Atlantis Online

Satellite Discoveries & Alternate Archaeology => Alternate Archaeology => Topic started by: Mark of Australia on March 16, 2007, 08:52:21 pm



Title: Forbidden Archaeology : masterpiece of science
Post by: Mark of Australia on March 16, 2007, 08:52:21 pm
Forbidden Archeology: The Hidden History of the Human Race by Michael A. Cremo and Richard L. Thompson quickly became a best selling underground classic, with over 200,000 copies sold and translations in more than 13 languages.   This massive work spawned waves of resistance and wonder amongst the scientific community, with over 900 pages of well-documented evidence suggesting that modern man did not evolve from ape man, but instead has co-existed with apes for millions of years!

Michael Cremo lectures to academic, popular, and scientific audiences around the world in a continuing challenge to Darwinian evolution


From its initial release in 1993 to the present, Forbidden Archeology has shocked and delighted readers around the globe with a veritable encyclopedia of anomalous scientific evidence challenging the standard views on human evolution
http://www.mcremo.com/ 
                     
                                                         (http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u167/atlantispix/fa.jpg)




 Now...
         I don't wanna  sound like one of those people with 20/20 vision in hindsight ,like, "Columbus didn't do much ,all he had to do was sail west til he hit land ,*scoff*)."    ...,but it is true that I had been leaning heavily towards similar conclusions as those found in Forbidden Archaeology before I'd even read it .
  Those conclusions are that the anatomically modern human race could be millions upon millions of years old ,but more importantly that the methods that the scientists have been using to piece together their view of antiquity has been hypocritical ,rife with double standards and plain unscientific.
 People who have not read the book will naturally find this hard to believe .Surely professional scientists can't be incompetent, can they ?    (naturally hard to believe?, yeah because our culture instills in us that scientists are smart ..err ..*scough*)

   When I  read in that book how the circus of academic opinion 'brutally' goes about forming the dogma, I marvelled at how the standards managed to get so low and how the fundamentals of scientific method could be mauled in such a blatant way. Despite this,Cremo and Thompson managed to restrain themselves and remain polite ;maybe a little too polite?.No ,they were perfect ,the way Cremo and Thompson maintained there composure to produce a masterpiece of dispassionate scholarship . They beat the incompetent bastards at their own etiquette.!    ( I dont have to be polite here do I ??  :P)

  The view I was leaning toward before I read Forbidden Archaeology was confirmed much more forcefully than I had hoped for upon starting out,  and I liken the intellectual journey on which it guided me, to a trailblazing adventure that is still pioneering ever expanding vistas of possibility concerning our own antiquity.It's such a contrast to the straight-jacket of 'their' orthodoxy.

  Ok Ok ,so I got a bit carried away with the last couple of sentences but it gives you an idea of how highly I rate the book . I seriously think that if you are a student of human antiquity and have not read Forbidden Archaeology then you can't really claim to be up to date with the knowledge on the subject at all .
 
 It is ESSENTIAL reading ..  get the abridged version if you must, but JUST GET IT !   lol



Title: Re: Forbidden Archaeology : masterpiece of science
Post by: Desiree on March 17, 2007, 06:29:30 am
Good book, long book! It's about as thick as some of my college textbooks.

It also got a lot of critcsm when it came out for it's archaeological method.  As I recall, most items weren't radiocarbon dated but were simply judged to be old because they were buried in deeper layers of earth?  If you have any other info on how they deated all that stuff, let me know.


Title: Re: Forbidden Archaeology : masterpiece of science
Post by: Essan on March 17, 2007, 09:06:19 am
Many stories.  Little, if any, empirical evidence.

Science works on the basis that just saying something happened doesn't actually prove it happened.  And let's face it, if you have 100,000 stories and 100 of those suggest orthodox views are wrong, then publishing a book with just those 100 stories in it presents a distorted view of reality ;)   


Title: Re: Forbidden Archaeology : masterpiece of science
Post by: Mark of Australia on March 17, 2007, 05:03:06 pm
I suggest you READ the book ,

 most of those 900 odd pages deal with the finds and sites that are mainly of stone tools ,many that are primitive ,and how the interpretation of those finds were severely influenced by the new theory of the time called evolution (you may have heard of it)  . Also most of the material the book uses are from sites and finds of the late 19th century .

