It can only be presumed that there is some history that they don't want
people to know about. In other words, we are being lied to about the real
history of planet earth.
Like the burning of the library at Alexandria, keeping the public in the dark
has come to be a feature of our current world rulers. It could almost be
presumed that there is information that would cause a loss of control and power
to manipulate reality outcomes if known.
Jonathan Gray has travelled the world and investigated many amazing records
of lost civilisations. He calls their suppression a scandal. Now read on . . .
Man as old as coal
Wrote Bill O'Brien:
"There was a time when Conrad regarded the integrity of the scientific
establishment as beyond reproach. But after seven years of dealing with
paleontologists and archaeologists, he said he has found them to be a devious
and untrustworthy bunch whose actions in relation to him have been downright
dishonest and deceitful."
"Conrad believes his discovery has frightened members of the
archeological/ paleontological establishment out of their wits. They dread the
truth, he says, because they know their cozy little clique will be gone with
the eons. No longer will they be able to sup at the trough of Darwinism,
enjoying soft jobs with huge salaries."
Suppression of Ancient History
Ancient History that has UFO Science links to Ancient Wisdom gets suppressed.
For instance Academia covers up evidence of Ancient Egyptians in Britain.
Ancient Egyptians fleeing the backlash against heretic pharaoh Akhenaten, came
to live in Britain around 1354 BC. The archaeological evidence is being ignored
by Academia so as to maintain the existing dogmatic view of history that the
Ancient Egyptians had never travelled that far.
An Egyptian boat was found at Ferriby, nearly fifty years ago, and promptly
ignored by Academia.
Lorraine Evans puts together the pieces of ignored evidence that exists in
Museums, in her book Kingdom of the Ark, claiming the ancient British race is
descended from the Pharaohs.
As to why Academia ignores the evidence that contradicts their dogma, she
"The fact that I had unearthed so many pieces of evidence, archaeological
and historical, to show Egyptian settlement in the British Isles raised one
question. Why had this all been ignored in academic circles? One of the main
reasons, I felt, was that if such information was readily accepted then academia
would rapidly have to rewrite huge chunks of history. This would throw certain
traditional `historical facts' into tremendous doubt. It is important to stress
that many academics' careers are based on these `facts' and to disprove them
overnight would make these people redundant, During the research for this book,
I soon discovered that some academics were quite willing to share their work off
the record, but when it came to committing it to print they soon backed down and
a wall of silence greeted me. None of them, it appeared, wanted to put their
jobs on the line, to tell the truth, The sad reality of the matter is that we
are relying on these people to tell us our history, but they seem content to
operate under a veil of academic censorship.
On a Saturday afternoon in the British Museum, hordes of tourists walk
nonchalantly by some of the greatest collections of artefacts from the ancient
world. As cameras flash and people pose by the more famous exhibits, there
stands, in the Medieval Gallery, possibly the most important piece in the entire
museum. By a dimly lit case rests the ancient stone of Llywel. Unearthed in a
farmer's field in Wales in 1843, it was sold to the British Museum for the
meagre sum of £10.00. An ornately carved piece of rock, its true importance
appears to have been belittled by its placement. The most significant carving on
this stone seems to have been deliberately obfuscated by the powers that be.
Turned facing the wall, and impossible to view, there is a clear representation
of a person dressed in Egyptian garb leaving the pyramids of Egypt on his
journey to the west. ..."
We rely too much on Academia to tell us the truth, when ‘they’ are not
really interested in the ‘truth’. The version of history ‘they’ give us
is a fiction, which ‘they’ are quite happy to support because its their
Why do people waste their time trying to make sense of the UFO phenomenon within
the context of the Belief system that these Academics have set up for us? The
whole of history is wrong. And these Academics are contented to maintain that
If you accept that Ancient Egyptians were in Britain, then our history needs a
great deal of amending.
When Christianity was imposed on Europe, we underwent a history rewrite, and
ever since that time people have tried to maintain that false history imposed
upon us, ignoring the evidence to the contrary.
The Renaissance was started by the rediscovery of Ancient texts from the Greeks
etc. One of the most influential was the Writings of Thoth - Hermes, which was
religion, philosophy and science. It influenced scientists such as Newton,
Leonardo da Vinci etc.
