Why do finds of ancient evidence get buried totally while ridiculously impossible histories get play

Originally posted by Danbones
This incident is mentioned on the list,
which is a good list of supposed anomolies

When you think about it;
Only one of the items on the list needs to turn out to be true.

And how many need to turn out to be blatant lies before you decide to turn your "research" in a different direction?

Harte

Originally posted by Danbones
This story was difficult to find on the net a few years ago, now it is impossible to find other then passing references like this.
(But because it happened locally, I know of how the dig was quashed and buried at least.)

Well get out there, eh. The only reason any of these types of stories are on the net is because people put them there. If no one's a puttin, there ain't no stories. If you're local maybe you can find something out. Don't be a hoser; take the few details you know and follow up, like them dudes from Law and Order. You could bring your investigation to this thread and be a hero. Take off, eh.

Back bacon

Bryan Adams

Celine Dion

reply to post by Harte


That is the dumbest question anyone has ever asked me Harte

How many times did edison fail before he invented the light bulb again?

reply to post by Sunsetspawn



Your monitor got slush in it?
I just put it on the net.

Originally posted by Danbones
There was a copper mine on Manitoulin Island in the Great Lakes
When the Archaeologist who supervised the original dig judged the age to be up to 120 thousand years or so,
both he and the head of the Department that hired him, were fired and the whole story has been buried.
This story was difficult to find on the net a few years ago, now it is impossible to find other then passing references like this.
(But because it happened locally, I know of how the dig was quashed and buried at least.)

More details on this, please? Who got fired by who? How about you link me to your sources. Also...like Harte asks, how many of these examples have to be proven as false for this particular 'researcher' to be called into question?

reply to post by Danbones


Its like the Little Big Horn
when the archeaologists finally dug it up it was the indians telling the truth the whole time
and the OS turned out to be a deliberate fabrication
to hide the truth...
wouldn't want the peeps to know about the genocide
or the cowards that commited it

and just one anomoly being true sinks the christian and the judeao churches,
and their related power structures
can't have that

oh yeah and this lamer racial supremacy BS goes out the window too

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck


those are interesting questions...
got google Johnny?

and how many times do you have to be proven false before you get called into the same question.
but since you asked here is a link that proves my point
www.bible.com...

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by Danbones
This incident is mentioned on the list,
which is a good list of supposed anomolies

When you think about it;
Only one of the items on the list needs to turn out to be true.

And how many need to turn out to be blatant lies before you decide to turn your "research" in a different direction?

Harte

That's absurd. A good number of them are not blatant lies, although the vast majority are. Ther eis no reason that this disparity should discredit the entire field.

Hey Dan great thread man s&f! I'll tell you exactly why they censor the past, for the exact reason they censor the present. Because the truth will set you free and civilization wants to shackle you!

reply to post by Solasis


I agree with what you are saying to the extant that sure some are not what they seem.
ITS A LIST OF CLAIMES MADE BY OTHERS
I had assumed that wasn't to un obvious...
oooops
But the point of the OP is that certain ridiculous versions of history accepted as mainstream have been proven totally false yet the whole paradigm of our civilization is built on them.

since the OP regards a LIST
using the logic that because some are "proven hoaxes" then all are proven hoaxes
well that just doesn't fly at all.

That is up to the discerning reader and intelligent debate on each item by its own merits to further determine.

reply to post by XxRagingxPandaxX


RP some times you nail it in one sentence
that was two sentences

covers it though

I hope that being the list is one piece, people can easily look and see and investigate to their own satisfaction.
The writer of the list and his opinions are neither here nor there in that regards.

Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck

 

those are interesting questions...
got google Johnny?

Oh, I have Google alright. I also have the wherewithal to look at those specific allegations regarding the copper mine and I'd like you to gimme what you've got. Then we'll compare notes.

Or does that get all awkward with your central thesis here?

reply to post by Danbones

I do whati can Dan, I do what I can!

reply to post by Danbones


Forgottenresearch.com

Very nice site. It is all there!! thank you for the heads up S&F

The agenda of deceit has been in play for thousands of years, they're not going to let the truth out now. The knowledge filter has been secretly 'editing' our history - the burning of the Alexandria library for example - in order for the 'jealous god' of the OT to maintain his authority.

reply to post by Casing

Boy I hope I made sense!!!

You made a lot of sense, but it's like a fart in a hurricane around here lately. The weaker the source, the stronger the flags.

The first three on the Pleistocene list are typical of these sites:

1/ Aluminium Wedge of Aiud. A genuine object with no chain of evidence. The alleged analysis exists only the same sites as usual....s8int, Hindu and Creationist websites. That it was found where these sites claim it was found is simple hearsay. The object remains undisplayed at an 'unknown location.'

2/ The Stone Spheres of Costa Rica ( ATS Thread) are not Ooparts at all. They date to around the 6th Century.

3/ Acambaro dinosaur figurines '7,000 to 12,000 years old' are blatant hoaxes from the 20th Century. All survived intact, with no patina, no dirt, no wear and tear.

The top three in the Pliocene Era are similarly shaky.

1/ Only seems to exist in relation to the OP linked site.

2/ A skull found at La Denise, France. Again, the claims are looped back to the same sites. Sir Arthur Keith gets roped in (eccentric at the very least), but there's still no evidence that the skull exists or that if it was found it looked like modern man.

3/ 'cut animal bones found in Astian strata' is pretty interesting. Google 'Astian strata' and see how many of the same sites reference each other and harvest the same claims. I haven't looked very hard, but can't find anything about these alleged bones.

If anyone can post more details on these examples I'd appreciate it.

Originally posted by Kandinsky
If anyone can post more details on these examples I'd appreciate it.

There's always www.hallofmaat.com....
While it could use a more academic slant, it's worth a look. While I'm all about the fringes, cuz that's where the fun is, it's worth doing a thorough investigation before betting the farm. So much of this alternative history is based upon 19th century machinations directed at disenfranchising the First Nations, backing up the Bible, or in Cremo's case, an embrace of Vedic cosmology. Not to mention selling books, sheer ignorance, and web access by crackpots.

Let's not forget the simple fact that just because we don't have an immediate answer, it does not follow that any old Bravo Sierra holds equal weight to a reasonable solution. Paradigms are tough to break for a reason and to re-build human history based upon an 'intuitive leap' (generally prefaced by the breathless phrase "xxx can only mean that...") is to construct an idiocracy.

I'm calling the OP on the great Copper Mine story for a start.

Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by Danbones

 

oh yeah and this lamer racial supremacy BS goes out the window too

...says the guy with a Confederate Flag for an avatar.

Originally posted by Velocismo

Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by Danbones

 

oh yeah and this lamer racial supremacy BS goes out the window too

...says the guy with a Confederate Flag for an avatar.

No. To his credit, the OP is proud of his diverse background, he is not using the flag to make a racial statement, and to reduce the CSA and the Civil War to a racial issue is to buy into the history that is written by the victors. In this case, the discourse is readily available.

Could just be that our dating process is horrifically wrong?