“Anatomically modern humans have been present on the Earth not just for 100,000 years or less (the orthodox version), but for millions of years, and that metal objects of advanced design have been in use at equally early periods.”
The model of human prehistory built-up by scholars over the past two centuries is sadly and completely wrong, and a deliberate tool of disinformation and mind control.
This is the thesis of the essay, “Forbidden Archaeology” by Michael Cremo and Richard L. Thompson (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_forbiddenarcheology.htm)
The authors begin with the assumption that archeologists are fundamentally of good faith. Nevertheless, little by little, they demonstrate a systematic destruction of proofs that show another reality than that the official story. Falsifications and even destruction of such proofs has been common for more than two hundred years.
In their first essay “The Hidden History of the Human Race”, Cremo and Thompson push back our horizons not just thousand years, but millions of years into the past, and show that almost everything we have been taught to believe about the origins and evolution of our species rests on a highly selective sampling of research.
The two authors then set the record straight by showing all the other research results that have been edited out, not because there was anything wrong about them, but simply because “they did not fit with prevailing academic opinion.”
Anomalous and out-of-place discoveries reported by Cremo and Thompson in “The Hidden History of the Human Race” include convincing evidence that anatomically modern humans have been present on the Earth not just for 100,000 years or less (the orthodox version), but for millions of years, and that metal objects of advanced design have been in use at equally early periods.
The authors describe an ongoing social process of knowledge filtration that at first sight appears quite innocuous, but has a substantial cumulative effect. Certain categories of evidence simply disappear from view.
This pattern of data suppression has been going on for a long time. For instance, in 1880, J. D. Whitney, the state geologist of California, published a lengthy review of advanced stone tools found in California gold mines. The implements, including spear points and stone mortars and pestles, were found deep in mine shafts, underneath thick, undisturbed layers of lava, in formations ranging from 9 million to over 55 million years old.
W. H. Holmes of the Smithsonian Institution, one of the most vocal critics of these California finds, wrote:
“Perhaps if Professor Whitney had fully appreciated the story of human evolution as it is understood today, he would have hesitated to announce the conclusions formulated (that humans existed in very ancient times in North America), notwithstanding the imposing array of testimony with which he was confronted.”
In other words, if the facts do not agree with the favored theory, then such facts, even an imposing array of them, must be discarded.
I shall give here some examples of these discarded paleo-archaeological elements:
In a report delivered to the British Association for the Advancement of Science in 1881, H. Slopes, F.G.S. (Fellow of the Geological Society), described a shell, the surface of which bore a carving of a crude but unmistakably human face. The carved shell was found in the stratified deposits of the Red Crag, which is between 2.0 and 2.5 million years old.
One should keep in mind that in terms of conventional paleontological opinion, one does not encounter such works of art until the time of fully modern Cro-Magnon man in the Late Pleistocene, about 30,000 years ago.
On August 2, 1890, J. H. Neale signed the following statement about discoveries made by him:
“In 1877 Mr. J. H. Neale was superintendent of the Montezuma Tunnel Company, and ran the Montezuma tunnel into the gravel underlying the lava of Table Mountain, Tuolumne County. . . . At a distance of between 1400 and 1500 feet from the mouth of the tunnel, or of between 200 and 300 feet beyond the edge of the solid lava, Mr. Neale saw several spear-heads, of some dark rock and nearly one foot in length.
On exploring further, he himself found a small mortar three or four inches in diameter and of irregular shape. This was discovered within a foot or two of the spear-heads. He then found a large well formed pestle, now the property of Dr. R. I. Bromley, and near by a large and very regular mortar, also at present the property of Dr. Bromley.”
Neale’s affidavit continued:
“All of these relics were found. . . . close to the bed-rock, perhaps within a foot of it. Mr. Neale declares that it is utterly impossible that these relics can have reached the position in which they were found excepting at the time the gravel was deposited, and before the lava cap formed. There was not the slightest trace of any disturbance of the mass or of any natural fissure into it by which access could have been obtained either there or in the neighborhood.”
The position of the artifacts in gravel close to the bedrock at Tuolumne Table Mountain indicates they were 33-55 million years old.
In 1844, Sir David Brewster reported that a nail had been discovered firmly embedded in a block of sandstone from the Kingoodie (Mylnfield) Quarry in Scotland. Dr. A. W. Medd of the British Geological Survey wrote to the authors in 1985 that this sandstone is of “Lower Old Red Sandstone age” (Devonian, between 360 and 408 million years old). Brewster was a famous Scottish physicist. He was a founder of the British Association for the Advancement of Science and made important discoveries in the field of optics.
In his report to the British Association for the Advancement of Science, Brewster stated:
“The stone in Kingoodie quarry consists of alternate layers of hard stone and a soft clayey substance called ’till’; the courses of stone vary from six inches to upwards of six feet in thickness. The particular block in which the nail was found, was nine inches thick, and in proceeding to clear the rough block for dressing, the point of the nail was found projecting about half an inch (quite eaten with rust) into the ’till,’ the rest of the nail lying along the surface of the stone to within an inch of the head, which went right down into the body of the stone.”
The fact that the head of the nail was buried in the sandstone block would seem to rule out the possibility the nail had been pounded into the block after it was quarried.