Then in the 17th century the writings were all declared a hoax, and one of the
most important reasons it was thought a hoax, was because the religious message
in the writings were too much a mixture of Christianity, Islam, Buddhism,
Judaism etc., that if true it meant all the existing religious beliefs were
Over the past 2000 years it has all been about religion. Some people want to
believe such and such, and will alter the facts or ignore the facts so that they
can continue to believe their delusions.
Long before Daniken, there were some people saying that the Ancients were far
more advanced than they should have been. For instance:
Dr. Soddy, a scientist famous for his researches into Radioactivity, saw the
links between his Radioactivity researches and Ancient Wisdom. He delivered a
series of lectures in 1908 explaining the latest discoveries of radioactivity to
the general public and in his 1909 book Interpretation of Radium, he wondered if
the Ancients had already known about radioactivity. He says as follows:
"The world probably being of much greater antiquity than physical science
has thought to be possible, it is interesting and harmless to speculate whether
man has shared with the world its more remote history.
i.e. wonders if mankind has as long a history as our planet’s. And continues:
In this connection it is curious how strangely some of the old myths and legends
about matter and man appear in the light of the recent knowledge. Consider, for
example, the ancient mystic symbol of matter, known as Ouroboros-" the tail
devourer "- which was a serpent, coiled into a circle with the head
devouring the tail, and bearing the central motto, " The whole is
one." This symbolizes evolution; moreover, it is evolution of matter - the
very latest aspect of evolution - the existence of which was strenuously denied by
Clerk Maxwell and others of only last century. The idea which arises in one's
mind as the most attractive and consistent explanation of the universe in the
light of present knowledge is, perhaps, that matter is breaking down and its
energy being evolved and degraded in one part of a cycle of evolution, and in
another part, still unknown to us, the matter is being again built up with the
utilisation of the waste energy. If one wished to symbolise such an idea, in
what better way could it be done than by the ancient tail-devouring serpent ?
i.e. recognises that the Ancients talked in symbolism, and was a universal
symbolism across the Ancient world. Tie that back to Evan’s discovery of
Ancient Egyptians in Britain, and Academia wanting to deny the evidence.
Some of the beliefs and legends which have come down to us from antiquity are so
universal and deep rooted that we are accustomed to consider them almost as old
as the race itself, One is tempted to inquire how far the unsuspected aptness of
some of these beliefs and sayings to the point of view so recently disclosed is
the result of mere chance or coincidence, and how far it may he evidence of a
wholly unknown and unsuspected ancient civilisation of which all other relic has
disappeared. It is curious to reflect, for example, upon the remarkable legend
of the philosopher's stone, one of the oldest and most universal beliefs, the
origin on which however far back we penetrate into the records of the past, we
do not probably trace to its real source. The philosopher's stone was accredited
the power not only of transmuting the metals, but of acting as the elixir of
life. Now whatever the origin of this apparently meaningless jumble of ideas may
have been, it is really a perfect and but very slightly allegorical expression
of the actual present views we hold today. It does not require much effort of
the imagination to see in energy the life of the physical universe, and the key
to the primary fountains of the physical life of the universe today is known to
Is, then, this old association of the power of transmutation
with the elixir of life merely a coincidence? I prefer to believe it may be an
echo from one of many previous epochs in the unrecorded history of the world, of
an age of men which have trod before the road we are treading today, in a past
possibly so remote that even the very atoms of its civilisation literally have
had time to disintegrate.
Let us give the imagination a moment's further free scope in this direction,
however, before closing. What if this point of view that has now suggested
itself is true; and we may trust ourselves to the slender foundation afforded by
the traditions and superstitions which have been handed down to us from a
prehistoric time ? Can we not read into them some justification for the belief
that some former forgotten race of men attained not only to the knowledge we
have so recently won, but also to the power that is not yet ours ? Science has
reconstructed the story of the past as one of a continuous Ascent of Man to the
present-day level of his powers. In face of the circumstantial evidence existing
of this steady upward progress of the race, the traditional view of the Fall of
Man from a higher former state has come to be more and more difficult to
understand, From our new standpoint the two points of view are by no means so
irreconcilable as they appeared. A race which could transmute matter would have
little need to earn its bread by the sweat of its brow.
