts and oral tradition handed down from the Celts or Keltic tribes that migrated from Europe to the British Isles. The tales do not talk about space or anything like that, lot of these tales were written by the monks in the 12th and 13th century after the fact, but many of these books which talk about the Tuatha Dé Dannann are now in the hands of Museums in Dublin and Museums around the UK.

The Legends were always considered to be history until the 17th century, something changed and I kind of know why, but if you look back into history around the 11th and 15th century, the Monks of Ireland, while the rest of Europe was still in the dark ages, came to up with some of the most marvellous, and beautiful pieces a manuscripts and books of the time, these books published influenced the whole of Europe no history buff can dispute what I type here.

The problem with some of the tales is, they talk of supernatural things, well stuff that doesn't make sense now today to our view of the world back then. The tales described marriages battles and wars, and the reason why the Tuatha Dé Dannann left the Island of Ireland probably around 3000 years ago or more, some of the tales supply dates of time, some don't.

I personally am convinced based on the evidence and of sites at Tara, Newgrange and others places around Ireland this people if they were people? lived and occupied Ireland until the coming of the Milesians, who came from Greece or Spain or perhaps Turkey (the milesians have an actual real history we can research) and they battled the Tuatha and won a treaty was signed and the Tuatha left, it is said, whoever or whom the Tuatha were, they'd went underground or returned to a spiritual kingdom hidden from mortal eyes according to the myths!

The Milesians were mostly the Irish peoples ancestors not the Celts, the Celts arrived later. This has been borne out recently wit the recent DNA and Genetic testing done at Universities in London, and Dublin. Everyone can find that research and the peer reviewed papers of those studies online.

Anyway, previous to those studies it was of the believe among the collective Irish race had a Celtic background, now the DNA testing tells us the Irish came over from the Spanish region, mostly likely the Basque region, the welsh and people of scottish background are the same, there ancestors came from the Spanish mainland as well.

So prior to this scientific discovery which is less than 20 years old, the legends that are thousands of years old in the making, in parts speak of a large army coming from Spain (THE MILESIANS) to Ireland to remove the Tuatha DÉ Dannann. According to the Legends these people settled thee and became the Irish or Gaels over time. My intellectual feelings are teling me something, if non of this legends are true, how did the legends get it so right?

I will end this long post and see what you have to say, before commenting further.

 

[Kandinsky]

I will end this long post and see what you have to say, before commenting further.

Hiya Kieran, that's a whole lot of points to deal with and there's a little 'bait and switch' in there too. I'm cool with your points and will try and answer a few of them rather than going down that point-for-point thing that some guys in forums enjoy. The fact that you've spent some time writing that essay reply is worthy of respect and hence this friendly reply.

Where you see me writing stuff against some widely held beliefs, it's because I once held a lot of those beliefs and found them to be BS. There's no reason why any beliefs should get a free pass and I apply that to myself all the time. I've never accepted things at face value and sooner or later question everything. It's the mind-set I was born with.

I've experienced a lot of weird stuff that most people would explain as ghosts, hauntings and high strangeness...UFOs too. These experiences leave a person looking for answers and if they didn't....they ought to.

Where Cremo uses the old news cuttings from 18th/19th century journals and local newspapers, they nearly always lack physical evidence. They are hearsay, legend and rumour. He uses them to present a virtual reality of an Earth littered with the anomalous remains of giants and out of place artefacts being found by miners and mid-west prospectors. To account for the lack of physical evidence, he spins a web of conspiracy whereby all academic scholars are complicit in a grand cover-up. His underlying theme is that science lies. My comparison of Cremo's arguments to those of Creationists is because they use the same techniques, innuendos and cases. Look at any Creationist website and you'll see the same alleged ooparts that Cremo uses. The difference is Cremo is adding weight to his beliefs in Vishnu and they are adding weight to beliefs in an Old Testament God and Genesis. Both sides see their source texts as the Truth about Creation.

The 'lady doing research in Mexico,' is Virginia Steen-Mcintyre and the site is Hueyatlaco. It's a fascinating location and the research is ongoing. The Creationist websites and 'forbidden archaeology' sites present it as a done deal. They state it's 250000 years old and anyone disagreeing is part of the cover up by Smithsonian agents or the old guard. It's far more complicated than that and there's an ongoing dispute about the layers the tools were found in and how they could have arrived there. The debate between academics and conflicting research papers is way more interesting than the simplistic presentation of biased, under-informed websites.