On June 22, 1844, this curious report appeared in the London Times:
“A few days ago, as some workmen were employed in quarrying a rock close to the Tweed about a quarter of a mile below Rutherford-mill, a gold thread was discovered embedded in the stone at a depth of eight feet.”
Dr. A. W. Medd of the British Geological Survey wrote to the authors in 1985 that this stone is of Early Carboniferous age (between 320 and 360 million years old).
(Ed. Note: Cornelius B cites many more examples which I excised in the interest of brevity.)
“Forbidden Archeology” was first released in 1993 and quickly became an underground classic. Today it is a bestseller, with foreign editions in over a dozen languages, presenting both accepted and anomalous scientific evidence defying the traditional view of human evolution. This is a fascinating intellectual excavation of a vast store of hidden knowledge.
I’ll let you judge their proofs sustaining the human evolution. What is the purpose behind this disinformation if not mind control, and therefore social engineering?
Science is a method that anyone can learn and apply. In a free and open society, science has to be a democratic process. Instead, we observe a behavior similar to the totalitarian attitude of the ancient priesthood clique in Egypt. To better illustrate this affirmation, I present the case of a science journalist, Richard Milton, initially an ardent believer in Darwinian doctrine until his investigative instincts kicked in one day.
After 20 years of studying and writing about evolution, he suddenly realized that there were many disconcerting elements in the theory. He decided to put every main classic proof of Darwinism to the test. The results were hard to believe – he found that the theory could not even stand up to the rigors of routine investigative journalism. Next, he published a book titled “The Facts of Life: Shattering the Myths of Darwinism”.
“I experienced the witch-hunting activity of the Darwinist police at first hand – it was deeply disappointing to find myself being described by a prominent Oxford zoologist, Richard Dawkins, as “loony”, “stupid” and “in need of psychiatric help” in response to purely scientific reporting.”
Does this sound like stories that came out of the Soviet Union 25 years ago when dissident scientists there started speaking out?
Without a doubt Dawkins is part of the “secret societies brotherhood” invested with high power. Richard Dawkins has been appointed to the position of Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University. This advocate of aetheism is a classic “Brain Police” storm-trooper, patrolling the neurological front lines.
According to Milton, the process came to a head when the London Times Higher Education Supplement commissioned him to write a critique of Darwinism. The publication foreshadowed his coming piece: “Next Week: Darwinism – Richard Milton goes on the attack”. Dawkins caught wind of this and wasted no time in nipping this heresy in the bud. He contacted the editor, Auriol Stevens, and accused Milton of being a “creationist”, and prevailed upon Stevens to pull the plug on the article. Milton learned of this behind-the-scenes backstabbing and wrote a letter of appeal to Stevens. In the end, she caved in to Dawkins and scratched the piece.
The Western scientific establishment and mass media pride themselves on being open public forums devoid of prejudice or censorship. However, no television program examining the flaws and weaknesses of Darwinism has ever been aired in Darwin’s home country or in America. A scientist who opposes the theory cannot get a paper published.
Darwin’s theory of evolution is the only theory routinely taught in our public school system that has never been subjected to rigorous scrutiny; nor have any of the criticisms been allowed into the curriculum. This is an interesting fact, because a recent poll showed that “71% of the American public say biology teachers should teach both Darwinism and scientific evidence against Darwinian theory.” Nevertheless, there are no plans to implement this balanced approach.
Then there is the high-profile case of Dr Virginia Steen-McIntyre, a geologist working for the US Geological Survey (USGS), who was dispatched to an archaeological site in Mexico to date a group of artifacts in the 1970s. This travesty also illustrates how far the « brothers scientists” will go to guard orthodox tenets.
McIntyre used state-of-the-art equipment and backed up her results by using four different methods, but her results were off the chart. The lead archaeologist expected a date of 25,000 years or less, and the geologist’s finding was 250,000 years or more.
The figure of 25,000 years or less was critical to the Bering Strait “crossing” theory, and it was the motivation behind the head archaeologist’s tossing Steen-McIntyre’s results in the circular file and asking for a new series of dating tests. This sort of reaction does not occur when dates match the expected chronological model that supports accepted theories.
Steen-McIntyre was given a chance to retract her conclusions, but because this woman was intellectually honest, she refused. She found it hard thereafter to get her papers published and she lost a teaching job at an American university.
Thus, as we may conclude from the information provided here, Darwinism, the theory of the survival of the fittest and its twin sister, the theory of human evolution, together with the official version of the Paleontology and Archaeology such as they are practiced, are pseudo-sciences.
In fact, they are tools for mind control of the masses. Their main purpose is to cut off the roots of the true history of humanity, and promote a naturalistic and mechanistic view of life as “survival of the fittest.” They promote atheism as a means of destroying Christian civilization.
We find the same hate of God and of Christianity in Marxism and Freudianism.
A very interesting read is the book of Richard Wurmbrand “Marx & Satan” where we discover that Marx was a Satanist priest with a deep hate of God and desire for the ruin and annihilation of the human society. How can we explain this deep hated nourished in the hearts of these men? Was it satanic possession?
I will close with this fact – at the funerals of Karl Marx, in his speech Frederich Engels compared Marx to Darwin as titans of the human mind, and this suggests the high probability that Darwin was Karl Marx’s “Luciferian brother”.