Interview - Virginia Steen-McIntyre: The struggle of a dissenting scientist

Virginia Steen-McIntyre: The struggle of a dissenting scientist


Interview by Xavier Bartlett with Virginia Steen-McIntyre

When I learned the sad episode of Hueyatlaco (Valsequillo, Mexico), in which prejudice and dogma passed over scientific evidence, I decided to study it further and write a lengthy article to expound all the details of this case although in fact already had mentioned in my book imperfect history. thus, in 2014 I collected various information and kept electronic correspondence with veteran geologist Virginia Steen-McIntyre, a scientist who lived (and suffered) the consequences of what happened in the Mexican site of very personal way, wanting to keep their principles and professional ethics rather than look elsewhere.

The truth is that this woman gave me a great impression for its serenity, fortitude and zeal, despite having gone through many years of disgrace and ostracism because of their position . Yet, despite his advanced age, he could resume his research in Hueyatlaco in the early 2000s, and has continued to soldier on research, advocacy and dissemination of heterodox positions in prehistory through the Pleistocene Coalition , a group of professionals from different disciplines who do not agree with the tenets of the prevailing paradigm.

In its day I found an interview on the Internet with VSM (in English) and decided to translate and disseminate this blog so readers could get a clearer idea of their employment and their scientific thinking.

Now I am pleased to present a totally new interview I did last year distance 2014 and had not published to date. In this interview, raised as a tribute, I quite focused on revealing the whole issue of Hueyatlaco and its implications, as well as other issues related to dogmatism and intolerance in science. Hopefully someday the name of Virginia Steen-McIntyre is justly recognized and claimed as many other dissident scientists who paid a high price to defend their principles against all odds.

INTERVIEW

Xavier Bartlett : First , thank you very much for your kind attention . In this first part of the interview will talk about the so - called " Saga of Valsequillo " ( in his own words ), an episode that had an impact very negative in his career . By way of introduction , can you explain briefly what was your educational background and how were involved in the excavations of Valsequillo ? What was your role principal there ?

Virginia Steen-McIntyre: I'm a geologist by profession, specifically Tephrochronology (the specialist studying the layers of ash and pumice volcanic) . I obtained my degree in the Augustana College in Rock Island, Illinois (1959 ). After a few years working in the oil and gas , I enrolled in graduate school at the State University of Washington , Pullman . It was there I got into archeology , the volcanoes , and layers of volcanic ash a combination fascinating !  in an excavation I attended identified often d you ample layers of ash volcanic in the strata visible s on the walls of the tasting of archaeologists , one of about 7,000 years old and the other about 12,000 years. Any artifact found in the layers sandwiched between these two layers had to be older than 7,000 years more recent than 12,000 years. This was thus a practical and economic to date about the artifacts, long as antiquity knew the layers of tephra (ash volcanic) with which it was dealing with . I started studying these two layers of ash with a microscope , and I used the results to get my degree in geology, specialization in pedology [1] (1965 ).

Valsequillo Reservoir, south of Puebla (Mexico) in 1962

In 1966, my mentor, Roald Fryxell , told me about an exciting project of archeology in Mexico, in the area of Valsequillo, south of the city of Puebla , about 100 kilometers southeast of Mexico City . Indirect evidence they indicated that the four reservoirs were at a Valsequillo you 22,000 years old, more than twice older than the "deposit oldest " acceptable in the Americas at that time [2] . But archaeologists were having trouble dating the remains: virtually no carbon in the bones were, they were mineralised ( partially turned into stone), which did not allow to carry out the usual datings by Carbon-14. Fortunately , at the site highest and most recent, Hueyatlaco, had several layers of ash and volcanic pumice above (ie, modern ) of the strata containing artifacts . they also were available datings of some layers of tephra found in the ravines steep of the flanks of nearby volcano La Malinche, with an interval length of between 8,000 and 24,000 years . what the project needed was someone who would use the microscope petrographic and had gotten a coincidence between the layers of tephra exposed in the excavations Hueyatlaco and one or more of the layers dated from La Malinche . it was suggested that I take on the task : would my thesis for a doctorate at University of Idaho in Moscow, Idaho . [After t res projects thesis and eleven years later (1977 ) I got finally my doctorate in geology from the University of Idaho. a long and painful history !]

XB : Hueyatlaco was another excavation normal a site prehistoric until that some datings of the Barranca Caulapán throws rum some figures unexpected ( around 22,000 BP ) of the objects made ​​by man related to the bones . What happened then?

VSM : The yacimient or of Caulapán was really small: just found in situ a flake of stone modified by man (yes, in a layer of sediment , not on the surface ) associated with a vertebra of proboscidio and some shells. the shells were dated by the method of C - 14 and the bone by uranium series, a technique that was then used in Africa for deposits of early humans. the dates of C- 14 and  of uranium series "agreed pretty well , " around 22,000 years . the academic establishment d and no way would accept the scant evidence of a flake stone to pass these dates as old . La Barranca Caulapán ended at the shore north of the reservoir Valsequillo , and a few kilometers away along the coast the were other four sites without dating , including Hueyatlaco , which was covered by one layer sedimentary thick and more modern ( including the layers of tephra ). These deposit s would be acceptable , long as they could be dated !

