Showing posts with label Darwinism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Darwinism. Show all posts

Sunday, 4 December 2016

Interview - The Truth about Ancient History - Michael Cremo



Alternative History, Ancient Technology, & Forbidden Archaeology
Interview by Adam Gorightly, recorded January 2014

Gorightly interviews guest, Michael Cremo, a leader in the alternative history field. Micheal, drops in to talk ancient texts and oral traditions, the nature of consciousness, our futuristic past, and the notoreous information embargo that surrounds the field of human history.

Michael Cremo began a series of Ancient History books aimed at both scholarly and popular audiences. The first to be published was 'Forbidden Archeology: The Hidden History of the Human Race'. This book shows that archaeologists and anthropologists, over the past one hundred and fifty years, have accumulated vast amounts of evidence showing that humans like ourselves have existed on this planet for tens of millions of years.

We show how this evidence has been suppressed, ignored, and forgotten because it contradicts generally-held ideas about human evolution." "In lecture presentations on Forbidden Archeology to scientific and lay audiences around the world I see a new consciousness emerging that integrates science and religion into a cohesive paradigm of reality."

source: http://thehighersidechats.com/thc-91-micheal-cremo-forbidden-archaeology/ https://twitter.com/HighersideChats

Saturday, 1 October 2016

Michael Cremo presents "Forbidden Archaeology"

<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/DKfGC3P9KoQ" width="480"></iframe>

Michael Cremo presenting "Forbidden Archaeology" lecture at 'Talks at Google'

Published 7 October 2014

Michael A. Cremo, Historian of Archeology
Abstract:

Over the past two centuries, archaeologists have found bones, footprints, and artifacts showing that people like ourselves have existed on earth for many millions of years. But many scientists have forgotten or ignored these remarkable facts. Why? Primarily because they contradict the now dominant evolutionary views about human origins and antiquity. According to these views, humans like ourselves have existed for only about 100,000 or 200,000 years, and before that there were only more primitive human ancestors. This evolutionary paradigm, to which influential groups of scientists are deeply committed, has acted as a "knowledge filter." And the filtering, intentional or not, has left us with a radically incomplete set of facts for building our ideas about human origins. Recovering the complete set of facts takes us on a fascinating expedition, across five continents to various archaeological sites, some long forgotten, some the center of ongoing controversy. On the other hand, the complete set of facts is consistent with the accounts of extreme human antiquity found in the Puranas, the historical writings of ancient India.

Bio:

Michael A. Cremo is research associate in history of archeology. He is a member of the World Archaeological Congress (WAC) since 1993. His WAC3 paper "Puranic Time and the Archaeological Record" was published in the Routledge One World Archaeology series volume Time and Archaeology (1999), edited by Tim Murray. He is also a member of the European Association of Archaeologists (EAA). In 2004 Cremo's paper "The Later Discoveries of Boucher de Perthes at Moulin Quignon and Their Impact on the Moulin Quignon Jaw Controversy," presented at the XXth International Congress for History of Science, Liege, Belgium, was published in a conference proceedings volume of this congress, by the scientific publisher Brepols.

Cremo is the principal author of the book Forbidden Archeology, a comprehensive historical survey of archaeological anomalies. In a review in British Journal for History of Science, Tim Murray said the book "provides the historian of archaeology with a useful compendium of case studies in the history and sociology of scientific knowledge, which can be used to foster debate within archaeology about how to describe the epistemology of one's discipline."

Cremo is particularly interested in examining the history of the archeology from the standpoint of alternative worldviews, particularly worldviews with foundations in ancient Indian thought. He has given invited lectures on his work at the Royal Institution in London, the anthropology department of the Russian Academy of Sciences in Moscow, the archeology department of the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences, and many other scientific institutions. He has also lectured on his work at universities throughout the world.


Michael Cremo's website: http://www.mcremo.com/
Michael Cremo on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MichaelCremoItsReallyMe/


Friday, 23 September 2016

What's Wrong With Science? An interview with Virginia Steen-McIntyre

An Interview with Virginia Steen-McIntyre, FMES, Idaho Springs, Colorado 
Originally published: MIDWESTERN EPIGRAPHIC JOURNAL, Vol 16, Nbr 1, 2002 

Note: This is a revised version of a manuscript first prepared in 1997 for investigative reporter Paul Williams Roberts, part of an article on maverick scientists for Harper's Magazine. According to Roberts, the article was accepted and, I assume, paid for, but never published.




Interview:

Q: WHAT'S WRONG WITH SCIENCE?