If we can judge from
what our engineers accomplish with their comparatively restricted supplies of
energy, such a race could transform a desert continent, thaw the frozen poles,
and make the whole world one smiling Garden of Eden, Possibly they could explore
the outer realms of space emigrating to more favourable worlds as the
superfluous today emigrate to more favourable continents, The legend of the Fall
of Man, possibly, may be all that has survived of such a time before, for some
unknown reason, the whole world was plunged back again under the undisputed sway
of Nature, to begin once more its upward toilsome journey through the
Dr. Soddy makes the connections that the Ancients were talking in a symbolic
manner as regards their science. That there could have been a forgotten
civilisation. That our science could be rediscovering their Ancient knowledge.
Surely an interesting area for Academia to investigate? And does Academia decide
to investigate? Answer - no they do not. Instead they choose to wait for
amateurs such as Daniken to investigate this subject, and then set up a campaign
to mock him and his followers.
Academia is not interested in anything other than maintaining their existing
All attempts to explain UFOs within existing Academic Beliefs are doomed to
failure. The framework of beliefs that UFO investigators are expected to agree
with and earn the title of being Scientific in their studies is an illusion.
And the science that really works, get dismissed as superstitious nonsense -
Magick, paranormal, supernatural. The nature of that science, Tom Lethbridge
managed to tie in with the possibility that we had been visited by Aliens in our
remote past, or that we ourselves might be aliens to this planet. He works out a
possible way as to how Stone Circles could be used as markers for aerial crafts
" It is hard for us today to visualize the Britain of, for instance, five
thousand years ago. The vast extent of natural woodland is unknown today, except
in tropical vegetation. Brambles and fallen trees made paths through it
extremely difficult and it covered the bulk of the country. Only on some
downlands was passage relatively easy and that was not free from large patches
of juniper trees, thorn bushes, gorse and bramble. The wide vistas of rolling
grassland did not exist. One can assume that exploration parties would be
dropped at the edges of all this and traces of them would be found, if at all,
in the kind of situations where we do find these stone set rings and alignments
today. A stone ring would be noticeable from the air, just because such things
do not often happen in nature. Neither would straight lines be frequent.
But there may have been another reason for setting up the stones, even if its
object were the same. For untold generations it has been believed, especially by
the devotees of the old witch religion, that by means of exciting people to
execute wild circular dances, power could be generated and stored in stones and
trees. Actually this appears to be scientific fact. It has been demonstrated by
Mr P. Callahan in America that moths generate bio-electricity by the heat caused
by the movements of their wings and they use this to locate their mates or food
such. .......I detected the same thing with beetles ......... This is observed
fact and no longer something on the fringe of knowledge, Now if you have a large
number of people dancing wildly round in a ring, you obviously generate a great
deal of this bio-electricity, living electricity.
If you carry out this
performance in rings formed of stones with gaps between them, you have a form of
dynamo. It has been shown that the electromagnetic fields of stones, trees and
water will absorb bio-electricity from outside and this is the probable reason
why some people see ghosts in situations which were favourable to such
impressions being preserved. I have elsewhere suggested the names of oread
fields for those of stones, dryad fields for those of trees and naiad fields for
those of streams in accordance with the Greek belief that nymphs with these
names were to be found in such places.
...........my wife and I experienced electric shocks when trying to date the
stones of the circle of the Merry Maidens in Cornwall. The bio-electronic force
had been stored at one time by the exertion of dancers in that circle and it had
never been taken out again. The circle is still complete. But why did anybody
wish to store up electronic power in such places? What possible use could it be
Well, experiments with the pendulum have shown that the electronic fields about
an object are double cones of limitless height and depth. It has also been shown
that a pendulum length of the same radius as the base of the double cone will
register contact with that cone. If, then, you had an apparatus in a flying
machine set to the right wave-length, you could pick up the rays from the stored
energy in the stones and home in it like the moth to its mate. These rings of
stones could have been used both as visible and invisible navigational
Lethbridge, I think was onto something, but that line of science inquiry by
Academia is suppressed as much as Academia suppresses the proper history. .