 XB : Anyway, in 1968, new and amazing datings obtained through the method of series of uranium from samples of Hueyatlaco and El Horno showed that the site could be 250,000 years . Old What was the reaction of Cynthia Irwin-Williams? And what happened to the rest of the academic community ? 

VSM : Barney Szabo , the same colleague who had dated artifact Caulapan, also dated the deposits Hueyatlaco and El Horno, in Valsequillo , but turned out to be more than ten times older! R eacción Cynthia was shock and disbelief . In fact , that is how the rest of the team members felt . We think that the methods of uranium series Barney Szabo did not work on samples of reservoir Valsequillo, but not we could use the excuse that the old bones somehow had been re deposited in the reservoir . the sample of Hueyatlaco , taken from sedimentary layers that contain tools bifacial , was part of a camel quartered, and the sample of El Horno , of one cap to (oldest) lower sedimentary , was a fragment of tooth of a mastodon descuartiz ado . Cynthia made ​​known to his colleagues that such dates were "impossible".

XB: On the other hand , something very unpleasant happened there in that s moments . The Mr. Lorenzo ( director of INAH in Mexico ) accused the archaeologists buried deliberately the artifact s that were found in the strata of gravel , and even sent police to obtain confessions of the workers . What was, in your opinion, the ultimate reason for this attitude?

VSM : Remember that I only was a student graduate at that time , so I was not aware of the
conversations original . From what I heard second - hand , it is that it was envy. When Professor Lorenzo did not like the Yankees or the capitalists , nor had great respect for women archeologists . and the fact that professor Juan Armenta Camacho , colleague Cynthia and discovered the original of these ancient sites in the area Valsequillo, was just an amateur archaeologist and was more than his ego could accept.

XB : Why do Cynthia Irwin Williams never published all the material on Hueyatlaco ? Why do we have now very little information about the excavations and any artifact?

VSM : Is d odorous admit it , but Cynthia refused to publish their material on Hueyatlaco and the other deposits until geologists who had dated the sediments in Hueyatlaco desdijésemos us from our datings, which we could not do in good conscience . Decades after his death and after a long struggle , we did get published in our online article on the debate stratigraphic in Hueyatlaco [3] .  Both Malde and VanLandingham are now dead . And there is an interesting video about the problem : "Suppressed: New Evidence of Early Man" available at:      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koYWznEIV50 . So far the video has had nearly a million hits (Dec 2015), and 1,277,277 views as at September 2016.

<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/koYWznEIV50" width="480"></iframe>

We have the molds of the artifacts that made ​​the mother Cynthia , Kay Irwin . They are stored in the Museum Smithsonian in Washington DC . We have pictures and drawings . As for the own artifacts original, see end of saw deo to know its whereabouts ! They were piled helter-skelter in boxes with thousands of other artifacts and deposited in a warehouse without signaling after the building in which they were stored originally proves destroyed by an earthquake.

S. VanLandingham, V. Steen-McIntyre and C. Hardaker (Valsequillo, 2001)

XB : What happened to his career after 1973 ? Do you think that s or professional reputation was destroyed because of their position staff on the datings ?

VSM : I was so innocent ! Thought that if one had the truth, there was more to do! The data is examined and contrasted in detail, and if held, were accepted finally .¡J to! Geologists Hal Malde and Roald Fryxell presented evidence of our datings of deposit of Hueyatlaco at a national meeting of the Geological Society of America in Dallas , while I was on my way par to give a talk in New Zealand (1973 ). the results had reached news agencies while I was in the plane, and they caused a stir. So much so that gave a talk further about the site at meetings of New Zealand with the audience full . But that was the highlight of my career . I expected to hear from various colleagues in the form of questions about our work , but it happened all otherwise . my correspondence fell sharply . my letters research not they were answered . I lost my job at the USGS (for nepotism , as suddenly discovered .) they spent several years after the death of Roald Fryxell in an accident car until it Hal Malde and I got finally that the information on Hueyatlaco came to the press (in the journal Quaternary Research, 1981) . There was no discussion . I did not say anything to the face . Suddenly I became a " non-person".

XB : How do you explain that dating officer Hueyatlaco ( about 20,000 years BP) could be set according to an article published in National Geographic , while the dates obtained by the USGS was n completely ignored ?

VSM : It 's simple: No unca contacted us . Apparently, Cynthia gave them to interview and resorted to dating with which he felt comfortable.

XB : The various absolute dating methods applied in Hueyatlaco have yielded results well over 20,000 years old, which invalidates conventional theories on the human population of the Americas . However, there is a big difference between the more moderate and more radical datings, hundreds of thousands of years. How would you explain these differences and what you grant reliability of radiometric dating methods?

VSM : If you read our article of 1981 in Quaternary Research ( Steen - McIntyre, Malde , Fryxell , v.16 , pp . 1-17 ) will all tests we use , both dating methods absolute as other methods to achieve our conclusions . None of the evidence we found would target dates recent to the site. the clincher came much later , after 2000 , when the late Diatomist (Consulting Environmentalist/Geologist) Sam VanLandingham found diatoms in the sediments of Hueyatlaco and its surroundings , many identified as pre-glacial period of Wisconsin or even earlier; in any case IDs post-glacial times were given. 