VSM: Nothing with science per se. It is a method used for looking at a small part of reality, mainly the physical universe. The problem arises when people, both scientists and the general public, try to make it something it is not -- a world view, for example. 

Q: BUT YOU OFTEN HEAR OF "THE SCIENTIFIC WORLD VIEW" 

VSM: A contradiction in terms. Science deals with measuring and manipulating concrete facts. A world view looks at those facts from a certain perspective. ALL world views are taken on faith, even supposedly scientific ones.

Q: SUCH AS? 

VSM: Such as the one that claims the physical universe we know is all there is, and that it developed by chance over time. 

Q: IS THAT SUCH A BAD THEORY? 

VSM: Not if we remember it is only one theory or philosophy, or religion or world view among many equally as valid. The danger arises when it becomes THE ONLY theory. Then it is only a matter of time until it is crammed down our throats as FACT.  When that happens, good-by free enquiry. 

Q: DO YOU SEE THIS HAPPENING IN WESTERN CULTURE?

VSM: Look around you. When was the last time you heard that particular theory seriously questioned by the scientific media? 

Q: BUT AGAIN, IS THAT BAD IF IT'S THE CORRECT WORLD VIEW? 

VSM: Do you mean politically correct? It obviously is that, but that would make me question it more than ever! 

Q: WHY?? 

VSM: Look at history.. Since when has any government, even the best, remained faithful to the ideal of the welfare of the common man? 

Q: WHY WOULD GOVERNMENTS BE SO INTERESTED IN THIS PARTICULAR WORLD VIEW? 

VSM: Because it's interwoven with the Theory of Evolution: accept one, you have to accept the other.

Q: AND IS "SOMETHING WRONG" WITH THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION?     

VSM: Not if you realize it is JUST a theory, and a shaky one at that. But think for a moment. Every major despot and would-be dictator since Darwin has loved that theory -- Marx, Hitler, Mao. It gives them such freedom to kill off those they don't like and to mess around with genetics to create superman. After all, when the Theory of Evolution is taken to its logical conclusion, the only moral imperative demanded is "survival of the fittest".

Q: SO YOU DON'T LIKE THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION? 

VSM: No, I don't like it, for scientific reasons: it goes against the Second Law of Thermodynamics for one thing. I don't like it for philosophical and religions reasons. I especially don't like it because it helped ruin my career. 

Q: HOW SO? 

VSM: The archaeologist in charge of the Hueyatlaco dig (where they had found well made stone tools) rejected our geologic dates of a quarter-million years1.' because, according to her belief, modern man, the maker of those tools, had not yet evolved 250,000 years ago.  He evolved only 100,000 years ago and that was in the Old World not the New. A classic case of arguing from theory to data, then tossing out the data that don't fit. 

Q: HOW COULD SHE GET AWAY WITH SUCH FAULTY THINKING? 

A matter of influence on her part and lack of it on mine. She was an anthropologist, a graduate of Radcliffe and Harvard with powerful friends; I was a geologist with a new PhD from the University of Idaho, looking for a job.

Q: IT SOUNDS LIKE A MAJOR CONTROVERSY EXISTS ABOUT THE HUEYATLACO SITE: ARCHAEOLOGISTS VS GEOLOGISTS.

VSM: There would be if all the facts were generally known. But the dates were run almost 25-30 years ago. Have you ever heard them mentioned? There is no controversy. The site and our geologic work are simply ignored. 

Q: NOT A VERY SCIENTIFIC APPROACH! 

VSM: No, of course not. But there it is. 

Q: WHAT CRITICISMS DO THE ARCHAEOLOGISTS BRING AGAINST YOUR GEOLOGIC WORK? 

VSM: None to my face: that's the frustrating part. Since the paper on Hueyatlaco was first published in 1981 only five scientists have contacted me on their own for more information.  And only one of those was an archaeologist.

Q: THAT'S INCREDIBLE! AND WHAT DO THE ARCHAEOLOGISTS SAY AMONG THEMSELVES? 

VSM: Nothing nice, I imagine. I worked with a group of them in a laboratory setting back in the mid-60's. It was a different world. No matter their specialty, each graduate student left that place with an extra-curricular BS degree -- BS for Back Stabber.  First thing you learned in the coffee room was who was "in the know" and who was "out of it". It became almost a game, verbally cutting to pieces those who didn't count. C.S. Lewis caught the flavor of the game in his novel.

Q: THAT HIDEOUS STRENGTH. I TAKE IT YOU HAVE BEEN DELEGATED TO THE "OUT OF IT" CATEGORY?