That’s why Academia like to ignore the evidence that Ancient Egyptians came to
Britain, it would mean everything else they have been building up for so long is
a house of cards waiting to fall down. Everything that Academia likes to
suppress fits together to give a different perspective on UFOs, and starts to
look like it could be true.
So, how can ‘they’ maintain this deception any longer? Easy - offer out the
'carrot' to UFO researchers, if you want respectability then you need the title
of being Scientific, and to get that title you have to agree to maintaining as
much of the ‘house of cards’ delusion as possible. If a lot of people are
given the task of preventing these cards from falling over, then it may be the
delusion can be propped up for a few more thousand years.
Its amazing what humans are capable of achieving when they set their mind to it.
They can maintain delusional belief systems through untold generations by
teaching it as dogma, setting it as exams and allowing progress in Society’s
pecking order, only if you believe the lies.
The truth is out there? And the truth is WE have been expected to swallow an
enormous amount of lies.
-- A Plot to Control History?
The scientific establishment tends to reject, suppress or ignore evidence
that conflicts with accepted theories, while denigrating or persecuting the
Extracted from Nexus Magazine, Volume
9, Number 3 (April-May 2002)
PO Box 30, Mapleton Qld 4560 Australia. email@example.com
Telephone: +61 (0)7 5442 9280; Fax: +61 (0)7 5442 9381
From our web page at: www.nexusmagazine.com
by Will Hart © 2002
"THE BRAIN POLICE" AND "THE BIG LIE"
Any time you allege a conspiracy is afoot, especially in the field of
science, you are treading on thin ice. We tend to be very sceptical about
conspiracies--unless the Mafia or some Muslim radicals are behind the alleged
plot. But the evidence is overwhelming and the irony is that much of it is in
The good news is that the players are obvious. Their game plan and even their
play-by-play tactics are transparent, once you learn to spot them. However, it
is not so easy to penetrate through the smokescreen of propaganda and
disinformation to get to their underlying motives and goals. It would be
convenient if we could point to a plumber's unit and a boldface liar like
Richard Nixon, but this is a more subtle operation.
The bad news: the conspiracy is global and there are many vested interest
groups. A cursory investigation yields the usual suspects: scientists with a
theoretical axe to grind, careers to further and the status quo to maintain.
Their modus operandi is "The Big Lie"--and the bigger and more
widely publicised, the better. They rely on invoking their academic credentials
to support their arguments, and the presumption is that no one has the right to
question their authoritarian pronouncements that:
1. there is no mystery about who built the Great Pyramid or what the methods of
construction were, and the Sphinx shows no signs of water damage;
2. there were no humans in the Americas before 20,000 BC;
3. the first civilisation dates back no further than 6000 BC;
4. there are no documented anomalous, unexplained or enigmatic data to take into
5. there are no lost or unaccounted-for civilisations.
Let the evidence to the contrary be damned!
Personal Attacks: Dispute over Age of the Sphinx and Great Pyramid
In 1993, NBC in the USA aired The Mysteries of the Sphinx, which
presented geological evidence showing that the Sphinx was at least twice as old
(9,000 years) as Egyptologists claimed. It has become well known as the
"water erosion controversy". An examination of the politicking that
Egyptologists deployed to combat this undermining of their turf is instructive.
Self-taught Egyptologist John Anthony West brought the water erosion issue to
the attention of geologist Dr Robert Schoch. They went to Egypt and launched an
intensive on-site investigation. After thoroughly studying the Sphinx first
hand, the geologist came to share West's preliminary conclusion and they
announced their findings.
Dr Zahi Hawass, the Giza Monuments chief, wasted no time in firing a barrage
of public criticism at the pair. Renowned Egyptologist Dr Mark Lehner, who is
regarded as the world's foremost expert on the Sphinx, joined his attack. He
charged West and Schoch with being "ignorant and insensitive". That
was a curious accusation which took the matter off the professional level and
put the whole affair on a personal plane. It did not address the facts or issues
at all and it was highly unscientific.
But we must note the standard tactic of discrediting anyone who dares to call
the accepted theories into question. Shifting the focus away from the issues and
"personalising" the debate is a highly effective strategy--one which
is often used by politicians who feel insecure about their positions. Hawass and
Lehner invoked their untouchable status and presumed authority. (One would think
that a geologist's assessment would hold more weight on this particular point.)