Basically it shows that our current views about human antiquity were moulded at that crucial early stage in evolutionary theory and archaeological interpretation .And so since then ,for most of the 20th century and up to today, the anomolus finds have been forced into the accepted view so that they simply dont appear to be anomolous.

I am not good at explaining it ,so I can not strongly recommend enough the importance of reading the book for yourself (Essan) .  It sounds like you have read it Desiree,I'm not sure if it was the full version though,you might wanna check the appendices that give a critique of C14 and other types of hi-tech testing..  also the Appendix concerning the dating of the Castenedolo skeletons is very interesting.The Castenedolo find is one of the best pieces of evidence presented in the book.   http://www.calarts.edu/~shockley/castenedolo.html

It would be astounding to me if you had actually read the full version Essan and still made that comment below.  So I am sure that you have not read it..Oh and Essan ,they ONLY worked with the empirical evidence .That was silly of you to say..("Little, if any, empirical evidence.") I'm not trying to be nasty to you but that was a sloppy comment ,much like the standard response of those in the 'orthodoxy'.

Desiree ,they explained in the book that they did not lean on radio carbon dating due to it's inaccuracies but that they did consider the C14 evidence . They explained why stratigraphic dating  of geological layers in many cases was considered to be more important evidence  than the C14 dates .. C14 has a limit of about 40000 years  ...

 I could try to defend the book as best I could but it would be nowhere near as eloquent as the book itself ,so again , I beseech anyone who sets eyes on these words ...read the book .

 


Title: Re: Forbidden Archaeology : masterpiece of science
Post by: Rebecca on March 18, 2007, 05:09:53 am
Carbon 14 dating has it's share of errors, but radiometric dating does not, and it's perfect for dating rock.  In fact, radiometric dating of rock is what helped establish the date of the earth, the oldest rocks dating to nearly 4.6 billion years old.


Title: Re: Forbidden Archaeology : masterpiece of science
Post by: Mark of Australia on March 18, 2007, 05:38:03 am
Hi Rebecca

i have read some arguments against radiometric dating ,,its pretty technical so i couldnt really follow the details ,, but basically they say there are too many assumptions of constancy .have you studied this sort of thing .?


Title: Re: Forbidden Archaeology : masterpiece of science
Post by: Rebecca on March 18, 2007, 05:56:29 am
Yes, I have, it's actually accurate so long as the iostopes of the specimen don't get contaminated, and care has to be taken with any sample in a lab. Also, tests need to be performed on several different areas of the rock.  So long as there isn't an a reading that is an anomaly, the results can be averaged out.

No question the earth is very old, but I think we need more scientific evidence before we decide that modern man appeared earlier on it.


Title: Re: Forbidden Archaeology : masterpiece of science
Post by: Mark of Australia on March 18, 2007, 06:10:55 am
yeah we do need more evidence to prove that man is millions of years older than thought..  but I dont actually assume that man is millions of years old . Forbidden Archaeology does lean that way but they don't actually say it is enough evidence to draw a conclusion yet either .

The main revelation of that book is that the scientific standards of archaeologists in the late 19th century and up to the present have not been so dispassionate or logical as they would have us believe and that the standard view may well be wrong .Personally I do think the standard view of our antiquity is wrong but cant say how old we really are or fill in any of the details .. We simply dont know .

The academics are too hasty by insisting on an answer now .... a bit like the climatologists concerning global warming ,, but dont get me started on that . ::)


Title: Re: Forbidden Archaeology : masterpiece of science
Post by: Tom Hebert on March 18, 2007, 06:29:34 am
yeah we do need more evidence to prove that man is millions of years older than thought..  but I dont actually assume that man is millions of years old . Forbidden Archaeology does lean that way but they don't actually say it is enough evidence to draw a conclusion yet either .

The main revelation of that book is that the scietific standards of archaeologists in the late 19th century and up to the present have not been so dispassionate or logical as they would like to believe and that the standard view may well be wrong .Personally I do think the standard view of our antiquity is wrong but cant say how old we really are or fill in any of the details .. We simply dont know .

