Out Of Place Artifacts

www.mcremo.com...

I lucked out and found the forbidden archeology website, I haven't even skimmed over its contents, I was so eager to post the link.
I hope it is a good one. I have always enjoyed reading the wild and weird articles in the Fortean magazine, and recently started reading Nexus too. Thanks for the great links.
Here is a Nexus link about Jesus' kids....

www.nexusmagazine.com...

someone asked 'where is a picture of the vase?'

Here it is:

Originally posted by timoothy
Why would scientists try to hide the truth and avoid any test of their hypothesis? Their motivations are equally transparent.

Why indeed? Which scientists are doing that? What specific examples do you have of archaeologists avoiding "any test of their hypotheses" ?

Originally posted by timoothy
If it can be proved that the Egyptians did not build the Great Pyramid in 2500 BC using primitive methods,

But, it can't be. The dating of the pyramids is not really in question.

Originally posted by timoothy
or if the Sphinx can be dated to 9000 BC, the whole house of cards comes tumbling down.

Well one geologist believes its dated to 9000 BC. Maybe it is, but its certainly not a theory accepted by mainstream archaeologists (or other geologists, for that matter!) Even if it is true, how does the "house of cards" come tumbling down?

Originally posted by timoothy
Orthodox views of cultural evolution are based upon a chronology of civilisation having started in Sumeria no earlier than 4000 BC.

What gave you that idea? Civilization "started" in many locations around the world at various times.

Originally posted by timoothy
The theory does not permit an advanced civilisation to have existed prior to that time. End of discussion. Archaeology and history lose their meaning without a fixed timeline as a point of reference.

There is no credible evidence of "advanced civilizations" prior to that time. If credible evidence is found, archaeological texts will change, as they have considerably over that last 100 years.

Originally posted by timoothy
Since the theory of "cultural evolution" has been tied to Darwin's general theory of evolution, even more is at stake. Does this explain why facts, anomalies and enigmas are denied, suppressed and/or ignored? Yes, it does. The biological sciences today are based on Darwinism

What's being "denied, suppressed and/or ignored" ? Crackpot claims that are not verifiable by other scientists are probably ignored. What does "Darwinism" have to do with ancient "advanced civilizations"?

Originally posted by timoothy
this conspiracy begins, it is with two filters: credentials and peer review.

What's wrong with either? I'd rather learn about archaeology or history from someone with a phD who has spent a lifetime studying it than some flake on the Internet.

Originally posted by timoothy
Modern science is now a maze of such filters set up to promote certain orthodox theories and at the same time filter out that data already prejudged to be unacceptable. Evidence and merit are not the guiding principles; conformity and position within the established community have replaced objectivity, access and openness.

That's totally false. All scientific disiplines go through significant changes as new evidence is found. Crackpot, unsubstantiated "theories" don't get a lot of consideration from scientists, that is true.

Sounds like you did not even bother to read the other posts. Crackpots are the ones who make an evaluation with no clue as to what has been presented as substantial evidence.


HAVE A NICE DAY

Originally posted by timoothy
Sounds like you did not even bother to read the other posts. Crackpots are the ones who make an evaluation with no clue as to what has been presented as substantial evidence.

HAVE A NICE DAY

And what is your point exactly?

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke

Originally posted by timoothy
Sounds like you did not even bother to read the other posts. Crackpots are the ones who make an evaluation with no clue as to what has been presented as substantial evidence.

HAVE A NICE DAY

And what is your point exactly?

His point is that he can't back up his claims, so he chose to make a snide comment, apparently.

Gotta agree with the Father and Nygdan, here -- a lot of those were not well documented and some are outright frauds. Remember that the standards of archaeological (and scientific) investigation were pretty fast and loose before the 1900's... if someone came up to you and said "i found this under 300 feet of ancient limestone" then nobody said, "do show us." and examined the place to see if it was real.