A short time later, Schoch, Hawass and Lehner were invited to debate the
issue at the American Association for the Advancement of Science. West was not
allowed to participate because he lacked the required credentials.
This points to a questionable assumption that is part of the establishment's
arsenal: only degreed scientists can practise science. Two filters keep the
uncredentialled, independent researcher out of the loop: (1) credentials, and
(2) peer review. You do not get to number two unless you have number one.
Science is a method that anyone can learn and apply. It does not require a
degree to observe and record facts and think critically about them, especially
in the non-technical social sciences. In a free and open society, science has to
be a democratic process.
Be that as it may, West was barred. The elements of the debate have been
batted back and forth since then without resolution. It is similar to the
controversy over who built the Giza pyramids and how.
This brings up the issue of The Big Lie and how it has been promoted for
generations in front of God and everyone. The controversy over how the Great
Pyramid was constructed is one example. It could be easily settled if
Egyptologists wanted to resolve the dispute. A simple test could be designed and
arranged by impartial engineers that would either prove or disprove their
longstanding disputed theory--that it was built using the primitive tools and
methods of the day, circa 2500 BC.
Why hasn't this been done? The answer is so obvious, it seems impossible:
they know that the theory is bogus. Could a trained, highly educated scientist
really believe that 2.3 million tons of stone, some blocks weighing 70 tons,
could have been transported and lifted by primitive methods? That seems
improbable, though they have no compunction against lying to the public, writing
textbooks and defending this theory against alternative theories. However, we
must note that they will not subject themselves to the bottom-line test.
We think it is incumbent upon any scientist to bear the burden of proof of
his/her thesis; however, the social scientists who make these claims have never
stood up to that kind of scrutiny. That is why we must suspect a conspiracy. No
other scientific discipline would get away with bending the rules of science.
All that Egyptologists have ever done is bat down alternative theories using
underhanded tactics. It is time to insist that they prove their own proposals.
Why would scientists try to hide the truth and avoid any test of their
hypothesis? Their motivations are equally transparent. 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. Orthodox views of cultural evolution are based upon a
chronology of civilisation having started in Sumeria no earlier than 4000 BC.
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.
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.
Pressure Tactics: The Ica Stones of Peru
Now we turn to another, very different case. In 1966, Dr Javier Cabrera
received a stone as a gift from a poor local farmer in his native Ica, Peru. A
fish was carved on the stone, which would not have meant much to the average
villager but it did mean a lot to the educated Dr Cabrera. He recognised it as a
long-extinct species. This aroused his curiosity. He purchased more stones from
the farmer, who said he had collected them near the river after a flood.
Dr Cabrera accumulated more and more stones, and word of their existence and
potential import reached the archaeological community. Soon, the doctor had
amassed thousands of "Ica stones". The sophisticated carvings were as
enigmatic as they were fascinating. Someone had carved men fighting with
dinosaurs, men with telescopes and men performing operations with surgical
equipment. They also contained drawings of lost continents.
Several of the stones were sent to Germany and the etchings were dated to
remote antiquity. But we all know that men could not have lived at the time of
dinosaurs; Homo sapiens has only existed for about 100,000 years.
The BBC got wind of this discovery and swooped down to produce a documentary
about the Ica stones. The media exposure ignited a storm of controversy.
Archaeologists criticised the Peruvian government for being lax about enforcing
antiquities laws (but that was not their real concern). Pressure was applied to
The farmer who had been selling the stones to Cabrera was arrested; he
claimed to have found them in a cave but refused to disclose the exact location
to authorities, or so they claimed.
This case was disposed of so artfully that it would do any corrupt politician
proud. The Peruvian government threatened to prosecute and imprison the farmer.
He was offered and accepted a plea bargain; he then recanted his story and
"admitted" to having carved the stones himself. That seems highly
implausible, since he was uneducated and unskilled and there were 11,000 stones
in all. Some were fairly large and intricately carved with animals and scenes
that the farmer would not have had knowledge of without being a palaeontologist.
He would have needed to work every day for several decades to produce that
volume of stones. However, the underlying facts were neither here nor there. The
Ica stones were labelled "hoax" and forgotten.