You could check out the discussion about pre-Clovis cultures in the Americas. It's academic and all that stuff, but there's a lot of evidence that people were there before 13kya. A minority of anthropologists and archaeologists have a good argument that the time-lines of migration into the Americas need adjusting.

250kya is doubtful for very good reasons. We all carry within us gene markers called haplotypes that separate us into haplogroups. They represent a record of the population migrations from 60kya. The mutations can be traced back to migrations from Africa (provisionally), through Siberia, across the land bridge (Beringia) into America. So far, the haplogroups of South/Central American populations fall within the timeline of migrations into America around 13kya. There are some studies that suggest an earlier migration occurred up to 25kya, but it's still far short of 250kya. At the same time, ice core samples and the geological evidence tell us that America was unreachable due to glacial ice until around 13kya. It's a puzzle.

I don't know enough about the Tuatha Dé Dannann to make an informed comment, if you'd like the opinion of an over-educated asshole I'll provide one in a couple of days.

In the meantime, check out these two vids. Cremo's scrapbook of clippings doesn't compare to the real research of guys who spend their lives studying history...in my opinion. The second is probably more accessible...

 

[The Pair of Cats]

Where you see me writing stuff against some widely held beliefs, it's because I once held a lot of those beliefs and found them to be BS. There's no reason why any beliefs should get a free pass and I apply that to myself all the time. I've never accepted things at face value and sooner or later question everything. It's the mind-set I was born with.

I've experienced a lot of weird stuff that most people would explain as ghosts, hauntings and high strangeness...UFOs too. These experiences leave a person looking for answers and if they didn't....they ought to.

It's just as well you are not trying to change anybody's mind, here, then. I do wonder, though, what led to the big change in mind and why you weren't able to discern that these "beliefs" were BS initially.
I do hope that you address the Pumu Punku and Baalbeck questions that Kieran posed. I eagerly await your educated and thoughtful responses to those.

 

[Kandinsky]

It's just as well you are not trying to change anybody's mind, here, then. I do wonder, though, what led to the big change in mind and why you weren't able to discern that these "beliefs" were BS initially.
I do hope that you address the Pumu Punku and Baalbeck questions that Kieran posed. I eagerly await your educated and thoughtful responses to those.

I do love sarcasm in the morning.

The 'big change in mind' was mostly a part of growing up; it's harder to tell BS when you're a teenager. The creation of Baalbeck and the trilithon have been fairly well explained to my mind; Pumu Punku maybe less so. At this point, from experience, you and others expect a long reply with links you'll likely ignore and evidence you won't accept. Kieran's reference to Egypt was a good example of this process. It usually takes the form of 'the skeptic' bringing pieces of evidence or research that 'the believer' tosses away and then asks for more. Kind of like a dog in the park.

Why not change the game? Why don't you do some reading on Baalbeck and dip your toes in the surrounding history? There's more than the location involved and there's also a timeline. When you've done that, why not post a couple of issues you have with the academic research and a link? It's a bit of effort huh? Instead, perhaps it's easier to post your explanation of Baalbeck?

 

[Anaximander]

One thing many people fail to take into account with these ancient constructions is the drugs the workers were on.

The argument goes something like "twenty modern men could barely move the stone five feet per day when they tried to replicate the ancient mayan's great feat"

Well, let's give those fella's some of the local drug (cocaine) and see how things get done then.

"The stones were carved with uncommon precision that modern man could not replicate."

Well maybe 'modern man' wasn't stoned enough to do the job right.

Maybe modern lacks the determination and focus of the ancient myan stone-cutter zonked out of his gourd on steady diet of chocolate, cigars and cocaine - always working furiously to get that surface mirror flat so that he will please his master (An ancient cokehead priest obsessed with superflat-surfaces and very precise angles).

 

[Decker]

Well Boys, I just have one question for you all. Actually a pretty simple one and you should be able to answer ASAP.

How many of you have taken the time to get a copy of Cremo and Thompson's book Forbidden Archeology and read the damn thing? I have it right here and I gotta tell you ... major weirdness.

Decker

 

[The Pair of Cats]

I do love sarcasm in the morning.

The 'big change in mind' was mostly a part of growing up; it's harder to tell BS when you're a teenager. The creation of Baalbeck and the trilithon have been fairly well explained to my mind; Pumu Punku maybe less so. At this point, from experience, you and others expect a long reply with links you'll likely ignore and evidence you won't accept. Kieran's reference to Egypt was a good example of this process. It usually takes the form of 'the skeptic' bringing pieces of evidence or research that 'the believer' tosses away and then asks for more. Kind of like a dog in the park.