At that time and place, a lot of money was made by selling things to traveling freak shows and carnivals and museums. You could scuff up your old granny's soup bowl and tell someone you brought it back from the Holy Land and that it was a bowl used by St. Peter -- and they would believe you.

Misidentification of fossils was quite common.

There is the occasional modern "out of place artifact" but most have been proven to be frauds (the recent one that we discussed was a Roman terracotta head found at a Mayan dig.)

Originally posted by timoothy
here's a piece of info on supressed finds.

www.viewzone.com...

A poor bit of information

We were just about to form an expedition to the site when another huge foundation was located nearby. Some symbols, possibly First Tongue, were described on one of the stones. But, sadly, the site was abruptly shut down and the excavations were bulldozed with earth by some arm of our own government. An informed source close to the family that owns the land reported that the family was threatened with harm if they allowed anyone to dig on their land in the future. They were told to forget what they saw. This type of threats remind one of the aftermath of Roswell in the late 40's.

'Some arm' of the government? They were 'just about' to study it when it got bulldozed? Please. The page is little more than peopel repeating the accustation that there is a conspiracy to coverup information.

If it can be proved that the Egyptians did not build the Great Pyramid in 2500 BC using primitive methods, or if the Sphinx can be dated to 9000 BC, the whole house of cards comes tumbling down.

Sure, that'd be spectacular. Unfortunately, no one has ever been able to prove anything like it.

Orthodox views of cultural evolution are based upon a chronology of civilisation having started in Sumeria no earlier than 4000 BC.

Thats the general understanding that has been arrived at based upon hundreds of years of research and independent studies, yes.

The theory does not permit an advanced civilisation to have existed prior to that time. End of discussion. Archaeology and history lose their meaning without a fixed timeline as a point of reference.

This is completely untrue. Archaeologists and scientists do not reject information simply because it clashes with the 'orthodox' theories.

Since the theory of "cultural evolution" has been tied to Darwin's general theory of evolution, even more is at stake.

Cultural evolution has nothing to do with darwinian evolution. "Evolutionary" as a method and mode of sociological study is not the same as darwinian biological evolution.

this conspiracy begins, it is with two filters: credentials and peer review.

The only groups complaining about credentials and peer review are the ones that can get neither, iow, incompetents and the unstructured. getting 'credentials' is not particularly important anyway, and all peer review means is that when you submit a paper, its reviewed by other knowledgeable people. They read and consider your paper submission and, if they have any criticisms, they detail those criticisms and return the paper to you, or rather the editor, who decides to publish or not based on that, and then returns it to you. Peer Review is the enemy of people who cannot to good work. Please demonstrate cases where a paper was submited to a respectable journal, but was rejected, soley because it suggested, based on good evidence and a good rational, that there was an advanced society in ancient times.

Modern science is now a maze of such filters set up to promote certain orthodox theories and at the same time filter out that data already prejudged to be unacceptable.

Your estimation is completely and wholly wrong. These 'filters' are such senseible things as 'reputation and standing', ie, 'is this guy a known fraud' or 'does this guy do good work'. If the answers are positive ones, if you are a person not known to be unreasonable, fraudulent, or irrational, then people tend to listen to you. If you have been through a rigourous training program, such as a good phd program or a good MS degree program, or have worked for a good musuem for a while, then too people will tend to give you the benefit of the doubt and listen to you. And peer review, while not perfect, is nothign more than knowledgable people studying your work. If it has gross errors, makes irrational conlusions and illgoical leaps of reasoning, then they will state that and return it to you and you can correct your errors and resubmit.

Evidence and merit are not the guiding principles; conformity and position within the established community have replaced objectivity, access and openness.