The case did not require a head-to-head confrontation or public discrediting
of non-scientists by scientists; it was taken care of with invisible pressure
tactics. Since it was filed under "hoax", the enigmatic evidence never
had to be dealt with, as it did in the next example.
Censorship of "Forbidden" Thinking: Evidence for Mankind's Great
The case of author Michael Cremo is well documented, and it also demonstrates
how the scientific establishment openly uses pressure tactics on the media and
government. His book Forbidden Archeology examines many previously
ignored examples of artifacts that prove modern man's antiquity far exceeds the
age given in accepted chronologies.
The examples which he and his co-author present are controversial, but the
book became far more controversial than the contents when it was used in a
In 1996, NBC broadcast a special called The Mysterious Origins of Man,
which featured material from Cremo's book. The reaction from the scientific
community went off the Richter scale. NBC was deluged with letters from irate
scientists who called the producer "a fraud" and the whole program
But the scientists went further than this--a lot further. In an extremely
unconscionable sequence of bizarre moves, they tried to force NBC not to
rebroadcast the popular program, but that effort failed. Then they took the most
radical step of all: they presented their case to the federal government and
requested the Federal Communications Commission to step in and bar NBC from
airing the program again.
This was not only an apparent infringement of free speech and a blatant
attempt to thwart commerce, it was an unprecedented effort to censor
intellectual discourse. If the public or any government agency made an attempt
to handcuff the scientific establishment, the public would never hear the end of
The letter to the FCC written by Dr Allison Palmer, President of the
Institute for Cambrian Studies, is revealing:
At the very least, NBC should be required to make substantial prime-time
apologies to their viewing audience for a sufficient period of time so that the
audience clearly gets the message that they were duped. In addition, NBC should
perhaps be fined sufficiently so that a major fund for public science education
can be established.
I think we have some good leads on who "the Brain Police" are. And
I really do not think "conspiracy" is too strong a word--because for
every case of this kind of attempted suppression that is exposed, 10 others are
going on successfully. We have no idea how many enigmatic artifacts or dates
have been labelled "error" and tucked away in storage warehouses or
circular files, never to see the light of day.
Data Rejection: Inconvenient Dating in Mexico
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 established scientists will go to guard
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 she
refused. She found it hard thereafter to get her papers published and she lost a
teaching job at an American university.
Government Suppression and Ethnocentrism: Avoiding Anomalous Evidence in NZ,
China and Mexico
In New Zealand, the government actually stepped in and enacted a law
forbidding the public from entering a controversial archaeological zone. This
story appeared in the book, Ancient Celtic New Zealand, by Mark Doutré.
However, as we will find (and as I promised at the beginning of the article),
this is a complicated conspiracy. Scientists trying to protect their
"hallowed" theories while furthering their careers are not the only
ones who want artifacts and data suppressed. This is where the situation gets
The Waipoua Forest became a controversial site in New Zealand because an
archaeological dig apparently showed evidence of a non-Polynesian culture that
preceded the Maori--a fact that the tribe was not happy with. They learned of
the results of the excavations before the general public did and complained to
the government. According to Doutré, the outcome was "an official archival
document, which clearly showed an intention by New Zealand government
departments to withhold archaeological information from public scrutiny for 75
The public got wind of this fiasco but the government denied the claim.
However, official documents show that an embargo had been placed on the site.
Doutré is a student of New Zealand history and archaeology. He is concerned
because he says that artifacts proving that there was an earlier culture which
preceded the Maori are missing from museums. He asks what happened to several
Where are the ancient Indo-European hair samples (wavy red brown hair),
originally obtained from a rock shelter near Watakere, that were on display at
the Auckland War Memorial Museum for many years? Where is the giant skeleton
found near Mitimati?
Unfortunately this is not the only such incident. Ethnocentrism has become a
factor in the conspiracy to hide mankind's true history. Author Graham Hancock
has been attacked by various ethnic groups for reporting similar enigmatic
The problem for researchers concerned with establishing humanity's true
history is that the goals of nationalists or ethnic groups who want to lay claim
to having been in a particular place first, often dovetail with the goals of
Archaeologists are quick to go along with suppressing these kinds of
anomalous finds. One reason Egyptologists so jealously guard the Great Pyramid's
construction date has to do with the issue of national pride.