XB : The team led by independent researcher Marshall Payn could not obtain permits excavation between 2005 and 2010 and then , in 2011 , it was found that the site had been heavily altered by the construction of a large house surrounded by walls , so there was almost nothing to ex dig . What do you think about these facts ?

VSM : " Something is rotten in the kingdom of Denmark" And the official Mexican who could have cleared up the mystery was found dead of a heart attack when the archaeologist Neil Steede was flying to Mexico City to interview .

XB : After all these years , do you think that such datings extreme not only questioned the orthodox theory of the population of the New World , but the whole theory about human evolution? It was this issue specific cause of all the problems experienced by some of the people involved in Hueyatlaco ?

VSM : Yes . They put at risk Darwinian evolution. It is assumed that any humanoid creature was smart enough to reach the New World makes a quarter of a million years , or to develop tools bifacial , or to make beautiful artworks . but that's what the tests demonstrate in Hueyatlaco , at least before all " disappeared" and that the site was destroyed . One of the po reasons r which I became a member founder of the Pleistocene Coalition and editor of the newsletter Pleistocene Coalition News is because there are plenty of other enclave s ancient New World , as well as researchers malcontents who can not provide their data to the public as they call into question the dogma established . the newsletter attempts to rectify this situation.

XB : In view of everything that happened in Hueyatlaco , do you think that this case was an episode of manipulation , of suppression or concealment deliberate ? Do you think that the INAH was the only party responsible for the whole thing ? Would you use the word conspiracy in the scientific environment ?

VSM : probably . the three factors the main players are almost all dead , and "I was just a graduate student" , so I can not speak with authority . I've heard rumors that senior government officials of both sides of our southern border they were involved , and that Hueyatlaco is just the tip of the iceberg .

XB : In the second part of the interview will address various topics on archeology , geology and science in general . Apart from Hueyatlaco , there are other sites archeological not known that may indicate that human settlement in the Americas are very old. What can you tell us about these findings? 

VSM : There are many . Here we must recognize the work of Michael Cremo and the late Richard Thompson, who sought between dusty records of libraries and archives to unearth a large number of them . Their findings were published in his book 1993 Forbidden Archaeology ( " Archaeology Forbidden") . Also in the newsletter Pleistocene Coalition News, you just celebrate five years of deliveries, they mentioned several more of these sites. 

XB : Although there are many clues and evidence that can prove that several people from different parts of the world came to America before Columbus in the fifteenth century , academia refuses to admit these contacts overseas . Why

VSM : Good question ! I myself have me inquire or several times , but find no answer. Do you know the book World Trade and Biological Exchanges Before 1492? ( "World trade and biological exchanges before 1492") of Sorenson and Johannessen, 2009? The cover shows the statue of one goddess of a temple Hindu holding a corncob (a plant New World! )

XB : Although much of the archaeological practice rests on foundations geology , the geology which supposedly is one science hard - it is ignored when not provide the expected results . Do you know the controversy about dating geological Great Sphinx in charge Robert Schoch ? Archaeologists rejected such fech as simply because " it was impossible" because it had not identified any " civilization" in that remote time . What do you think of this? 

VSM : Yes , I know the work of Dr. Schoch . It seems that the Great Sphinx was modified due to water erosion . Very interesting! I try to use a concept called "Multiple Working Hypotheses " ( MHT) to address these issues . That 's what geologists use (or should use! ) C hen face problems that can not be resolved in the laboratory .

We can use the origin of life from non - life example. With the approach MHT try to consider as many ways as are possible to get from point A to point B : in this case, from non - life to life . This is the time when we let the imagination is fired , without taboos . The macroevolution Darwinist , the breath of a star, the clay animated , whatever, everything will be considered with equal possibility. Then you take out all these hypotheses and test yourself against the new facts that are appearing . Some will agree with the facts, others do not. you leave aside those that do not comply (but not you exclude completely) and add new hypotheses as they come to mind , and keep trying .

All this having always in mind that you probably do not have the answer correct - or even the answer that comes closest to the answer correctly on your list of hypotheses compliant. [This method] nor can guarantee that it can lobby the correct answer , but it is a way of thinking that frees the mind from the limitations usually is . Thus it is allowed, and even be encouraged , to think openly.

XB : We have said that you belong to an entity called Pleistocene Coalition ( " Coalition Pleistocene") , which does not share the orthodox views on human origins and evolution. Please tell us something about the work and the objectives of this initiative. 

VSM : The Pleistocene Coalition was founded five years ago years by a group of scientists , engineers and researchers malcontents who could not provide their data to the public through the normal channels , since question some dogmas established; for example: " Modern humans are intelligent, the cavemen were fools." So we created a newsletter on-line , the Pleistocene Coalition News , to bring to light the facts scientists . It 's free , and we are all volunteers . In this publication you will find articles that certainly will not see in your morning paper ! 

XB : Do you think that the theory of evolution has become a religious dogma that can not be discussed or criticized even though they have to deal with the lack of evidence or to evidence contrary ?

