Why Do Archeologists Lie? New England’s Ancient Stone Chambers Revealed

Me and 3 other men climbed Mt Shasta off trail for 3 days. On the second day, we were on a bluff, looking at another arm of the mountain, far away from any trail. There was a giant, eroded statue carved into the side of a cliff face, looking out along the valley cut between the two arms. We estimated it would take anywhere between 100-300 men with ropes to cut such a thing, as it was 100 feet tall. Also along that ridge, up high, was a sort of terrace structure, looking like a battlement of an old civilization. We stared at the two in silent revelation, knowing that there was an ancient civilization long ago that had built such things. One of my friends took pictures, never posting them stating stupidly(in my head) "The world isn't ready for this kind of info"

I have also been to Serpent Mound. The most amazing thing about it, is that every curve aligns with the sun setting, and rising at time of equinox. There are many, many, many mounds in the surrounding areas that have astonishing astrological designs, matching up to stars. There are also structures that convey certain geometric principles only a highly intelligent civilization could have known. Modern archaeologists date these structures to 4000 BCE, and it isn't that they are lying about them, but that they do not have any explanation that fits with "modern" history. There is not written records that refer to them other than findings since the 1800s. Also, in the middle of the "egg" of the serpent mound, when you sit inside it, it appears to cancel out all sound coming in, making it very quiet. Also the shape is very peculiar, and has been eroded over time(worn down) since that picture being taken. A beautiful structure though, made by master earthen work builders.

There is no conspiracy to hide this information, modern archaeologists have no way of knowing how things happen without a written record(it is frowned upon to make assumptions about different tools located at sites, as they now know that people gravitate to these structures as they are massive indeed, and stand out as you forage).

Nobody is hiding the info, it is merely another unknown. Then again, I don't believe in conspiracies, but rather comprehend that people unite for a common goal, with many individuals having their own separate agenda, or intent behind that unified goal(which is why so-called "conspiracies" never last long and are always found out, intent, agendas, they change).

Moto

reply to post by wantstoknowmore

Also, in the middle of the "egg" of the serpent mound, when you sit inside it, it appears to cancel out all sound coming in, making it very quiet. Also the shape is very peculiar, and has been eroded over time(worn down) since that picture being taken. A beautiful structure though, made by master earthen work builders.

I know exactly what you mean. The combination of the old earthworks, the way they are arranged, the incredible snake sinuously winding through it, and also laying right in the middle of a meteorite crater... It has an effect on you for sure.

I wondered if it was just the effect of being in that shallow crater, as it would act like a sound reflector outward, and that was what was causing the peace, however I think the native population knew it as well, and made it even better.

The government and universities don't think the human race can handle the truth, so they lie.

With the technologies available, it is getting harder for them to keep it hidden.

One of the great tools are this amazing website!

reply to post by maxzen2004


There are a number of reason's why such data would not be interpreted correctly but it all boils down to simple control and fear of the implications on social heirarchy.
Have you ever heard of the brooking's report, well it is in the UFO forum's so there is a distinct possability many whom read this may not be familiar with it.
It was a report commisioned by the US authority's into the possible implications of discovery or disclocure that a more advanced race of superior being's to us may be out there, They actually predicted social collapse, religious collapse and even national collapse.
Now to these power players whom are intent on maintaining there positions that is unthinkable so the decision was made to prevent any evidence of such being disclosed to the public.
How does this play into this, well the Nazi's in germany were so convinced that an ancient superior civilization had existed that they sent expeditions throughout the 1930's around the world in search of lost knowledge, they worked for the Nazi occult Ahnanerb organization whom also had a very great say in what research project's the Nazi scientists pursued during WW2.
After the war both America and Russia siezed what remained of the Ahnanerb document's as well as the scientists and technology's and they may very well have believed as a result that some of the Advances that Nazi germany was working on and had developed were in part based on research made by Ahnanerb.
So they would be non too eager on excessive and uncontroled probing into the past unless it served there purposes and coupled the brooking's report they may have interpreted also non human or even more advanced past civilizations (or in possesion of more advanced technology than they should of had) were also a potential threat or should be controled lest knowledge they did not have fell into other hand's or was lost to there control.
Now while these site's are obviously neo lithic stage of development they would still not be too eager as after all if there was such to be found they would not want it in your hand's and applying the brookings report if these giants were essentially more intelligent or superior (which there extinction would disprove but that is not the way they think) then they would apply it to any previous or non human earth based civilization as well.

Caver78
Not to wander too far off topic but most down here don't know about the Canadian Serpent Mound, sadly everyone runs off to Ohio like it's the beat-all-end-all.

This is an example of Serpent-Mound envy.

Harte

reply to post by wantstoknowmore

There is no conspiracy to hide this information, Nobody is hiding the info...

FACT: They ARE hiding this stuff from us... but WHY?

There are FAR too many pieces of evidence that were either buried, lost or just plain lied about over the years.

I find it rather ironic that all those "calling BS" are usually the same people holding up these false illusions of reality that they call "Science" and trying to protect their jobs.