The case of the Takla Makan Desert mummies in western China is another
example of this phenomenon. In the 1970s and 1980s, an unaccounted-for Caucasian
culture was suddenly unearthed in China. The arid environment preserved the
remains of a blond-haired, blue-eyed people who lived in pre-dynastic China.
They wore colourful robes, boots, stockings and hats. The Chinese were not happy
about this revelation and they have downplayed the enigmatic find, even though
Asians were found buried alongside the Caucasian mummies.
National Geographic writer Thomas B. Allen mused in a 1996 article
about his finding a potsherd bearing a fingerprint of the potter. When he
inquired if he could take the fragment to a forensic anthropologist, the Chinese
scientist asked whether he "would be able to tell if the potter was a white
man". Allen said he was not sure, and the official pocketed the fragment
and quietly walked away. It appears that many things get in the way of
scientific discovery and disclosure.
The existence of the Olmec culture in Old Mexico has always posed a problem.
Where did the Negroid people depicted on the colossal heads come from? Why are
there Caucasians carved on the stele in what is Mexico's seed civilisation? What
is worse, why aren't the indigenous Mexican people found on the Olmec artifacts?
Recently a Mexican archaeologist solved the problem by making a fantastic claim:
that the Olmec heads--which generations of people of all ethnic groups have
agreed bear a striking resemblance to Africans--were really representations of
the local tribe.
STORMTROOPERS FOR DARWINISM
The public does not seem at all aware of the fact that the scientific
establishment has a double standard when it comes to the free flow of
information. In essence, it goes like this... Scientists are highly educated,
well trained and intellectually capable of processing all types of information,
and they can make the correct critical distinctions between fact and fiction,
reality and fantasy. The unwashed public is simply incapable of functioning on
this high mental plane.
The noble ideal of the scientist as a highly trained, impartial, apolitical
observer and assembler of established facts into a useful body of knowledge
seems to have been shredded under the pressures and demands of the real world.
Science has produced many positive benefits for society; but we should know by
now that science has a dark, negative side. Didn't those meek fellows in the
clean lab coats give us nuclear bombs and biological weapons? The age of
innocence ended in World War II.
That the scientific community has an attitude of intellectual superiority is
thinly veiled under a carefully orchestrated public relations guise. We always
see Science and Progress walking hand in hand. Science as an institution in a
democratic society has to function in the same way as the society at large; it
should be open to debate, argument and counter-argument. There is no place for
unquestioned authoritarianism. Is modern science meeting these standards?
In the Fall of 2001, PBS aired a seven-part series, titled Evolution.
Taken at face value, that seems harmless enough. However, while the program was
presented as pure, objective, investigative science journalism, it completely
failed to meet even minimum standards of impartial reporting. The series was
heavily weighted towards the view that the theory of evolution is "a
science fact" that is accepted by "virtually all reputable scientists
in the world", and not a theory that has weaknesses and strong scientific
The series did not even bother to interview scientists who have criticisms of
Darwinism: not "creationists" but bona fide scientists. To
correct this deficiency, a group of 100 dissenting scientists felt compelled to
issue a press release, "A Scientific Dissent on Darwinism", on the day
the first program was scheduled to go to air. Nobel nominee Henry
"Fritz" Schaefer was among them. He encouraged open public debate of
Some defenders of Darwinism embrace standards of evidence for evolution
that as scientists they would never accept in other circumstances.
We have seen this same "unscientific" approach applied to
archaeology and anthropology, where "scientists" simply refuse to
prove their theories yet appoint themselves as the final arbiters of "the
facts". It would be naive to think that the scientists who cooperated in
the production of the series were unaware that there would be no
counter-balancing presentation by critics of Darwin's theory.
Richard Milton is a science journalist. He had been an ardent true believer
in Darwinian doctrine until his investigative instincts kicked in one day. After
20 years of studying and writing about evolution, he suddenly realised that
there were many disconcerting holes in the theory. He decided to try to allay
his doubts and prove the theory to himself by using the standard methods of
Milton became a regular visitor to London's famed Natural History Museum. He
painstakingly put every main tenet and classic proof of Darwinism to the test.