VSM: That seems evident. And once you get a bad rep in the scientific community, even if it's the result of rumor and down right lies, it spreads. In 1973, when we first announced the results of our new excavations and the fission track dates, I was sitting pretty. I had the beginnings of an international reputation because of my basic research on volcanic ash layers, a wide correspondence with my peers, a part-time job in a government laboratory that I assumed would lead to better things, and later, an adjunct professorship in the anthropology department of a state university. Today, all that is gone. My last job was as a gardener, caring for flower-beds in a local nursing home a few hours a week.

Q: ARE YOU BITTER? 

VSM: I fight against bitterness. But that emotion, if it becomes chronic, will ruin your life. I'm certainly not happy with how things turned out. It hurts! 

Q: MAVERICK SCIENTISTS OBVIOUSLY DO NOT HAVE IT EASY. DO YOU SOMETIMES FEEL LIKE THE LONE RANGER? 

VSM: More like one of a bunch of Davids slinging stones at Goliath. Hueyatlaco isn't the only censored early man site in the New World, it's the tip of an iceberg.  There's the late Tom Lee, a Canadian archaeologist. He had the misfortune to find an early site on an island in one of the Great Lakes in the 50's. Not only did he lose his government job, he actually was committed to an insane asylum for a time!  There's Dee Simpson and her Calico site in the Mojave Desert of California. The soil developed on top of the sediment column containing the artifacts is 200,000 years old, which makes the sediment layers and artifacts beneath it much older.  Louis Leakey of African fame recognized the stone tools as tools -- not the result of natural causes -back in the 60's. Then there's George Carter and his sites in the San Diego area. He's been battling the archaeologic establishment for 50 years! And many more.

Q: WHAT DO YOU THINK SHOULD BE DONE NOW?

VSM: Several things.

First of all, there needs to be more research in the Valsequillo area: more radiometric dates, more field work, more archaeologic excavations. Fortunately, through support of a wealthy philanthropist, this is happening. Scientists from the USA and Mexico have been working there since the fall of 1997.  I have not been told the results of their research -- I'm certain that they will want to report on it themselves -- but I have been told that it should make me very happy!

Second, we must somehow reverse an alarming trend that has appeared in the research community today, a trend towards "feel good" science, where facts no longer count if they question a politically correct world view. It was precisely that type of "science" that reigned in the Soviet Union for decades. And what a headache it caused to all concerned! 

Third, the censorship of our work and the work of our colleagues MUST STOP! Scientists cannot afford to be rigid in their theories, at least if they are searching for truth.  We must separate science- as-a-method, which is available for all to use, from our world views. Each one of us has a world view we live by, whether we are aware of it or not.  Each is unique, developing out of our personal life experiences. Each is taken on faith.  Recognize the fact! Work with it! A knotty problem such as the age of the first humans in the New World can only benefit from a multi-pronged attack by scientists with different world views.     

My ideal: a search for truth in an atmosphere of free inquiry and mutual respect. After all, isn't that what science should be all about? 

END OF INTERVIEW

1. VC Steen-McIntyre, "A Quarter-Million-Year-Old Habitation site Found in Mexico", Ancient American, NO. 19/20, 72-78 (1997). 

2. VC Steen-McIntyre, "Has Man Been in the New World for a Quarter - Million Years? " , Midwestern Epigraphic Journal 12/13, 35-42 (1998-99); Barnes Review, $(I), 31-36 (1998)
Source: http://www.s8int.com/wrong-science.html
Additional Source: http://www.robertschoch.net/

Monday, 29 August 2016

Hueyatlaco: 250,000 Year Old Settlement In Mexico Found Under Volcanic Ash

Humans were hunting mastodons in Mexico 250,000 years ago.

This archaeological heresy is supported by finding at Hueyatlaco. 


Hueyatlaco is an archeological site in Valsequillo, Mexico. Several potential pre-Clovis localities were found in the 1960s around the edge of the Valsequillo Reservoir, Mexico.  One of these localities is the site of Hueyatlaco.  This site was excavated by Cynthia Irwin-Williams in 1962, 1964, and 1966. 


One of its early excavators Virginia Steen-McIntyre writes “Hueyátlaco is a dangerous site. To even publicly mention the geological evidence for its great age is to jeopardize one’s professional career. Three of us geologists can testify to that. It’s very existence is blasphemous because it questions a basic dogma of Darwinism, the ruling philosophy (or religion, if you will) of the western scientific world for the past 150 years. That dogma states that, over a long period of time, members of the human family have generally become more and more intelligent. The Hueyátlaco site is thus ‘impossible’ because Mid-Pleistocene humans weren’t smart enough to do all that the evidence implies. Besides, there is no New World anthropoid stock from which they could have evolved.:


The Hueyatlaco Archeological Site is situated on the Tetela Peninsula, along the north shore of the Valsequillo reservoir in the State of Puebla, Mexico, approximately 100 km southeast of Mexico City and 10 km south of the City of Puebla.