The academics are too hasty by insisting on an answer now .... a bit like the climatologists concerning global warming ,, but dont get me started on that . ::)

Hi Mark,

I came to a similar conclusion when I read the book.  Either man is older than we thought OR perhaps the world is younger than we thought.  Or maybe we just don't know how stable our planet has been over the past eons.

I know that when they carbon dated the Great Pyramid, they found that the upper part was older than the lower part!  This was, of course, explained away, but shouldn't that send up a red flag somewhere?  This would be an example of what Cremo calls "filtered knowledge."  If something looks impossible according to our current theory, it must be impossible!



Title: Re: Forbidden Archaeology : masterpiece of science
Post by: Mark of Australia on March 18, 2007, 07:15:49 am
Yes ,you have mentioned something Tom , that I think is the way forward .  I hadnt said anything about it before but now's the time i guess...

In Forbidden Archaeology near its beginning , the authors  mention that they will be working with the 'standard' geological chrononlogy in their identification of the artefacts ages and context. They also hint that maybe geological history as it now stands may also need to be investigated in a similar way to the method they will be using in their book and therefore may not be a reliable dating method..but they basically decided that they would nevertheless continue ...and that criticism of geology is for some future work.. they were very brief about that part.

I do think that is the way forward. I notice how the geological ages are totally unquestioned ,even amongst the sort of theorist you'd find around here... there is some sort of taboo about questioning geological doctrine .It should be thoroughly scrutinized ,right back to the original assumptions of Lyell. That is where the errors started I believe... Gradualism is enemy number one..because it is considered a principle of Geology.. I never heard anything so stupid as to claim that there are Principles of Geology. As Lyells epoch making book is called.  We need an epoch breaking book ....another 'Forbidden Archaeology'.



Title: Re: Forbidden Archaeology : masterpiece of science
Post by: Tom Hebert on March 18, 2007, 12:21:50 pm
Yes, I would love to see "Forbidden Geology" published.  There are some Creation scientists who have done research on this already, but what we need is a comprehensive book like Cremo's.

Cremo used traditional geology in order to have a stable reference point.  Otherwise things would really have been confused, and the anomolies would not have shown up so clearly.  But this methodology allowed him to refute traditional scientists using their own "standards."


Title: Re: Forbidden Archaeology : masterpiece of science
Post by: Mark of Australia on March 18, 2007, 06:07:05 pm
Yep ,I think the 'deeper' readers noticed that. I wonder if Cremo has any plans on that front. I would have thought that was logically the next step to take.
    Instead, Cremo wrote "Human Devolution" . Putting forward a theory to kind of fill the vacuum caused by the potential implications of Forbidden Archaeology .And because it matched his Born-Again Hindu (for want of a better description) beliefs.

Here's a thought...Maybe Cremo and Thompson are not so different from the establishment scientists as it may appear.They launched into the massive undertaking that was "Forbidden Archaeology" initially because their own beliefs didn't match establishment views about human antiquity.(A bit of an over-simplification,but that is the gist of it).
  And I remember they pointed out that their belief for the age of the Earth just happens to match the scientific establishments view ie. 4.32 billion years. That is some Hindu cycle of time for the Earth or the regeneration of the Earth.  The academics say Earth is about 4.5 billion years old.

 So maybe that is why they feel no urgency to investigate geological history ,it doesn't conflict with their belief . "If it ain't broke ,don't try to fix it "

 That said, Cremo and Thompson were led by their belief to conduct some great science so I think that's all that matters.

The problem is when your beliefs lead you to ignore clear scientific data.

I remember writing something to someone here that basically goes  ... at the end of the day it is healthy ,actually vital , that their be scientists with varied beliefs looking at the data from their respective points of view and being able to be heard in the halls of acadaemia.That would only do any good if acadaemia was not dominated by a single point of view.

Despite that ,I think it is a healthy little underground we've got going around and I dont think that I would change very much about the system even if I could. Any one of us here has the chance to make a name for themselves by making an important discovery of a "fact" that has been overlooked by professional scientists.It's just very hard to do it from the 'outside' though.