VSM : I think that's obvious .

XB: Do you think you that the confrontation between evolutionists and creationists fundamentalists ( religious) is a false controversy ? In other words , could be a way to put aside scientific theories such as design intelligent ?

VSM : Yes . What often hear about evolutionary question their own assumptions ? Where is the proof that what they believe is true ?

XB: the researcher alternative Michael Cremo believes that evolution is totally wrong and that the origin of man , as described in the scriptures Vedic , must go back many millions of years . What do you think about this approach mythological ?

VSM : My own beliefs are those of a charismatic Christian [4] . M is visions of the world and of Michael are far apart . But we worked for years and are good friends . As a scientist , this is another case where I would use the multiple working hypotheses (MHT) to think of this type of things .

XB : Some leading scientists actually consider that science today is indeed a bad science because it is perverted by prejudices ideological and interests of all kinds ( economic, in particular) . Do you share this view ?

VSM: I have certainly had one personal experience with this bias , like many members of the Coalition Pleistocene . I am glad that we are able to convey some of our information to the public . We are most well as lots of Davids facing Goliath!

XB : In these days , many people around the world no longer rely on policy , finance or religions, but has a blind faith in the empirical science as something " objective" and " good", because of their training and to the influence of the media. in addition , people often think that there is a broad consensus among the scientists on the issues major , but this is not true , as we can see clearly , for example, in the controversial debate over global warming anthropogenic . What would you say to people after their experience at this point ?

VSM : I speak now from a Christian background : " human beings are all fallen creatures , imperfect. Treat others with respect and love , but cuestiónate and continues cuestionándote ideas come from any source. "   

XB : In your opinion , why the current science , dominated by the ideology materialistic - reductionist, rejects any vision related to consciousness? Did you know that the British archaeologist Tom Lethbridge was heavily criticized and ridiculed for research in the field of the paranormal ? 

VSM : At materialistic - reductionist them scares the paranormal . It is something they can not control . 

XB : Thank you for your time and dedication to this interview . Any comment  end that want to express to readers?

VSM : I think I've said more than enough !


END OF INTERVIEW

[1] The science that studies soils.

[2] Refers to the site of Clovis, New Mexico (USA)

[3] See : Malde, Harold E. , Steen - McIntyre, Virginia , Naeser , Charles W. and VanLandingham , Sam L. 2011. The debate stratigraphy in Hueyatlaco , Valsequillo , Mexico Palaeontologia Electronica Vol 14 , Issue 3 , 44A . . 26P ; paleo-electronica.org/2011_3/27_malde/index.html.

[4] This Christian movement emphasizes the religious experience from a personal point of view. However, it is clear that Steen-McIntyre has never mixed his beliefs with his scientific activity itself.

source: https://laotracaradelpasado.blogspot.com.au/2015/12/virginia-steen-mcintyre-la-lucha-de-una.html

Virginia Steen-McIntyre - PART 2 Trench Profiles

This blog exists to promote Hueyatlaco and Virginia Steen-McIntyre's work, as there is no current working website that Virginia runs, which is a shame as there is a loss in her ability to keep her work online for all people and humanity to access, and educate themselves about her life long work.
In 2011, Virginia was given access by the The Pleistocene Coalition to post her items on their website, that had gone from her three previous websites. Below is a direct copy of this from source:  http://pleistocenecoalition.com/steen-mcintyre/index.html

Following on from the previous Post : Virginia Steen-McIntyre Recommended Reading, Research and Unpublished manuscripts published 30th August 2016, this continues Virginia's posting of information covering Trenching profiles.

TRENCH PROFILES
Stratigraphic cross-sections at the Hueyatlaco archaeological site, Valsequillo area, State of Puebla, Mexico.
INTRODUCTION
Following are the Hueyatlaco trench profiles available to the “Classic” Valsequillo project as of October, 2005. The bulk of Irwin-Williams’ data, including her original profile drawings, had been removed from her files in Portales, New Mexico before Steen-McIntyre had a chance to copy them in 1997. The original INAH profiles have not been located. The original Fryxell profiles are archived, along with copies of other pertinent Valsequillo data, in the Harold E. Malde file, Field Records Library, Central Regional Library, U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, Colorado.

The trench profile drawings shown here were transferred to computer by Steen-McIntyre using Adobe Illustrator, with the available profile copies used as templates. The work extended over many months, from June 2004 to October 2005, and was a learning experience for her. Irwin-Williams’ profile 1966 10/B-J and INAH profile 1966 66-4  were traced from copies she gave to us (Malde, Fryxell, Steen-McIntyre) shortly before we left for field work at Hueyatlaco in 1973. Her profile 1964? 8?/B-YY was pieced together from 8.5x11 sheets (exact location not given) found in her extant Portales materials. Grateful thanks to Chris Hardaker, who recently uncovered the sheets for the eastern half of the profile while looking through her data. The 2004 Waters profile is a copy of an interim drawing by Waters, made by me in the field. It is included only to show placement of the samples I collected during excavations at Hueyatlaco in May, 2004.