In the 1960s, highly sophisticated stone tools rivaling the best work of Cro-magnon man in Europe were unearthed by Professor Juan Armenta Camacho and Dr. Cynthia Irwin-Williams at Hueyatlaco, near Valsequillo.

Dr. Cynthia Irwin-Williams

Credit: Smithsonian National Archives http://www.earthmeasure.com/first-american.html

After excavations in the 1960s, the site became notorious due to geochronologists’ analyses that indicated human habitation at Hueyatlaco was dated to ca. 250,000 years before the present.

Professor Juan Armenta Camacho.

Beds containing human artifacts at Valsequillo, Mexico, have been dated at approximately 250,000 years before the present by fission-track dating of volcanic material and uranium dating of a camel pelvis. The dilemma posed by such dates is clearly stated in the following quotation from the conclusions of the subject article.

“The evidence outlined here consistently indicates that the Hueyatlaco site is about 250,000 yr old. We who have worked on geological aspects of the Valsequillo area are painfully aware that so great an age poses an archeological dilemma. If the geological dating is correct, sophisticated stone tools were used at Valsequillo long before analogous tools are though to have been developed in Europe and Asia. Thus, our colleague, Cynthia Irwin-Williams, has criticized the dating methods we have used, and she wishes us to emphasize that an age of 250,000 yr is essentially impossible.”

Steen-McIntyre, Virginia, et al; “Geologic Evidence for Age of Deposits at Hueyatlaco Archeological Site, Valsequillo, Mexico,” Quaternary Research, 16:1, 1981.

Credit: mcremo.com

These controversial findings are orders of magnitude older than the scientific consensus for habitation of the New World (which generally traces widespread human migration to the New World to 13,000 to 16,000 ybp). The findings at Hueyatlaco have mostly been repudiated by the larger scientific community, and have seen only occasional discussion in the literature


According to  Steen-McIntyre “we have evidence for two primitive human skulls. The Dorenberg skull was collected in the area over 100 years ago (Reichelt,1899 (1900)) . The interior cavities were filled with a diatomite that contains the same Sangamon-age suite of taxa that occurs associated with the artifacts at Hueyátlaco (VanLandingham 2000, 2002b,c, 2003). It was on display in a museum in Leipzig for many years, and was destroyed during the bombings of WW II. We are looking for a photo or drawing of it.


The second skull, the Ostrander skull, is rumored to have been collected illegally at Hueyátlaco sometime in the late 60’s or early 70’s and recently to have been turned over to a Native American tribe for reburial. No attempt was made to date it.”


Ostrander skull to the rignt, allegedly from the Hueyatlaco Site. On the left a modern skull

Credit:  Austin Whittall  patagoniamonsters.blogspot.com

Cynthia Irwin-Williams led the team that first excavated the site in 1962 The dig is often associated with Virginia Steen-McIntyre because of her continuing efforts to publicize her findings and opinions. However, the site was actually discovered by Juan Armenta Camacho and Irwin-Williams. Steen-McIntyre joined the team in 1966 as a graduate student, at the request of project geologist Hal Malde. The excavation was associated with the U.S. Geological Survey.

The region, about 75 miles SE of Mexico City, was known for its abundance of animal fossils, and Irwin-Williams described Hueyatlaco as a “kill site” where animals were hunted and butchered.


These tools are believed to be 250,00 years old from the Hueyatlaco site.

Credit: Dr. Cynthia Irwin-Williams/H.S. Rice

Excavations were conducted via standard protocols, including securing the sites to prevent trespass or accidental disturbances. During excavation, investigators discovered numerous stone tools. The tools ranged from relatively primitive implements at a smaller associated site, to more sophisticated items such as scrapers and double-edged blades uncovered at the main excavation site. The diversity of tools made from non-local materials suggested that the region had been used by multiple groups over a considerable period.

Credit: Chris Hardaker http://www.earthmeasure.com/first-american.html

In 1967, Jose L. Lorenzo of the Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia claimed that implements had been planted at the site by local laborers in such a way as to make it difficult or impossible to determine which artifacts were discovered in situ and which were planted. Irwin-Williams counter-argued that Lorenzo’s claims were malicious and without merit. Furthermore, in 1969 Irwin-Williams cited statements of support from three prominent archeologists and anthropologists (Richard MacNeish, Hannah Marie Wormington and Frederick A. Peterson) who had each visited the site independently and attested to the integrity of the excavations and the professionalism of the group’s methodology.