That's another thing that's so good about Forbidden Archaeology to my mind. The idea that two independant scholars from way out of left-field could shake to their foundations the sciences of Anthropology and Archaeology in their entirety.



Title: Re: Forbidden Archaeology : masterpiece of science
Post by: Tom Hebert on March 18, 2007, 09:12:24 pm
Yes, Mark, you hit the nail on the head.  I didn't want to bring up their religion because their work should be judged on its own merit.  But you can see how these authors would not be motivated to challenge the geological assumptions of modern science.  Now on the other hand, a creation scientist would be eager to show the fallacies of the geological ages, thus bolstering the idea of a young earth and recent appearance of man.

Maybe the truth lies somewhere in between.  At any rate, it is obvious to me that we are missing many pieces of the puzzle, and when we find them, we may discover that our picture is upside down!


Title: Re: Forbidden Archaeology : masterpiece of science
Post by: starlight1946 on April 04, 2007, 06:48:29 am
I have not read the book but I saw somewhere photos in caves of drawings made by prehistorical human beings along with animals that no longer exist. That to me would be convincing enough. How did people way back then draw on the caves those creatures if they were not around then? The book is too expensive for me to buy but I do have interests in our past.



Title: Re: Forbidden Archaeology : masterpiece of science
Post by: Mark of Australia on April 06, 2007, 10:09:17 am
Hi Starlight

Forbidden Archaeology does not really consider the evidence of human paintings .It does deal with legends of bigfoot and things like that in one chapter.  I have heard how some tribes have legends about their ancestors being attacked by giant flying lizards.That would seem to be a memory of life alongside dinosaurs . Hard to say .


Title: Re: Forbidden Archaeology : masterpiece of science
Post by: Jake on April 28, 2007, 12:29:32 am
There is a condensed version of "Forbidden Archeology". It is called "The Hidden History of the Human Race". This was condensed by Michael Cremo and Richard Thompson themselves to make their work more accessible (and affordable) to the average reader. I got mine back in 1999 for about $16. It has basically the same format as the original big book, but cuts out alot of the repeated types of material. I love "Forbidden Archeology", if only for the fact that it can make you think about possibilities other than the accepted norm.

Jake


Title: Re: Forbidden Archaeology : masterpiece of science
Post by: Mark of Australia on May 10, 2007, 03:39:59 am
Hi Jake ,

 Yeah ,the condensed version is better than nothing.But if you are inspired enough about human antiquity the full version will just convince you even more that something is drastically wrong with the current view.

Here's an article about Piltdown Man ,which was covered in Forbidden Archaeology. And the way this article suggests smugly that we have actually learnt from Piltdown had me scoffing.


Piltdown's lessons for modern science 
By Professor Chris Stringer
Natural History Museum 

A new book reveals how recent research has uncovered a goldmine of information about the history of human habitation in Britain. 
The Piltdown skull fooled scientists for more than 40 years

Here, Homo britannicus author Chris Stringer describes how efforts to search for evidence of early Britons were hampered by wrong turns and false leads, including the granddaddy of all scientific forgeries.

 In the early years of the 20th Century, British archaeologists were becoming increasingly desperate for a human fossil to show that our island had deep prehistoric roots.

Our greatest rival, Germany, had the Heidelberg jaw and the original Neanderthal bones. France had Neanderthal fossils and early modern humans at Cro-Magnon to complement their beautiful cave art. Even the Dutch had Java Man, which they had brought back from the Dutch East Indies.

Stone handaxes had been found in Britain, so it was clear that early people had lived here. Some scientists also believed in more primitive stone tools called eoliths, though we now know these were often no more than naturally broken rocks. The absence of a single significant human fossil from Britain was conspicuous.

The time was right for the appearance of Piltdown Man: the earliest Englishman with the earliest cricket bat.

Not cricket

Charles Dawson, a British solicitor and amateur fossil hunter, claimed that some time before 1910, a workman had handed him a thick, dark-stained piece of human skull that had been found in gravels at the village of Piltdown in Sussex.
 
The "cricket bat" would have threatened Dawson's plans
By 1912, Dawson had found more of the skull, and had contacted his friend Arthur Smith Woodward, the keeper of geology at the British Museum (now the Natural History Museum, where I work).