Why? Because a theory that you favour without sufficient evidence or reason, is generally rejected?? Its not like Scientists stamp ideas with the word 'scientifically approved' and pass them around, while perfectuly good ideas languish without approval. Science is up to every scientist to perform. Things like advanced ancient socieities with nuclear rockets and the like are widely rejected, not simply because 'science as an organization' rejects them, but because the vast majority of individual scientists reject these theories based on the evidence. Its silly to say that these ideas are somehow supressed, they're all over the place, and they're crap. They're inevitiably not based on any sort of evidence or rationale, and their big supporters at best end up saying 'you can't prove it wrong' or some other such nonesense.

Crackpots are the ones who make an evaluation with no clue as to what has been presented as substantial evidence

Neither you, nor the authors of those webpages and 'studies' you cited, have presented evidence, substantial or otherwise.

Dating these objects is very difficult ,theproblem with using artifacts to interpret human history is that only the most durable objects have survived the passage of time. The moist, acidic soils of the Maritimes rapidly decompose buried objects of wood, bone, bark, hide or natural fibres. All that is usually ever left of tools or weapons are the indestructible stone parts. From such sparse clues, ancient cultures and ways of life have to be reconstructed. Artifacts are usually more informative when found together at obvious places of human settlement, rather than scattered randomly about the landscape.


Im just keeping an open mind to all possibilities ,i'm one who never goes with the obvious explaination. Everyone has flaws , or gifts..

Originally posted by timoothy
Dating these objects is very difficult ,theproblem with using artifacts to interpret human history is that only the most durable objects have survived the passage of time. The moist, acidic soils of the Maritimes rapidly decompose buried objects of wood, bone, bark, hide or natural fibres. All that is usually ever left of tools or weapons are the indestructible stone parts. From such sparse clues, ancient cultures and ways of life have to be reconstructed. Artifacts are usually more informative when found together at obvious places of human settlement, rather than scattered randomly about the landscape.

Hey Timoothy, if you're going to quote something you should say where you lifted the text from.

This doesn't seem to support your original arguement at all though.

Looks like it was lifted from www.bayoffundy.com...

Credit should be given where credit is due.

my bad


[edit on 8-6-2005 by timoothy]

[edit on 8-6-2005 by timoothy]

Just a point...
I am sure that dating of 'history" will change as it does... and i am sure that there are new things found every day that alter our perspective somewhat...
(i remember several lately, including the pygmy finds)

BUT... this will not radically change things... it will just mean that humans had metal on and off for a few thousand years more than was thought or somesuch...

no biggy

I will point out however that archeology sites that could prove these claims true are found every day by constructiuon workers and road builders but are destroyed or covered up due to timelines, and apathy of ignorant minds

in 1969 a huge mosaic tile floor was found in oklahoma on the corner of 122nd and broadway. (under 3 feet of soil)
It was thousands of square feet in size and observers readily surmised that it was nothing built by native americans...
the suppositions range from mesoamerican cultures, phoenocian, viking and even indo european...

but the problem is... they wont ever know, because there is a frikin highway and electrical relay on top of it now.

As soon as the road crew found it, they called the geological society, and that was that... they spooked them...
the geological society wanted to do more research, but that would have delayed the road building... so the bulldozers won...
as I am sure happens so often...
developers worst news would be our best...

"ancient city found on site of future walmart"
wont ever happen, becuase the building crew would never let it... they just want their paycheck folks...

this stuff means much to us, but to many... it is nothing but a waste of time and money.

Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
Just a point...
I am sure that dating of 'history" will change as it does... and i am sure that there are new things found every day that alter our perspective somewhat...
(i remember several lately, including the pygmy finds)

BUT... this will not radically change things... it will just mean that humans had metal on and off for a few thousand years more than was thought or somesuch...

no biggy

I will point out however that archeology sites that could prove these claims true are found every day by constructiuon workers and road builders but are destroyed or covered up due to timelines, and apathy of ignorant minds

in 1969 a huge mosaic tile floor was found in oklahoma on the corner of 122nd and broadway. (under 3 feet of soil)
It was thousands of square feet in size and observers readily surmised that it was nothing built by native americans...
the suppositions range from mesoamerican cultures, phoenocian, viking and even indo european...

but the problem is... they wont ever know, because there is a frikin highway and electrical relay on top of it now.