Here is the reason WHY they are hiding this stuff from us:

"...scientists who see an intelligent force at work in nature are being fired from their jobs. ...mention "intelligent design" today and your career is over. Why are "secularists" so afraid of intelligent design?

Because they're funded by the Illuminati, (Rockefellers, Rothschilds etc.) who are Satanists. Satanists fear that acceptance of this "intelligence" will interfere with the makeover they're giving humanity. They think they are God.

Science - The Illuminati Religion and Mind Control Tool for the Masses

Science and education are nothing but MASSIVE forms of mind control...

How sad that so many are actually gullible enough to actually BELIEVE the people hiding behind this deception called "Education" and "Science", when in reality there's NOTHING but fraud and lies behind it.

"Because the archeological findings would prove the Biblical account of creation, and they can't as easily deceive the world into believing the lies we have all been taught." www.wearesmrt.com...

"The model of human prehistory built-up by scholars over the past two centuries is sadly and completely wrong, and a deliberate tool of disinformation and mind control. ...they demonstrate a systematic destruction of proofs that show another reality than that the official story. Falsifications and even destruction of such proofs has been common for more than two hundred years." LINK

“we are told not to look into this, it’s pretty well communicated if you research into giants or other races they will end your career immediately, we are told to say it’s all 1800’s media fraud regardless of the evidence, if you ask questions you’ll be working at McDonalds tomorrow”.

"A cave full of giant skeletons was found by telephone employees near Santa Barbara, California. Unfortunately, the cave entrance was sealed shut before proper excavation could be conducted."

"A giant skeleton on Santa Cruz Island, California, was sent to the National Science Foundation in Washington, D.C., where it was promptly "misplaced". Source

"...the sad fact remains that the most persistent commonality between all of these tales seems to be that the bones - the physical evidence - have all somehow gone missing.

If, as Stephen Quayle seems convinced, there is a concerted conspiracy of silence surrounding this archeological evidence, then it is a conspiracy of, well, gigantic proportions. The accounts of these giant remains are too numerous and too far-flung for all of them to have been lost, stolen, or secreted away. And yet, I truly believe the accounts. They are supported not only by an overwhelming body of evidence found in mythology, but an equally overwhelming body of archeological evidence." SOURCE

Quest for Death Valley Giants and the Cover Up

I asked about what happened to the full bodies and the older curator said University of Berkeley had came and taken all the giant skeletons away for study decades ago and this was all that had survived that grab. ...if you research into giants or other races they will end your career immediately, we are told to say it’s all 1800’s media fraud regardless of the evidence, in fact they think they have found a living tribe of Neanderthals in northernmost Canada, but I don’t know anymore about it, it’s pretty controversial, again if you ask questions you’ll be working at McDonalds tomorrow”. Source

"...authorities ordered the skeleton and all the artifacts secretly reburied- and, of course, lost to the scientific study they deserved.” Source

“the biggest cover-up in the history of mankind is the history of mankind itself”

JohnnyCanuck

bottleslingguy

irgust
reply to post by AlaskanDad

 

There is one just like it in Cahokia Ill. and it is also called the serpent mound.

I think the elephant in the room is that somebody was building these huge serpents mounds all over N America. Enki is represented by the serpent (among other things), maybe that is his territory?

I think it does our First Nations a disservice to attribute their cultural symbology to Old World beliefs. Besides, the time frames are way out of whack. Sometimes it's just a snake, eh?

I think the Old World was not the only people who used it and the First Nations probably got their idea based on the same people who represented the symbol to begin with. The serpent symbol is not limited to N America and goes much further back than the Old World (I guess you're talking about Europe right?) Where did the First Nations get the notion? Isn't it from star people?

bottleslingguy

JohnnyCanuck

bottleslingguy

irgust
reply to post by AlaskanDad

 

There is one just like it in Cahokia Ill. and it is also called the serpent mound.

I think the elephant in the room is that somebody was building these huge serpents mounds all over N America. Enki is represented by the serpent (among other things), maybe that is his territory?

I think it does our First Nations a disservice to attribute their cultural symbology to Old World beliefs. Besides, the time frames are way out of whack. Sometimes it's just a snake, eh?

I think the Old World was not the only people who used it and the First Nations probably got their idea based on the same people who represented the symbol to begin with. The serpent symbol is not limited to N America and goes much further back than the Old World (I guess you're talking about Europe right?) Where did the First Nations get the notion? Isn't it from star people?

Sure. Well, that or from snakes.

Which is more likely?

Harte

reply to post by Harte


fair enough, so when they say "snakes" we have to take them literally and when they say "star people" we should be consistent, no?

bottleslingguy
reply to post by Harte

 

fair enough, so when they say "snakes" we have to take them literally and when they say "star people" we should be consistent, no?

There's evidence for snakes...kinda tough to write them off as folk tales to explain a complex environment in a world lacking scientific reasoning.

reply to post by AlaskanDad


Same reasons politicians don't want to participate in unbiased debate on ufos because it takes them to a place where they don't have the answers, and main stream science doesn't like to admit to it doesn't know everything.

JohnnyCanuck

bottleslingguy
reply to post by Harte

 

fair enough, so when they say "snakes" we have to take them literally and when they say "star people" we should be consistent, no?