The Fryxell profiles were drawn primarily from a series of annotated blue-line prints provided to Steen-McIntyre by Roald’s widow, Helen, in 1977. Only recently did she discover that the originals were at the U.S.G.S. offices in Denver, and Hal Malde kindly provided sharper copies of them.

All profiles were carefully transferred to computer. Contact lines were traced at a magnification of 1100 per cent for the most part. The bedding units in the lower  trenches (includes those containing artifacts) were identified by Irwin-Williams on her profiles, either by label or pattern overlay, and were the standard to which Fryxell sheet 4 and Waters’ interim profile 4-extension were compared when correlating beds and adding the color overlay.

TRENCH PROFILES

A word here about trench profiles, especially the Fryxell series.

Trench profiles are accurate, vertical drawings of the sedimentary layers encountered at an archaeologic site during the process of excavation. They preserve the record of the stratigraphy of the site; a record that can be used by future researchers after the site itself has been reduced to a backfilled cavity.

At the beginning of the first season of excavation, a bench mark is chosen and the site is surveyed. A horizontal grid is established, usually at metre intervals, and the grid lines are identified in some way.  Excavation usually takes place vertically in blocks controlled by the placement of this horizontal grid. The vertical walls that form around the sides of the blocks as the material within them is removed show in cross section the layers of sediment encountered, the sedimentary beds. They provide the raw data for the trench profiles.

Periodically excavation work is halted while the scientist in charge, after previously scribing the bedding contacts directly on a newly exposed trench wall, transfers the information to a large sheet of graph paper. Sedimentary units of interest are labeled in the field with a number or letter, and the position of any archaeologic or geologic feature is carefully measured and drawn to scale. A surveyed grid of strong twine, attached to the vertical wall with long nails, guides the transfer. A series of such profiles is drawn as the excavation continues, often spaced only a metre apart. The annotated profiles are later reconstructed in the office or on computer to form a three-dimensional picture of the site.

The “Classic era” Hueyatlaco trench profiles shown below were originally drawn in 1964?, 1966 and 1973. Site archaeologist Cynthia Irwin-Williams provided us (Malde, Fryxell, Steen-McIntyre) with a copy of her 1966 profile 10/B-J in 1973, shortly before we left for new work there. The plan was to use this profile, in which she identified her bedding units, and her survey datum point to tie our planned excavation in with hers. This we were able to do (see join lines, Irwin-Williams’ 1966 profile, Fryxell sheet 4, Waters interim 4--extension).

Profiles on Fryxell sheets 1 through 4 were drawn in 1973 by Fryxell assisted by Steen-McIntyre. Each dashed line represents an actual bedding plane, and shows in cross section the ground surface as it existed just prior to the deposition of the sedimentary layer immediately above it. Periodically over the years, erosion would remove portions of the bedding units, then the sequence of deposition would begin all over again. These “breaks” in the sedimentary sequence, which actually represent periods of “lost” time, show up as lacunae , some quite distinct, between the two series of beds. (Sedimentary beds are most easily recognized when a newly exposed trench wall is allowed to dry naturally for a day or two undisturbed. Then, the sandy beds will appear lighter in color than the clay-rich ones, and natural cracks, or parting planes, will develop along the bedding planes.)

When examining a trench profile, Fryxell first concentrated on the bedding planes at the bottom and top of a sedimentary unit of interest rather than the unit itself. This enabled him to recognize the unit, deposited during the same time period, by its various sedimentary facies: for example, a deposit of overbank sediment from a flooding stream will grade from sand to silt and finally to clay as one moves away from the ancient stream channel. This is what we found for the uppermost sequence of the  upper channel deposits exposed in Irwin-Williams’ Hueyatlaco trenches, the ones labeled “sand grading to clay” on Fryxell sheet 4.

Following excavation in 1973, a series of stabilized columns of undisturbed sediment from the trench walls ("monoliths") were collected. Their locations are shown on the trench profiles, and their appearance in a series of photos and brief notes taken at Midland, Texas in 2002, when the packing crates were finally opened.The photos and notes are located in the Hueyatlaco 1973 file, under "Hueyatlaco 1973 monoliths, Monolith photos."

Virginia Steen-McIntyre October 6, 2005

FILES

Introduction to the Trench Profiles (doc. same text as above)
Hueyatlaco 1973 fence diagonal (pdf)
Hueyatlaco trench map (provided by Hal Malde 2006, pdf)

Irwin-Williams pdf profiles:

• I-W 64 B-YY
• I-W 66 10 B-J

Fryxell Sheets 1a, 1b, 2, 3, 4

INAH profile 66-4 (pdf)

Waters profile:

• Waters profile 4 sanslines
• Malde 2004 photos: Trench 4-a, Trench 4-b, Trench 4-c. (NOTE: These are 24MB tiffs and load slowly.)
  

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/

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/

Further information: Midwestern Epigraphic Society
Facebook: MES--Midwestern Epigraphic Society

Oldest Civilzation Discovered: Hueyatlaco Archaeological Site and the "Extreme Dating Controversy"

The following is an Article Originally from:

Early Sites Research Society, Newsletter Volume 1; No 1, by Neil Steede  

 

The Hueyatlaco Archaeological Site has found remains of human habitation at about between 250,000 to 350,000 years ago.

