Humans 80,000 Years Older Than Previously Thought?

Course we have to keep in mind that we can't just dig up the whole world to find out.

A friend of mine had in her office a phrase like that and below it the comment, "oh yes we can". She was an avid excavator.

The giant archaeological conspiracy has that goal in mind too, dig up the entire planet - however it might take a few thousand years.......


Theories, lots of ideas but only a limited number have any reality in fact or in other words, evidence that backs them up.

First of all..thank you for making my first topic post work out well. With the various links I have no hopefully I can weed some of the crap out.

The Crystal Skull was a weak link to the Calderas (?) skull. I know that part is fake I just had to get in a knock on Lucas since he has categorically raped my childhood joys.

Now..back onto the whole stone tool part of the responses...That is a lot of link to get through. Wow.

I don't think any culture like ours or any developed nation of today has a historical rival. What we are doing is unprecedented to our knowledge. I'm just one of those people who entertain the belief that life itself is cyclical. I often find myself wondering..if we find human skull fragements from various types of humanoid and man has existed in some form for a million years (this is a dangerous guess but I open myself up to disproval. I remember a big number lol) How can we say we know # about them? Just because our standards say it isn't possible.

I know time obliterates all. Here's to hoping that somehow something has survived.

I'm just bewildered by how easy it seems for scientists to deny this or that. One of the first rules about science I was taugh is that nothing is absolute when you look at just how much science has changed over my lifetime, let alone a few hundred years.

If our rise today is as meteoric as I believe it is..who says we couldn't have seen this again.

I know someone is waiting for me to say Atlantis camoflaouged itself through their psychic powers so no one but the most worthy would be able to unlock their secrets..but I don't believe that either.

The cuan underwater structures has been an obsession of mine over the past 6 years and I'm sorry it took me this long to find this sight.

ROCK ON ABOVE TOP SECRET!!

Howdy AW

Evidence drives the methodology we call science. Useful thing, it's sometimes delayed or diverted due to human egos but always tends to get back on track.

I'm just bewildered by how easy it seems for scientists to deny this or that.

Not exactly sure what you are referring too. If there is no evidence for something or tons of contra-evidence for something then they would be correct to say that something doesn't appear to exist BASED ON THE PRESENT EVIDENCE. If new evidence comes in then the situation changes - that happens all the time. However that doesn't mean that everything is going to proved wrong.

If you fall for that theory then everything is always wrong! Lol

Originally posted by Hanslune
Howdy AW

Evidence drives the methodology we call science. Useful thing, it's sometimes delayed or diverted due to human egos but always tends to get back on track.

I'm just bewildered by how easy it seems for scientists to deny this or that.

Not exactly sure what you are referring too. If there is no evidence for something or tons of contra-evidence for something then they would be correct to say that something doesn't appear to exist BASED ON THE PRESENT EVIDENCE. If new evidence comes in then the situation changes - that happens all the time. However that doesn't mean that everything is going to proved wrong.

If you fall for that theory then everything is always wrong! Lol

And what you just said would be true if not for the fact that there is PLENTY of evidence already, and yet, no dice from the vast majority of the scientific community, somethings not right there.

reply to post by Outlawstar


Well obviously what you consider to be compelling evidence is not considered compelling by others.

May I suggest you pick what you consider to be the the three most compelling pieces of evidence. Pick something that you have researched and verified and we can take a look at them for reasons why they may not be accepted by science.