Why not change the game? Why don't you do some reading on Baalbeck and dip your toes in the surrounding history? There's more than the location involved and there's also a timeline. When you've done that, why not post a couple of issues you have with the academic research and a link? It's a bit of effort huh? Instead, perhaps it's easier to post your explanation of Baalbeck?

Damn! And here i was eagerly awaiting an eloquent and scholarly lesson on the topics of Baalbeck and Pumu Punko. As the info i have read has been fleeting and superficial i was hoping that you would regail us with a detailed and comprehensive lecture on those subjects. Maybe i didn't put enough smiley faces at the end of my post. Or has your old age dampened your enthusiasm for educating us rubes.
So in other words as a teenager you were running around believing in all types of esoteric stuff and at some point in your later years when your balls dropped it was time to put away childish things and start thinking like an adult. Damn that wasted childhood.
Maybe you could assign some of your maturation to your innate ability for assumption making and derision. It appears that some things may have ripened with age but i wonder, were you as cynical and pompous in your youth or did that occur when you grew up? (mustn't forget smiley faces).

 

[Kandinsky]

Well Boys, I just have one question for you all. Actually a pretty simple one and you should be able to answer ASAP.

How many of you have taken the time to get a copy of Cremo and Thompson's book Forbidden Archeology and read the damn thing? I have it right here and I gotta tell you ... major weirdness.

Decker

Hiya Don, good question.

I gave mine to a friend's daughter because she loves this kind of stuff. I've got the abridged version, Hidden History of the Human Race as a reference. It begins with a Graham Hancock foreword, nosedives into a leading commentary on the Laetoli Footprints and finishes with the notion that evolutionary science, archaeology and anthropology haven't enough evidence to base a family tree upon. It's major weirdness because Cremo relies heavily on these same guys to make his claims that anatomically modern humans have been around for 'millions' of years.

He and Thomson do explain that they are coming from the Vedic Hindu belief system and propose that it shouldn't make their 'theory' invalid. That's a fair point to make and shows more honesty than in the first edition. Saying that, they don't offer an alternative theory or explanation for where these modern men and women came from way back when. It isn't much clearer in the Rig Vedas which is possibly why they keep their distance from a concrete position?

I'm sorry your thread has been derailed, it was an honest opinion regarding Cremo and I couldn't predict the reaction. Have you thought about inviting an archaeologist or anthropologist on the show? Other than Dr Heiser on C2C, I can't think of anyone similar being on a paranormal show.

---------- Post added at 08:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:02 PM ----------

Damn! And here i was eagerly awaiting an eloquent and scholarly lesson on the topics of Baalbeck and Pumu Punko. As the info i have read has been fleeting and superficial i was hoping that you would regail us with a detailed and comprehensive lecture on those subjects. Maybe i didn't put enough smiley faces at the end of my post. Or has your old age dampened your enthusiasm for educating us rubes.

I don't know where the old age thing comes from, I'm probably younger than you. My posts are usually pretty polite and any 'derision' is rarely aimed at fellow members. In the instances where my attitude has been less than friendly, it's often a reaction to the tone of that member's previous posts. If you'd prefer to project your animosity on how you perceive me to be...that's up to you. It's a hazard of forum life.

Now how about starting a thread of your own where you explain your beliefs regarding Puma Punku or Baalbek? If they're interesting, you might get some replies.

 

[Decker]

Hiya Don, good question.

It's major weirdness because Cremo relies heavily on these same guys to make his claims that anatomically modern humans have been around for 'millions' of years.

He and Thomson do explain that they are coming from the Vedic Hindu belief system and propose that it shouldn't make their 'theory' invalid. That's a fair point to make and shows more honesty than in the first edition. Saying that, they don't offer an alternative theory or explanation for where these modern men and women came from way back when. It isn't much clearer in the Rig Vedas which is possibly why they keep their distance from a concrete position?
---------- Post added at 08:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:02 PM ----------
.

Okay Kandinsky, your remark that Cremo and Thompson rely on Hancock is noted. Now, are you suggesting that the information contained in FA is wrong or bullshit? You know, I have interviewed both Cremo and Thompson and while neither have EVER made secret of the fact they are coming from the Vedic belief system, their information all seems to be backed up by the records. So, if you are suggesting that this is wrong, incorrect, or bullshit please provide examples.
Thanks.