Many things are happening with this site, which have not been reported in other magazines such as "the Ancient American." We would like to report some of these events to our readers at this time. Hueyatlaco was excavated at first by an archaeologist by the name of Cynthia Irwin-Williams.
 

Williams found that she had a very early occupational site. She found some crude stone tools and also found many animal bones from which meat had been butchered.  The animal bones consisted of such things as the wooly rhinoceros and other pre-glacial fauna. She realized, having such an early site, that she must get laboratory dating done on the site, and requested that to be done by the U.S. Geological Survey.

The U.S. Geological Survey sent down a three member team who dated the site and found the range of very ancient dates mentioned above. Much of their controversy has been reported by Geologist Virginia Steen-McIntyre.

We consider Virginia to be a very good friend of ours, and have helped channel some of the financing that she needed to complete her work more recently. We will not attempt here to cover ground which she has already covered in her articles. What we do wish to relate to our readers in this article are the steps that we took in parts of the investigation of this enigma.

Shortly after the excavation of the Hueyatlaco site, and shortly after the dating of the site was made public, the Mexican Government came to be directly involved. The head of the Archaeological Department of the Mexican Government was very upset at these very ancient dates at this site. 

It is also believed by us that he did not like the fact that Americans were finding this site, nor did he like that the Americans involved were women. Whatever his motive, he had the Mexican army go and close the site down, and confiscate all of the artifacts and related materials. 

The man who was in charge of this was a very powerful man in the Mexican archaeological community, and no one would confront him directly with these misdeeds. About three years ago, this gentleman passed on to that "big dig in the sky where all archaeologists go."

When that happened, it was once again a subject that could be talked about in the archaeological world. We began doing interviews with different people that were related to the site or to the area at that time, We found archaeologists who now are very famous, but who were students then.

One of them related to us the story that the head Mexican archaeologist had come to him and told him that since his site, that he was excavating, was several hundred feet up the mountain from the site at which these people were excavating, that he should claim that he had found some more artifacts at his site, and that artifacts from his site probably had washed down to their level in ancient times.

He also told us that, in fact, this was not true. He had not found any artifacts. In fact, he had found no artifacts whatsoever, and had a barren dig at the site.

After the death, some thirty years later, of the "head honcho" of Mexican archaeology, this now-famous archaeologist published a paper simply claiming that he had found nothing.

To him, that was very important, from the standpoint that he could report honestly for the first time in three decades what he had really found. He was well aware that the head Mexican archaeologist was trying to destroy the validity of the site.

For the sake of continuity, we will give this head Mexican archaeologist the name of "Dagwood." "Dagwood" had an immense amount of power. He controlled all archaeology executed within the Mexican borders. He was a very opinionated man, and was a man whom very few people liked.

"Dagwood" not only controlled what archaeology and what sites were excavated, but also controlled what was published about them. It is obvious the amount of power he had, since he could muster up the Mexican army to carry out his purposes.

The young archaeologist, located farther up the mountain that we have referred to, we will call "Rusty." "Rusty" was very intimidated by "Dagwood." He knew that his whole future lay within "Dagwood's" grasp, and he would be crushed if he did not do "Dagwood's" bidding.

Therefore, "Rusty" decided simply not to write a report on his site. Only thirty years later, after "Rusty" had become a well-known and respected Mexican archaeologist, and after "Dagwood" had passed away, did Rusty, feel comfortable enough to publish on the excavation he had done hundreds of feet above the Hueyatlaco site.

His report simply says he found "barren ground." All of this is important to understand to what point "Dagwood" would go to control what was said about the site of Hueyatlaco. Once "Dagwood" had stopped the excavations at the Hueyatlaco site, he realized that he was not finished. He realized that he had to control more information and more knowledge. Other people had found similar things to this site. Those collections lay in private hands, and under the control of the University of Puebla.

Therefore, he sent the Mexican army to seize those collections, also; and they also disappeared. "Dagwood" never gave his permission to reopen the site, though there were several requests.

Even after "Dagwood" retired, he had named "puppets" to take his place which would follow his bidding and follow his orders not to allow the site to be opened. Time passed. An immense amount of people who had never heard that any of this had happened, continued their daily lives. The few who had been scarred, "licked their wounds and went to their corners."

One last step "Dagwood must take to fulfill his plan:

 
There was still the problem of the U.S. Geological Survey team's date. That date placed the site of Hueyatlaco at 250,000 to 350,000 years ago, as previously mentioned. 

He must get that date changed. He went to the United States Ambassador and told him in no uncertain terms, that no more Americans would be allowed to excavate in Mexico, unless that date were changed. In fact, he would try to make all relations with the United States extremely difficult. 

The Ambassador reported this to the Secretary of State of the United States, who "leaned upon" the U.S. Geological Survey to change their dates. The U.S. Geological Survey went back to their team and told the members that the date was going to be changed. They were going to take away one zero, thus making the date "35,000" years ago.

