It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by constantwonder
So after doing some more looking around i have found that there seems to not only be an active archaeological conspiracy in Egypt, Peru, and Mexico, we can now add New zealand, Australia, and Tasmania.
I know that this is not new news but when you look at the dates of several disputed sites you find a pattern of dates coinciding with what may or may not be cover ups.
They dug four strata to excavate the artifacts. Virginia Steen-McIntyre later wrote and published a paper concerning the dating of the artifacts found. It reported four sophisticated, independent tests: uranium-thorium dating, fission track dating, tephra hydration dating and the studying of mineral weathering to determine the date of the artifacts. Their 1981 paper (Quaternary Research (1981) v. 16, pp. 1-17) suggested that these tests, among others, validated a date of 250kya for the Hueyatlaco artifacts. Later analyses conducted by biostratigraphic researcher, Sam VanLandingham, were concordant with the radiometric analyses conducted earlier.
The professional report, categorizing the findings at Hueyatlaco, was delayed for years. When it was finally published in 1981 it met widespread criticism. Steen-McIntyre argues that her findings were rejected not on their failings or merits, but because her critics engaged in circular reasoning
According to U.S. Geological Survey researchers, the beds from where these artifacts were recovered all underlay the Hueyatlaco Ash. The Hueyatlaco Ash was dated by: the U.S.G.S. to ca. 250kya via the fission track method; Ray Donelick (University of Idaho at the time) to ca. 250kya via the fission track method; Ken Farley (Caltech) to ca. 430kya via (U-Th)/He and Sam VanLandingham to ca. 80kya-430kya via biostratigraphy.
Originally posted by SaturnFX
oh boy, the jesus freaks aren't going to like this news... how can you have a 40k year old site in a 6k year old universe
Originally posted by TheComte
What makes the aboriginal 'dreamtime' stories any more real than Christianity? Doesn't seem logical to believe in one myth and not the other. Unless you are guided by faith.
Originally posted by infinite8
Can you imagine how many civilizations could have accomplished the same things and disappeared in these time periods.
Originally posted by SaturnFX
oh boy, the jesus freaks aren't going to like this news...
how can you have a 40k year old site in a 6k year old universe
Originally posted by zazzafrazz
Originally posted by constantwonder
So after doing some more looking around i have found that there seems to not only be an active archaeological conspiracy in Egypt, Peru, and Mexico, we can now add New zealand, Australia, and Tasmania.
I know that this is not new news but when you look at the dates of several disputed sites you find a pattern of dates coinciding with what may or may not be cover ups.
LOL constantwander don't tell me you are falling for the archeological cover up nonsense? Not you too!!!!
Archaeologists have said that Indigenous people have been here for up to 60 000 years, no cover up!!! Quite the opposite.
This is great news, I will read up on it more, so thankyou for posting it, but this is not astounding new information from the archaeological record regarding how long they have been here, just supportive evidence backing this incredibly rich cultures' long long long stay here.
[edit on 11-3-2010 by zazzafrazz]
Originally posted by B.Morrison
my apology is for them, the descendants, who need the event to be acknowledged and apologised for in order for THEM to move on....
some of my fortunate existence is due directly to their ancestors slaughter, simply due to my race....I believe that gives me the right to apologise for it..... as some of their misfortune is directly linked to the same things....
anything that can help to bring peace & unity is worth doing in my eyes...
and with this one...at the end of the day..it is not about me.
-B.M
[edit on 11/3/10 by B.Morrison]
Originally posted by Ha`la`tha
I'm just glad I know real Aborigines and not the ones who feel as if they deserve something in order to be able to 'move on'.
What peace? What unity? Are we all living in harmony now???
Originally posted by Ouroborus2012
Excellent... But, rest assured that the mainstream scientific community will flash their PhD's and find a way to discredit those who dated the find and will give it a new time that better fits with the modern science version of human evolution.
‘Thus, the two spacecraft headed for Earth. The first landing took place where Australia is now found. At that time, it should be explained that Australia, New Guinea, Indonesia and Malaysia were all part of the one continent. A strait existed, about 300 kilometres wide, exactly where Thailand is now found. ‘In those times, Australia possessed a great inland sea fed by several large rivers, so that diverse and interesting flora and fauna flourished there. All things considered, the astronauts chose this country as their first immigration base. ‘I must say, to be more precise, that the black race chose Australia and the yellow people established themselves where Burma is now - here too, was a land rich in wildlife. Bases were quickly set up on the coast, on the Bay of Bengal, while the black people constructed their first base on the shores of the Inland Sea in Australia. Later, further bases were established where New Guinea is presently located.
Originally posted by constantwonder
This woman was a credible geologist who's career was destroyed over her findings at Hueyatlaco. The U.S. Geological Survey confirmed her dating.
According to the program, Dr. McIntyre was blacklisted because she dated some stone tools found in Hueyatlaco, Mexico at 250,000 years old, indicating that humans were living in the Americas far earlier than the time accepted by the scientific "establishment." In actual fact, Dr. McIntyre did continue to work in her chosen field, but not achieve a high degree of success and recognition. Subsequent to her involvement in the Hueyatlaco project in 1973, she published technical papers in 1975, 1977, and 1981.
The program stated only that the stone tools were "uncovered," and that a team of experts from the U. S. Geological Survey was called in to date "them," meaning the stone tools. The program implied that it was Dr. McIntyre's project. This was not the case. In fact, at that time she was a graduate student working on a temporary basis under Harold Malde, the head of the USGS team which was called in to date the site, not the artifacts.
The archaeologist in charge of the project was Dr. Cynthia Irwin-Williams. It was she who directed the project and published the results and conclusions of the investigation. The 250,000 year date for the age of the artifacts was included in her published data. Although her colleagues disagreed with her on the age of the artifacts, they never persecuted her; they merely claimed that there were errors in her dating procedures. She continued as a respected and influential member of the American Anthropological Association and the Society for American Archaeology. The 250,000 year date definitely did not ruin her career.