As soon as the road crew found it, they called the geological society, and that was that... they spooked them...
the geological society wanted to do more research, but that would have delayed the road building... so the bulldozers won...
as I am sure happens so often...
developers worst news would be our best...

"ancient city found on site of future walmart"
wont ever happen, becuase the building crew would never let it... they just want their paycheck folks...

this stuff means much to us, but to many... it is nothing but a waste of time and money.

Commerce rules the world. -Not the truth.

There was word by those that worked on one of the largestest Intel plants here, that the diggers uncovered a Mammoth Tusk. The construction workers notified those in charge and those in charge notified Intel. Intel gave the word to 'say it never happened.' You won't believe how many people that plant employs now. Jobs and food on the table are more important than history. Survival is more important and that's why there are many lost artifacts we would have loved to see today.

Date of the Sphynx...

John Anthony West delivered a seismic shock to archaeology in the early 1990's when he and Boston University geologist Robert Schoch revealed that the Great Sphinx of Giza, Egypt, showed evidence of rainfall erosion. Such erosion could only mean that the Sphinx was carved during or before the rains that marked the transition of northern Africa from the last Ice Age to the present interglacial epoch, a transition that occurred in the millennia from 10,000 to 5000 BC.

www.jawest.net...

Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
in 1969 a huge mosaic tile floor was found in oklahoma on the corner of 122nd and broadway. (under 3 feet of soil)
It was thousands of square feet in size and observers readily surmised that it was nothing built by native americans...
the suppositions range from mesoamerican cultures, phoenocian, viking and even indo european...

Do you have a source for this claim?

Originally posted by Flange Gasket
Date of the Sphynx...

John Anthony West delivered a seismic shock to archaeology in the early 1990's when he and Boston University geologist Robert Schoch revealed that the Great Sphinx of Giza, Egypt, showed evidence of rainfall erosion. Such erosion could only mean that the Sphinx was carved during or before the rains that marked the transition of northern Africa from the last Ice Age to the present interglacial epoch, a transition that occurred in the millennia from 10,000 to 5000 BC.

www.jawest.net...

Yeah, it's an interesting idea.... John Anthony West also wrote a book in the early 90's called "A Case for Astrology" ... this does not help his credibility, IMHO.

I think some of you should read and digest this essay:
www.xmission.com...

Originally posted by JustMe74

Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
in 1969 a huge mosaic tile floor was found in oklahoma on the corner of 122nd and broadway. (under 3 feet of soil)
It was thousands of square feet in size and observers readily surmised that it was nothing built by native americans...
the suppositions range from mesoamerican cultures, phoenocian, viking and even indo european...

Do you have a source for this claim?

the only reference online is thru one of these "ancient mysteries" websites, and it only mentions it in passing...
there are 2 newspaper articles on it. One in the edmond daily news (precluded the edmond sun) and the other in the tulsa, world the same month. I found out about it as a rumor, and asked my Uncle, who was a construction worker during that time...(not on this project) but it was common knowledge among early edmondites apparently... but not a mystery that is still considered, it has been forgotten and tucked away with the stories of ancient fortresses and viking runes found out of place... great for the campfire though...

Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
there are 2 newspaper articles on it. One in the edmond daily news (precluded the edmond sun) and the other in the tulsa, world the same month.

What month and day did the article appear? What is "the tulsa" ?

Originally posted by JustMe74

Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
there are 2 newspaper articles on it. One in the edmond daily news (precluded the edmond sun) and the other in the tulsa, world the same month.

What month and day did the article appear? What is "the tulsa" ?

the tile was found on june 27th of 1969... the articles appeared in the edmond "booster" paper on july 3rd and the Tulsa World in june 29th (same year)

here is the only mention I could find online:
200,000 yr old tile floor...