Together, they excavated the Piltdown site, where they discovered more skull fragments, fossil animal bones, stone tools and a remarkable lower jaw.

Additional finds, including a bizarre elephant bone implement shaped like a cricket bat, helped swing the opinions of British sceptics in favour of the discovery. But Piltdown's days were numbered. Discoveries of possible human ancestors in Africa and Asia in the 1920s and 1930s pushed Piltdown into an increasingly peripheral position.

  Part of the cleverness of the hoax was the way in which it suited preconceived ideas about what early humans should look like
 
Finally, in 1953, stringent scientific tests were applied, exposing the lower jaw as a forgery. Later analyses would show the whole assemblage of bones and fossils at Piltdown had been planted.

The human skull was that of a modern person, the jaw from an orang-utan. Both had been artificially stained to match the gravels.

Charles Dawson remains the prime suspect. He was the first person to seriously search for and report fossils at the site and was present when all the major finds were made.

He is now linked with several suspected forgeries, most of which were "missing links" between previously known stages in either evolution or technology.

Sent off course

Dawson was daring to a point, but he took things one step at a time. For example, he waited until experts predicted what size Piltdown Man's canine would be and, lo and behold, the next year a canine turned up of just the right size.
 
The time was right for an early Englishman to emerge
However, I don't think Dawson would have done something as grotesque and outrageous as the "cricket bat", as it would have threatened the entire story he was trying to construct. Martin Hinton, a volunteer in Smith Woodward's department at the British Museum and later the Keeper of Zoology, had the means and motive to create this object.

In the 1970s, a canvas trunk bearing the initials MH was found in loft space above the old Keeper of Zoology's office. Inside were mammal teeth and bones carved in the style of the Piltdown material.

We also know from letters that Hinton was aware the Piltdown finds were suspect. I think he made and planted this absurd object to warn the forgers that the game was up - only to find it hailed as one of the earliest known bone implements.

 PILTDOWN MAN IN TIME
1912 - Discoveries publicised
1914 - 'Cricket bat' surfaces
1915 - Charles Dawson dies
1949 - Piltdown ages queried
1953 - Fossil fakes unmasked
Piltdown was particularly damaging for us in Britain, because British scientists clung to it for far longer than they should have done. It clouded their judgment and affected their interpretations of genuine fossils.

For example, when australopithecine fossils started to turn up in South Africa during the 1920s, prominent British-based anatomists like Sir Arthur Keith and Grafton Elliot Smith wouldn't take them seriously because they believed in Piltdown Man.

Lessons learnt

Part of the cleverness of the hoax was the way in which it suited preconceived ideas about what early humans should look like.

Keith and Grafton Elliot Smith thought a large brain was such an important part of humans today that it must have a long and deep evolutionary history. Piltdown had a high, domed skull with a large brain, confirming their belief in the antiquity of these features in the human lineage.

Stone tools from Pakefield in Suffolk are 700,000 years old
In other countries, Piltdown was viewed with more caution if not downright suspicion. The scientist Franz Weidenreich, who fled Nazi Germany to work in the US during the 1930s, had seen what a potential human ancestor could look like after working on the Peking Man fossils from China. Of course, they looked nothing like Piltdown Man.

He said of Piltdown: "The sooner the chimaera 'Eoanthropus' is erased from the list of human fossils, the better for science."

Weidenreich didn't have an explanation for it and he couldn't say outright that it was a fake; but he knew there was something seriously wrong with it.

  In other countries, Piltdown was viewed with more caution if not downright suspicion
 
Hopefully, the Piltdown saga has taught those of us who study the evolution of humans some important lessons that we should apply today.

Firstly, we mustn't let preconceived ideas run away with us. Secondly, specimens have to pass certain basic tests.

Science thrives on scepticism, which is why the extraordinary discovery of the "Hobbit" fossils in Indonesia has prompted a lively scientific debate over its status.

Science is also self-correcting. In Britain, during the first half of the 20th Century, people simply shut their minds to other evidence and continued to believe in Piltdown because it fitted their beliefs and was the only significant human fossil we had.

Further work

We now have genuine human fossils to speak of from Britain, including a shinbone and teeth from Boxgrove dating to about 500,000 years ago and part of the skull of an early Neanderthal that was unearthed at Swanscombe in Kent.