Decker

 

[Anaximander]

Hey Don,

I have a digital copy of his book, so if there are any parts in particular you want me to post - I can do that.

Same for the rest of you. Tell me the name of the section or the article and I'll post it.

*For now, I'll skim through my copy and try to pull up something interesting.

(not that that will be difficult.)


Edit:

Here is one excerpt - It shows Cremo's style for the book and it is pretty strange if true.

Cremo basically lays it out like this: "The rock is this old. This human-made thing got blown out of the solid rock. That means it is evidence of humans around as far back as the rock is old." (That is some pretty solid logic and it does work if his data is accurate)

 

[The Pair of Cats]

I don't know where the old age thing comes from, I'm probably younger than you. My posts are usually pretty polite and any 'derision' is rarely aimed at fellow members. In the instances where my attitude has been less than friendly, it's often a reaction to the tone of that member's previous posts. If you'd prefer to project your animosity on how you perceive me to be...that's up to you. It's a hazard of forum life.

Now how about starting a thread of your own where you explain your beliefs regarding Puma Punku or Baalbek? If they're interesting, you might get some replies.

Yes you may be younger than me. So i have to start my own thread before you will reply with an answer? Oh the intemperance of youth!
I have no beliefs regarding either. That was an assumption by you. As i have previously stated I have only a fleeting and superficial exposure to both. It is you who seem to know all about these subjects. If you do not wish to honor us with your opinion or knowledge on these matters then that is up to you. I, for one, would have enjoyed a response. But as it seems that you now can't be bothered, i am yet again disappointed.
Sorry but any derision derived by you from my posts is probably in response to the pomposity of your replies to those who questioned you. I don't believe that Kieran was anything but fair and moderate in his asking you to comment on the subjects..And to this moment you still haven't provided anything.
It seems that you are more than willing to provide a detailed response when it suits you. i look forward to your response to Don's question.

 

[Kandinsky]

Okay Kandinsky, your remark that Cremo and Thompson rely on Hancock is noted. Now, are you suggesting that the information contained in FA is wrong or bullshit? You know, I have interviewed both Cremo and Thompson and while neither have EVER made secret of the fact they are coming from the Vedic belief system, their information all seems to be backed up by the records. So, if you are suggesting that this is wrong, incorrect, or bullshit please provide examples.
Thanks.

Decker

Don, in my view you're encouraging and complicit in a forum-gang situation. Looking at the ad-homs flying my way and the 'thanks' going against me, it's looking like some of the Paracast members are singling out one member for posting his opinion. I've been here for a while now and can't recall seeing so much activity in opposition against a member. If I'm wrong, feel free to correct the impression.

Instead of me being at the beck and call of you and the other guys, why don't you post an example that you think is worth discussion and I'll try and address that one?

 

[Decker]

Don, in my view you're encouraging and complicit in a forum-gang situation. Looking at the ad-homs flying my way and the 'thanks' going against me, it's looking like some of the Paracast members are singling out one member for posting his opinion. I've been here for a while now and can't recall seeing so much activity in opposition against a member. If I'm wrong, feel free to correct the impression.

Kandinsky, with all due respect my friend ... that sounds like Bullshit. I am not ganging up on anyone. You seem to reject the arguments put forth by Cremo and Thompson. Several messages back I asked the people contributing here if they had read FA, and I asked you if you could prove your assessment that FA was crap. Now, IMHO, you my friend are spinning the argument.

Fine, if you feel that I am ganging up on you I will drop out of the discussion. But before I go I must say I am disappointed in a major way.

Decker

 

[Kandinsky]

Kandinsky, with all due respect my friend ... that sounds like Bullshit. I am not ganging up on anyone. You seem to reject the arguments put forth by Cremo and Thompson. Several messages back I asked the people contributing here if they had read FA, and I asked you if you could prove your assessment that FA was crap. Now, IMHO, you my friend are spinning the argument.

Fine, if you feel that I am ganging up on you I will drop out of the discussion. But before I go I must say I am disappointed in a major way.

Decker

Don, with all due respect, you know what my post was referring to. There's no spinning the argument. Post an example from Cremo's book and I'll address it. Asking me to post a reply that assesses a several hundred page book is not gonna happen. Give me a specific case and I'll look at it.