Credit: Chris Hardaker http://www.earthmeasure.com/first-american.html

In mid-1969, Szabo, Malde and Irwin-Williams published their first paper about dating the excavation site. The stone tools were discovered in situ in a stratum that also contained animal remains. Radiocarbon dating of the animal remains produced an age of over 35,000 ybp. Uranium dating produced an age of 260,000 ybp, ± 60,000 years.

The site had been buried by the ash of La Malinche. The reservoir, which lies 100 km southeast of Mexico City and south of the city of Puebla is surrounded by four of Mexico’s famous volcanoes: Tláloc, Iztaccíhuatl, Popocatepetl, and La Malinche.

The authors admitted that they had no definitive explanation for the anomalous results. However, Malde suggested the tool-bearing strata had possibly been eroded by an ancient streambed, thus combining older and newer strata and complicating dating.

Credit: Chris Hardaker http://www.earthmeasure.com/first-american.html

In 1973, Steen-MacIntyre, Malde and Roald Fryxell returned to Hueyatalco to re-examine the geographic strata and more accurately determine an age for the tool-bearing strata. They were able to rule out Malde’s streambed hypothesis. Moreover, the team undertook an exhaustive analysis of volcanic ash and pumice from the original excavation site and the surrounding region. Using the zircon fission-track dating method, geochemist C.W. Naeser dated samples of ash from Hueyatlaco’s tool-bearing strata to 370,000 ybp +/- 240,000 years.


The confirmation of an anomalously distant age for human habitation at the Hueyatlaco site led to tension between Irwin-Williams and the other team members. Malde and Fryxell announced the findings at a Geological Society of America meeting, admitting that they could not account for the anomalous results. Irwin-Williams responded by describing their announcement as “irresponsible”.  Given the substantial margin of error for the fission-track findings, and the then-new method of uranium dating, Irwin-Williams asserted that Hueyatlaco had not been accurately dated to her satisfaction. 

Credit: Chris Hardaker http://www.earthmeasure.com/first-american.html

Excerpt of letter to Marie Wormington from Dr. Cynthia Irwin-Williams [circa 1969]:

“…Meanwhile, I recently got a letter from Hal, with some (completely wild) uranium dates on Valsequillo material. I don’t see how he can take them seriously since they conflict with the archaeology, with his own geologic correlations, and with a couple C14 dates. However, God help us, he wants to publish right away! I am enclosing a copy of Hal’s letter and my reply. Needless to say any restraint you can exercise on him would be greatly appreciated. All we need to do at this point is to put that stuff in print and every reputable prehistorian in the country will be rolling in the aisles.”


On March 30, 1981, Steen-McIntyre wrote to Estella Leopold, the associate editor of Quaternary Research:

“The problem as I see it is much bigger than Hueyatlaco. It concerns the manipulation of scientific thought through the suppression of ‘Enigmatic Data,’ data that challenges the prevailing mode of thinking. Hueyatlaco certainly does that! Not being an anthropologist, I didn’t realize the full significance of our dates back in 1973, nor how deeply woven into our thought the current theory of human evolution had become. Our work at Hueyatlaco has been rejected by most archaeologists because it contradicts that theory, period.”

Eventually, Quaternary Research (1981) published an article by Virginia Steen-McIntyre, Roald Fryxell, and Harold E. Malde. It upheld an age of 250,000 years for the Hueyatlaco site. Cynthia Irwin-Williams (1981) objected to these findings in a letter responding to these authors. Her objections were answered point-for-point in a counter letter from Malde and Steen-McIntyre (1981).

Credit: Chris Hardaker http://www.earthmeasure.com/first-american.html

The case of Virginia Steen-McIntyre opens a rare window into the actual social processes of data suppression in paleoanthropology, processes that involve a great deal of hurt and conflict. In general, however, this goes on behind the scenes, and the public sees only the end result—the carefully edited journals and books that have passed the censors.


The Sangamonian Stage, also known as the Sangamon interglacial, is the name used by Quaternary geologists to designate the last interglacial period in North America from 125,000—75,000 years ago, a period of 0.05 million years. The Sangamonian Stage precedes the Wisconsinan (Wisconsin) Stage and follows the Illinoian Stage in North America


Source:
http://beforeitsnews.com/beyond-science/2012/10/hueyatlaco-250000-year-old-settlement-in-mexico-found-under-volcanic-ash-2439498.html

Also good reference
http://valsequillo.earthmeasure.com/Val6/index.html