The discovery of the "Hobbit" fossils has prompted a lively debate
The first phase of our Ancient Human Occupation of Britain (AHOB) project has pushed back the evidence of humans in Britain by 200,000 years.

We have also shown that humans tried to settle in Britain at least eight times, but on seven of those occasions they subsequently perished as Britain was hit by successive ice advances.

In the second phase of AHOB, due to last until 2010, we plan to uncover further details about these ancient colonisations.

Piltdown Man is now on show once again, at an exhibition in Bonn, Germany, to commemorate the 150th anniversary of the discovery of the original Neanderthal fossil.

It still gets a lot of attention, because it is, as much as anything, a whodunit story.

Once proudly held up as the earliest known Englishman, Piltdown is now displayed as a lesson from the past, of a prehistory of Britain and a stage of human evolution that never was.

Homo britannicus is published by Penguin Books. Chris Stringer is Research Leader in Human Origins at the Natural History Museum in London. He is also director of the Ancient Human Occupation of Britain (AHOB) project

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6054656.stm
 


Title: Re: Forbidden Archaeology : masterpiece of science
Post by: Wanderer on May 21, 2007, 10:45:19 am
Jake I like your observation concerning "the accepted norm."   In the world of archeology and many others people have all sorts of time and reputations invested in their particular points of view and theories.  Anything that rocks their boat is an attack upon their livelyhood so opposing ideas are shouted down as it were.

Things we take now as simple and basic were once fought over in the acedemic circles.  Just the furor over the Lucy's discovery in the 1970s illustrates it.  Now we accept that the australapithicines are valid members in the hominid to human evolution.  But it took the dethroning of a few old ideas with absolute proof of something different. We've uncovered a pitiful few fossils reflecting out human ancestry really relative to all things. 

As with most scientific breakthroughs and discoveries it takes a new approach and out-of-the-norm thinking to make significant strides.  When we begin believing that most is impossible we lose the whole spirit of human and proto-human existance.  There are people who don't want to accept anything new in any field of science or non-science.

Remember in 1900 the head of the pantent office thought it should be closed since everything worthwhile that could ever be invented had been.  It's a great illustration of close-mindedness.


Title: Re: Forbidden Archaeology : masterpiece of science
Post by: BlueHue on May 21, 2007, 02:16:23 pm
Forbidden Archeology: The Hidden History of the Human Race by Michael A. Cremo and Richard L. Thompson quickly became a best selling underground classic,

but more importantly that the methods that the scientists have been using to piece together their view of antiquity has been hypocritical ,rife with double standards and plain unscientific.
 People who have not read the book will naturally find this hard to believe .Surely professional scientists can't be incompetent, can they ?    (naturally hard to believe?, yeah because our culture instills in us that scientists are smart ..err ..*scough*)

   When I  read in that book how the circus of academic opinion 'brutally' goes about forming the dogma, I marvelled at how the standards managed to get so low and how the fundamentals of scientific method could be mauled in such a blatant way. Despite this,Cremo and Thompson managed to restrain themselves and remain polite ;maybe a little too polite?.No ,they were perfect ,the way Cremo and Thompson maintained there composure to produce a masterpiece of dispassionate scholarship . They beat the incompetent bastards at their own etiquette.!    ( I dont have to be polite here do I ??  :P)

  The view I was leaning toward before I read Forbidden Archaeology was confirmed much more forcefully than I had hoped for upon starting out,  and I liken the intellectual journey on which it guided me, to a trailblazing adventure that is still pioneering ever expanding vistas of possibility concerning our own antiquity.It's such a contrast to the straight-jacket of 'their' orthodoxy.

  It is ESSENTIAL reading ..  get the abridged version if you must, but JUST GET IT !   lol



Sorry MARK ,

I have not read it yet but does it mention the Out-of Africa Evolution of Man and the"Black EVE"or is that old hat allready ?? 

"PILTDOWN Man" sort of discovery covering  it with Mud, is just what I said about GEORGEOS"Hoax about Cape Spartel as "Atlantis" in 2003.


 Life is Sad :"BlueHue"