The results shocked him. He found that the theory could not even stand up to the
rigours of routine investigative journalism.
The veteran science writer took a bold step and published a book titled The
Facts of Life: Shattering the Myths of Darwinism. It is clear that the
Darwinian myth had been shattered for him, but many more myths about science
would also be crushed after his book came out. Milton says:
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
(Does this sound like stories that came out of the Soviet Union 20 years ago
when dissident scientists there started speaking out?)
Dawkins launched a letter-writing campaign to newspaper editors, implying
that Milton was a "mole" creationist whose work should be dismissed.
Anyone at all familiar with politics will recognise this as a standard
Machiavellian by-the-book "character assassination" tactic. Dawkins is
a highly respected scientist, whose reputation and standing in the scientific
community carry a great deal of weight.
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.
Imagine what would happen if a politician or bureaucrat used such pressure
tactics to kill a story in the mass media. It would ignite a huge scandal. Not
so with scientists, who seem to be regarded as "sacred cows" and
beyond reproach. There are many disturbing facts related to these cases.
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 the American
public wants the theory of evolution taught to their children; however, "71
per cent of the respondents say biology teachers should teach both Darwinism and
scientific evidence against Darwinian theory". Nevertheless, there are no
plans to implement this balanced approach.
It is ironic that Richard Dawkins has been appointed to the position of
Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University. He is a
classic "Brain Police" stormtrooper, patrolling the neurological front
lines. 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.
The Mysterious Origins of Man was not a frontal attack on Darwinism;
it merely presented evidence that is considered anomalous by the precepts of his
theory of evolution.
Returning to our bastions of intellectual integrity, Forest Mims was a solid
and skilled science journalist. He had never been the centre of any controversy
and so he was invited to write the most-read column in the prestigious Scientific
American, "The Amateur Scientist", a task he gladly accepted.
According to Mims, the magazine's editor Jonathan Piel then learned that he also
wrote articles for a number of Christian magazines. The editor called Mims into
his office and confronted him.
"Do you believe in the theory of evolution?" Piel asked.
Mims replied, "No, and neither does Stephen Jay Gould."
His response did not affect Piel's decision to bump Mims off the popular
column after just three articles.
This has the unpleasant odour of a witch-hunt. The writer never publicly
broadcast his private views or beliefs, so it would appear that the "stormtroopers"
now believe they have orders to make sure "unapproved" thoughts are
never publicly disclosed.
TABOO OR NOT TABOO?
So, the monitors of "good thinking" are not just the elite of the
scientific community, as we have seen in several cases; they are television
producers and magazine editors as well. It seems clear that they are all driven
by the singular imperative of furthering "public science education",
as the president of the Cambrian Institute so aptly phrased it.
However, there is a second item on the agenda, and that is to protect the
public from "unscientific" thoughts and ideas that might infect the
mass mind. We outlined some of those taboo subjects at the beginning of the
article; now we should add that it is also "unwholesome" and
"unacceptable" to engage in any of the following research pursuits:
paranormal phenomena, UFOs, cold fusion, free energy and all the rest of the
"pseudo-sciences". Does this have a familiar ring to it? Are we
hearing the faint echoes of religious zealotry?
Who ever gave science the mission of engineering and directing the
inquisitive pursuits of the citizenry of the free world? It is all but
impossible for any scientific paper that has anti-Darwinian ramifications to be
published in a mainstream scientific journal. It is also just as impossible to
get the "taboo" subjects even to the review table, and you can forget
about finding your name under the title of any article in Nature unless you are
a credentialled scientist, even if you are the next Albert Einstein.
To restate how this conspiracy begins, it is with two filters: credentials
and peer review. 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.
Scientists do not hesitate to launch the most outrageous personal attacks
against those they perceive to be the enemy. Eminent palaeontologist Louis
Leakey penned this acid one-liner about Forbidden Archeology: "Your book is
pure humbug and does not deserve to be taken seriously by anyone but a
fool." Once again, we see the thrust of a personal attack; the merits of
the evidence presented in the book are not examined or debated. It is a blunt,
In a forthcoming instalment, we will examine some more documented cases and
delve deeper into the subtler dimensions of the conspiracy.
References and Resources: