what else don't we know?

The painting here is called 'After Science' - a simplified reflection on what might come about if our rigid intellectual priesthood of archaeologists was able to follow their own advice and consider some of the evidence that exists before a priori closing the doors to other explanations of human origins. Although strictly interpreted biblical explanations are laughable, so too is the Darwinist theory of gradualism too simplistic.

When the politically correct theories on human origin were first formed, a little over a 150 years ago, they were supported by a relatively few scientific fields of study with a limited range of technical methods. Today, with so many scientific disciplines, specialties and technologies at our disposal, it is an apt time for re-examining the existing theories to see if they really are worth keeping intact, or in need of significant overhauling.

For example, even minimal research into the mathematical, astronomical, and engineering feats of the great pyramid of Cheops in Egypt, supposedly built a few thousand years ago, reveals an architectural masterpiece that required the stacking of one million stone blocks weighing 2.5 to 200 tons (with some interior blocks weighing up to 200 tons) to a great height with a mathematical precision unequaled anywhere in the world. Yet, to apply orthodox theory, one would have to believe that the people who built it were primitive men, using stone tools and a jury-rigged apparatus of ropes and logs!

Even with modern technology, it is unlikely we could reproduce this masterpiece with such mathematical precision. The Japanese actually attempted to build a 20 foot tall pyramid in Egypt in the 1970's using the tools Egyptologists say were the only ones available when the original was built. Not only were they thwarted at every step, reverting to modern tools and methods, but the comparatively tiny pyramid they constructed didn't match up at the apex and they went home defeated. It is interesting that orthodox scholars so often make meticulous demands for proof of advanced technology in antiquity—yet in instances such as this one, their own theories either ignore the current evidence or give absurd explanations.

In fact, the occurrence of knowledge being won, then lost, then rediscovered “for the first time” is far from uncommon even in our documented history. Columbus’s discoveries of America and Galileo’s pronouncement that the earth was round are two such examples. It is firmly established historical fact that Columbus was not the first to discover America, and the ancient Egyptians, Mayans, and Chinese knew that the earth was round long before Galileo’s time.

Alternative historians have paved the way toward a new understanding of human origins that incorporates the early and current research of orthodox anthropology, paleontology and archeology with other scientific disciplines (e.g., archeoastronomy, engineering, geology, mathematics). Even the written and oral traditions, myths and legends of traditional peoples throughout the world are being openly researched and analyzed for further insights.

If any of this interests you I'd recommend: 'Forbidden Archeology' by Cremo and Thompson; 'Shattering the Myths of Darwinism' by Richard Milton; and 'Evolution, Creationism and other Modern Myths' by Vine Deloria, Jr. These three books are intriguing works that put human evolution in its rightful place - as a theory in serious need of reconsideration.

I'm just fed up with so-called 'experts' telling me what is 'true' and since I have the luxury of spending my free time doing and reading what interests me I'll continue doing just that. The world is far older and stranger than the history we've been told and maybe we are too - I already know I am.