This still would be an incredible date, it was claimed, and still would be the oldest date known, they claimed. But one member of the team would have nothing to do with it. The other members reluctantly agreed, knowing that their jobs were "on the line."

One single member stood her ground. Her name was Virginia Steen-McIntyre. Virginia would go on to carry the torch for years, trying to force the truth to come out. If not for her, very possibly all of this would have been lost in the "brambles" of history.

At that time, I was a student in Mexico. I heard in class of the Mexican army's coming and containing the artifacts. I heard how the excavation had been forced to shut down. However, I was guilty, along with many others, of laughing at the story of the "foolish archaeologists" who were finding the dates of early man at hundreds of thousands of years ago in the Americas.

"We simply know it could not be." So I was guilty of lack of judgment at the time, and later I felt guilty about this. However, there was nothing I could do till years later.

By a very happy circumstance, I was brought to meet Virginia Steen-McIntyre. And I had long ago decided that whether I believed her or not, that was irrelevant; the point was, at least she was standing her ground and saying, and practicing something she believed.

When I met her, of course, I asked her many things about the excavation, now some thirty years old--I asked her for clues that I might be able to pick up, and she was very giving with her information.

I decided to re-open the case. You see, during that thirty year lapse, several people had found similar finds in the Americas. One of those people was Dr. Leakey. He had found a very similar ancient site in California called "Calico." So the feasibility of what Virginia was claiming seemed to be true.

First, we must find out if the artifacts still existed. Through a friend, I contracted a "mole." This " mole" worked for the National Institute of Anthropology in the warehouses where all the artifacts from all excavations were kept. And we had him look, and he found the artifacts from Hueyatlaco.

For, you see, "Dagwood" had been so egotistical that he did not think he would have to destroy them. Upon finding the artifacts and examining them, we determined that, in fact, they were authentic. Then, we went to the site and looked at the strata. The strata (the layerings of soil and rock) were all in order. The site did, in fact, seem to be very old, and very ancient.

Could, in fact, man have arrived to the Americas 200,000 years ago? Only time will tell as we develop this site. We are hoping that we resolve this question one way or another within the next year. We will keep our readers informed as this project develops. Whichever side you are for in this controversy, we ask that you "keep your fingers crossed" that everything occur with integrity.

Source: http://www.s8int.com/hueyatlaco.html
Originally Published: Early Sites Research Society, Newsletter Volume 1; No 1, by Neil Steede

Documentary - Forbidden Archeology: Suppressed New Evidence of Early Man

New Evidence of Early Man: SUPPRESSED

Video Published on Aug 30, 2012

This Documentary includes interviews with Virginia Steen-McIntrye and other leading scientific experts in Archeology, Geolochronology and Palaeontology, including Dennis.J Standford Paleo-Anthropologist at the Smithsonian Institution, George Carter Prof. Geography at Texas A&M University and Marshall Payn the benefactor who sponsored the new expedition to Hueyatlaco in 1997 to re-investigate the work by Cynthia Irwin-Williams.

This Documentary is from the EMMY AWARD WINNING Producers of "The Mystery of the Sphinx" and the Producers of "The Mysterious Origins of Man", this is a new ground breaking film about "New Evidence of Early Man: SUPPRESSED." What happens when scientific evidence conflicts with theory? In the early sixties, discoveries were made in Central Mexico, which were the handiwork of early man. Exquisitely carved animal bones and advanced spear points caused much excitement, including a Life Magazine article, until the dates came in. 5 mutually exclusive geological tests revealed they were over 250,000 years old.

In spite of the geochronology, archaeologists insisted the dates were too ridiculously old. This world-class archaeological region became off-limits for official research, a "professional forbidden zone."

This is the story of the shocking events that occurred, told first-hand by many of the actual participants. It reveals how one field of science can conflict with another and how new discoveries must battle evidence vs. belief, exposing what some have called "the dark side of archaeology."

Source: http://www.UFOTV.com

Virginia Steen-McIntyre Recommended Reading, Research and Unpublished manuscripts

This blog exists to promote Hueyatlaco and Virginia Steen-McIntyre's work, as there is no current working website that Virginia runs, which is a shame as there is a loss in her ability to keep her work online for all people and humanity to access, and educate themselves about her life long work.

In 2011, Virginia was given access by the The Pleistocene Coalition to post her items on their website, that had gone from her three previous websites. Below is a direct copy of this from source:  http://pleistocenecoalition.com/steen-mcintyre/index.html

Virginia writes:

For those of you new to the Valsequillo Saga, I'll start off with a couple of popular articles by way of introduction, followed by a list of critical references. Here also are the unpublished trench profiles from the Hueyatlaco archaeological site, and select photos by Hal Malde (2004). Soon I hope to add Roald Fryxell's b/w photos of the trench stratigraphy at Hueyatlaco (1973) and links to unpublished Hal Malde material.

The Valsequillo Saga, Introduction

Steen-McIntyre, V. 1998. Suppressed Evidence for Ancient Man in Mexico. NEXUS Magazine, August-September 1998: 47-51.