BTW the 'disappointed in a major way' comment was BS and we both know it. You're yanking my chain and it's okay.

 

[The Pair of Cats]

Well Boys, I just have one question for you all. Actually a pretty simple one and you should be able to answer ASAP.

How many of you have taken the time to get a copy of Cremo and Thompson's book Forbidden Archeology and read the damn thing? I have it right here and I gotta tell you ... major weirdness.

Decker

I haven't read that book. Although i have heard Cremo via C2C (i think) some years ago.

 

[Anaximander]

Hey Phil,

Here is another exceprt from Cremo's book. This one covers a find this anthropologist made and then what happened to him when he had the nerve to publish his data without adjusting it fit the mainstream view - the cheeky bastard.....

 

[The Pair of Cats]

Hey thanks Anaximander. Those extracts are interesting. I would like to get hold of a copy of that book.

 

[Kieran]

The 'lady doing research in Mexico,' is Virginia Steen-Mcintyre and the site is Hueyatlaco. It's a fascinating location and the research is ongoing. The Creationist websites and 'forbidden archaeology' sites present it as a done deal. They state it's 250000 years old and anyone disagreeing is part of the cover up by Smithsonian agents or the old guard. It's far more complicated than that and there's an ongoing dispute about the layers the tools were found in and how they could have arrived there. The debate between academics and conflicting research papers is way more interesting than the simplistic presentation of biased, under-informed websites.

You could check out the discussion about pre-Clovis cultures in the Americas. It's academic and all that stuff, but there's a lot of evidence that people were there before 13kya. A minority of anthropologists and archaeologists have a good argument that the time-lines of migration into the Americas need adjusting.

250kya is doubtful for very good reasons. We all carry within us gene markers called haplotypes that separate us into haplogroups. They represent a record of the population migrations from 60kya. The mutations can be traced back to migrations from Africa (provisionally), through Siberia, across the land bridge (Beringia) into America. So far, the haplogroups of South/Central American populations fall within the timeline of migrations into America around 13kya. There are some studies that suggest an earlier migration occurred up to 25kya, but it's still far short of 250kya. At the same time, ice core samples and the geological evidence tell us that America was unreachable due to glacial ice until around 13kya. It's a puzzle.

I don't know enough about the Tuatha Dé Dannann to make an informed comment, if you'd like the opinion of an over-educated asshole I'll provide one in a couple of days.

In the meantime, check out these two vids. Cremo's scrapbook of clippings doesn't compare to the real research of guys who spend their lives studying history...in my opinion. The second is probably more accessible

I will try to answer some of the the issues you've raised constructively.

I have to say, your complete dismissal of Cremo's work "Forbidden Archaeology" still my opinion supports the argument, I previously made! Physical evidence does exist, well the book would be just meaningless without there being some physical evidence to confirm those stories , surely you can see the dilemma some of us face?

Some members of the forum, as well as I, can not truly, comprehend the bullish stance, you've taken, it's not a personal attack against you personally, it's your views of Human history, that I can't wrap my head around, and Yes your fully entitled to have a different viewpoint, but your not entitled to bash everyone around the head with your viewpoint.

The view you support has wider support among the scientific community at large, and the videos are interesting, but this clearly shows the standpoint from which you base most of your arguments on.

I have a skeptical approach, and I have clearly shown this before, so you can not bag me as some person who just wants to believe we being lied to, or that all of us are being manipulated by the scientific mainstream.

The difference as I see it is.

I go were the evidence takes me, even if it does hit a brick wall after time researching, frankly, and I not to bring Angel into this discussion, and do apologise in advance, well it just to make a point. You'd be similar in lot of ways to him, and I leave it up to you to figure out what I mean!

I understand you are individual, and you obviously viewing oneself, and not likely to criticize yourself or change your views on the forums quickly. But I believe it is healthy to do so from time to time reflection about ones views is healthy, and not a weakness at all!

I was out yesterday to do this and I have bloody headache, so any grammar spellings, well I have to blame it on the booze for the errors, but I have been doing some research about the site at Hueyatlaco, it only fair I do so before arguing for a case.

The site was discovered in 1962, a long time is it not, to not have figured out what the site represents!

The early controversy you brought up centres around a claim made by Jose L Lorenzo, i will avoid posting his credentials just to save time, but lot of the information I post here can be found online.