There's evidence for snakes...kinda tough to write them off as folk tales to explain a complex environment in a world lacking scientific reasoning.

so we shouldn't be consistent? final answer?

reply to post by Murgatroid


Murgetroid, yours is the best explanation so far, Mine was hypothesis but yours has data to support it and I believe what you are saying and quoting to be accurate, I feel it to be accurate at a much deeper level.
And as for the Illuminate lucifer worshipers, well that quote is totally accurate.

I do a lot of sasquatch research, and because of this I have sometimes run across information related to your topic. For instance, the numerous, consistent reports involving giant skeletons discovered on Native American burial sites, especially the mounds found in certain parts of North America. Many of these incidents were first reported in the 19th century, when archaeologists actually started doing somewhat real archaeology in some instances. And they were not describing tall Native Americans, rather they were describing skeletons much taller than the above-average human, and having a thicker skeletal structure, etc...One of the most interesting things I've noted in these cases involves what is described as a double row of teeth.

There are about 10 reports of such that I could find, all describing this same detail from skeletons found at different locations. The main reason I found this interesting is because there are a handful of modern sasquatch reports in which the witness was extraordinarily close to one of these animals, and as such they could see the inside of the mouth...and a double row of teeth was mentioned. I don't know if there are enough reports to be statistically valuable, but I think there definitely could be something to this.

Considering the fact that the vast majority, if not all, Native American tribes had a name for sasquatch or bigfoot, they were obviously seeing something...since many of these tribes did not have contact with one another, yet they all describe the animals in the same manner. The main difference in their descriptions comes from some tribes believing the animals are supernatural, while others believed they are just animals, or people in some instances. And some of these bones were supposedly taken to institutions like the Smithsonian, where they disappeared.

Even in the 20th century there were quite large skeletal specimens found, which were taken to universities, only to have the specimens lost. There is decent documentation for this in at least one case, although there are probably many more. So this has always made me question whether the government, academia, or anyone else has a reason to cover up certain archaeological finds. It would not surprise me in the least, because I can think of a few reasons why this might be done.

bottleslingguy

JohnnyCanuck

bottleslingguy
reply to post by Harte

 

fair enough, so when they say "snakes" we have to take them literally and when they say "star people" we should be consistent, no?

There's evidence for snakes...kinda tough to write them off as folk tales to explain a complex environment in a world lacking scientific reasoning.

so we shouldn't be consistent? final answer?

How so? You seriously want to equate evidence for existence of snakes with that of 'star people'? Oh my...you're on your own there.

bottleslingguy

JohnnyCanuck

bottleslingguy
reply to post by Harte

 

fair enough, so when they say "snakes" we have to take them literally and when they say "star people" we should be consistent, no?

There's evidence for snakes...kinda tough to write them off as folk tales to explain a complex environment in a world lacking scientific reasoning.

so we shouldn't be consistent? final answer?

If you mean, should we believe there are stars, then yes.

"Star People?" No. No "Snake People" either.

That's perfectly consistent.

Harte

JohnnyCanuck

bottleslingguy

JohnnyCanuck

bottleslingguy
reply to post by Harte

 

fair enough, so when they say "snakes" we have to take them literally and when they say "star people" we should be consistent, no?

There's evidence for snakes...kinda tough to write them off as folk tales to explain a complex environment in a world lacking scientific reasoning.

so we shouldn't be consistent? final answer?

How so? You seriously want to equate evidence for existence of snakes with that of 'star people'? Oh my...you're on your own there.

you're saying they went through all that trouble to build the structures and spread the word around vast distances that snakes was good eatin? How are you the expert on what was going on inside these peoples' heads not even to mention how the idea got spread around and so pervasively. You can't tell me THAT many people were gaga over snakes. Wouldn't you expect a little more diversity in the zoological symbolism?

Harte

bottleslingguy

JohnnyCanuck

bottleslingguy
reply to post by Harte

 

fair enough, so when they say "snakes" we have to take them literally and when they say "star people" we should be consistent, no?

There's evidence for snakes...kinda tough to write them off as folk tales to explain a complex environment in a world lacking scientific reasoning.

so we shouldn't be consistent? final answer?

If you mean, should we believe there are stars, then yes.

"Star People?" No. No "Snake People" either.

That's perfectly consistent.

Harte

edit on 3/15/2014 by Harte because: of the wonderful things he does!

perfectly consistent for a linear thinker absolutely yes!

bottleslingguy
perfectly consistent for a linear thinker absolutely yes!

And that's perfectly consistent for someone that doesn't understand the term "consistent."

Harte

reply to post by JiggyPotamus


If this evidence could be proven it would immensley important and open up a number of hypothetical scenarios as well as idicating the already posited hypothesis that sasquatch are essentially a sub species of humanity, perhaps a regressed and highly primitive remnant of a species which was the victim of a long remembered genocide at the hand's of homo sapiens, a chinese proverb much quoted say's that the most intelligent animal is the one no man has yet seen.

Purely hypothesizing but maybe they were not cannibal murderers but a peaceful race whom had not real defence against homo sapien aggression.