Steen-McIntyre, V. 2008. AReview of the Valsequillo, Mexico Early-Man Archaeological Sites(1962-2004) with Emphasis on the Geological Investigations of Harold E.Malde. Presentation at the 2008 Geological Society of America Joint Annual Meeting (October 5-9) Houston, Texas. Published online. [12MB pdf file may require several minutes to load.]

Critical References

Armenta Camacho, J. 1978. Vestigios de Labor Humana en Huesos de Animales Extintos de Valsequillo, Puebla, Mexico (Traces of Human Workmanship on Bones of Extinct Animals from Valsequillo, Puebla, Mexico). Published privately with aid from the American Philosophical Society and the Mary Street Jenkins Foundation, Puebla, Mexico; 125 pp; 1,000 copies. [NOTES: This is Armenta's complete monograph. The file is extremely large, 50MB pdf. The file includes the cover and blank pages. If printed double-sided, it is a virtual duplicate of the original publication.]

Armenta Camacho, J. 1978. Traces of Human Workmanship on Bones of Extinct Animals from Valsequillo, Puebla, Mexico. Translated into English from the original Spanish by Virginia Steen-McIntyre (September 1996 - February 1997). [NOTE: This is the text only. For the figures, see the original Spanish monograph above.]

Szabo, B. J., H. E. Malde, and C. Irwin-Williams. 1969. Dilemma Posed by Uranium-Series Dates on Archaeologically Significant Bones from Valsequillo, Puebla, Mexico. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 6: 237-44. [2MB pdf]

Steen-McIntyre, V., R. Fryxell, and H. E. Malde. 1981. Geologic Evidence for Age of Deposits at Hueyatlaco Archaeological Site, Valsequillo, Mexico. Quaternary Research 16: 1-17.

Unpublished manuscripts

Steen-McIntyre, V. 2003. Geological observations at Hueyatlaco archaeological site, Valsequillo area, Puebla, Mexico. Submitted to CURRENT RESEARCH IN THE PLEISTOCENE on February 20, 2003 for inclusion in the section called Paleo-environments, Geosciences. Slightly modified September 27, 2003.Rejected.

Steen-McIntyre, V. 2002. Geologic observations at Hueyatlaco, a Late Mid-Pleistocene archaeological site, Valsequillo area, Puebla, Mexico. Submitted to THE MAMMOTH TRUMPET, August, 2002. First draft August 8, 2002, modified slightly September 27, 2003. Rejected.

Steen-McIntyre, V. 2002. Geologic observations at Hueyatlaco, a Late Mid-Pleistocene archaeological site, Valsequillo area, Puebla, Mexico. Submitted to THE MAMMOTH TRUMPET, August, 2002. First draft August 8, 2002, modified slightly September 27, 2003. Rejected.

Steen-McIntyre, V. 1982. Report on numbered specimen 378, a platy fragment of indurated tuff with groove-like markings on two sides. Pp. 1-8. Unpublished report produced for Archaeological Research Associates, Inc.; now: Archeological Research Books.

Virginia Steen-McIntyre PhD, Tephrochronologist, Specialist in volcanic ash studies

Who is Virginia Steen-McIntyre A.B., M.S., Ph.D?

Virginia Steen-McIntyre was born in Chicago into a working-class family. She received her AB from Augustana College, Rock Island in 1959 (geology, minors in chemistry and art), the MS from Washington State University (1965, geology, minor in soils), and the PhD from the University of Idaho (1977, geology, minor in ecology).

She is a Tephrochronologist (volcanic ash specialist) with a secondary interest in archaeological site stratigraphy. She has worked with others in the Valsequillo area, Mexico, since 1966 especially at the Hueyatlaco archaeologic site. Most of her professional life has been spent working on the Hueyatlaco site, Puebla, Mexico. Virginia and her husband David live in Colorado.

The following taken from Virginia's Website:

The purpose of this website is threefold:
* To introduce the interested layman to the very early archaeologic sites clustered on the north shore of the Valsequillo Reservoir, 100 km east of Mexico City.
* To give much of the history of The Valsequillo from its beginning to 2004.
* To supply hard data for research scientists, much of it unpublished, that would be difficult if not impossible to find elsewhere.

Much of the data concerns Hueyatlaco, the youngest of four archaeologic sites discovered in 1964 by Mexican Prehistorian Juan Armenta Camacho and archaeologist Cynthia Irwin-Williams, then a graduate student in anthropology at Harvard. It contains the most complete sedimentary record. El Horno, a topographically lower, older site is also discussed. Both have been dated using U-series methods (on a bone and a tooth fragment respectively) to approximately 250,000 - 300,000 years. The Hueyatlaco site in addition has had volcanic ash layers dated by the zircon fission-track method and the tephra hydration dating method, and more recently its sedimentary layers by diatom stratigraphy. All methods agree as to the site's great age.

The word "classic" in the address is intentional. The Valsequillo Saga is ongoing, with new scientists, new excavations, new dates, new research. I refer to them as The New Valsequillo Project. There is disagreement between the old and the new groups that has not yet been resolved. We hope to work together to do so.

Source

Resource:
Palaeontologia Electronica (PE), established in 1997, is the longest running open-access, peer-reviewed electronic journal and covers all aspects of Palaeontology.
http://palaeo-electronica.org/content/

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