He claimed implements had been implanted by local farmers or laborers. Virginia-Steen Mcintyre, strongly argued against does claims, and she was supported, when three prominent Archaeologists and Anthropologists gave statements about the site (all three are named again online) and all three attested to the integrity of the excavations, having visited the site independently of each other!

The problem with the whole planting of tools scenario is, how would farmers or laborers get hold of tools that were a couple thousand years old never mind the period of time borne borne out when carbon dating of the site was undertook?

There is a controversy about how old the site is that was discovered!

There was animals remains found with the stone tools in the strata, and some of animal remains were tested and dated back to 35,000 years ago, well still a date before peoples should have been in the Americas, other follow on tests.. Uranium dating not Radiocarbon dating, reproduced the same date as was previously given 250,000 years!

In 2004 and 2006 A Biostratigraphic researcher Sam Van Landingham published two-peer reviewed papers on the site, he confirmed the findings, that the tools found in the strata could be dated to the period called the "Sangamonian Interglacial period"

Is this evidence good enough for you yet?

The whole theory of human origins today is, that homo-sapiens came out of Africa roughly around 150,000 years ago, and spread out across the planet, and replaced Homo-Erectus and Neanderthals over time.

The thing you neglect to mention though, the Out of Africa hypothesis, is still only a "Theory" we can form a time-line, but that could easily been wrong, the numbers of skulls found in that region of the world does I agree give some credence to idea we originated from east Africa, since the skulls are some of the oldest ever found. This theory is not overly controversial, it the one most agree on, but there is another theory that other scientists do argue about, that is multi-regional theory interbreeding between groups and that Africa is not the sole starting point. Most importantly, the date would also have to be pushed back over 2 million years, if some of the claims are true.

Haplotypes, are basically DNA marker which identify certain genetic elements in various cultures today and in the past, the problem what if there was cultures in the past long since perished, and no longer is there a trace of them, only the settlement of their existence in the past?

We have a problem if the Mexico site as old as said, who were the inhabitants, and how they get there? The best way to find out is a fossil record, and I don't believe they have discovered skeleton remains at that site!

You also with the "OUT OF Africa" theory have to take into consideration recent discoveries that occurred this century. The "MUNGO MAN" A 68,000 year old skeleton remains found in Australia for example, Mitochondrail DNA showed up that the "MUNGO MAN" as not coming out of Africa!

The Georgian Skulls that were found recently, and dated to 1.8 millions years old. 1 million years before Homo-erectus was believed to have been in EURASIA, the case for the multi-regional theory in my opinion holds more credibility because of these two finds, and there is a few more I have not mentioned.


I will wrap it up here, as regards to the Tuatha Dé Dannann. You can if you want research this topic, but if you don't go into with a open mind, and already have a preconceived idea, about what it all means there is no point. You have hard time believing the Ancient-Alien theory, and wouldn't blame you, the Ancient Alien series been aired on the history channel and the characters promoting that theory, would turn anyone off the idea of Alien intervention in the past, and I not saying it occurred, but the stories are interesting!

You brought it up that I dismissed the evidence you posted, academics sources and materials discussing the Egyptian pyramids.

I never, the reason I argued against what was contained at those sites, is I believed much of the information is false, and each website you posted had no neutral preceptive on the buildings at Giza and the Sphinx!

I not going back to the Egyptian, thing again, but it always amazes me how people like you will accept stuff without questioning it, like come on, the Egyptians never rubber stamped, or gave a hint they build the Pyramid at Giza, no texts no pamplets, nothing no heiroglyphs recording the construction zilch, yet the Egyptians were good enough to record war battles eating habits other building construction animals and so on, like come on get real man!

Also I was willing to test one of my theories, and I put in out there to the members of the forum. If copper can cut granite I'd be really shocked.

I stand by my believe, that copper saws and chisels allegedly used by the Egyptians, would not have cut the granite slabs and stone from the quarries, and one forum member tried a simple test for me.

Red, was the member of the forum, who tried to scratch a granite surface with some Copper wiring, mind you it was only a simple test, like i said, but still an indicator of what i was trying to convene to people here. Red and he has no reason to lie, posted for everyone to read. The Copper wiring was useless not even a scratch not even with force being implied!

I asked you to explain two mysteries site, Pumu Punku you agree it very hard to explain (yes) and Baalbek, you said that place can be explained and you never said how was it explained? I Post these photographs just for people to get a feel for what we are discussing! Please do enlighten us to how those stones were moved please, you say can be explained, so go ahead?