posted on Apr, 2 2003 @ 11:17 PM
"Those who control the past, control the future. Those who control the present, controls the past" George Orwell, 1984
I can tell you a couple of things about how well or not so well things are accepted in historical studies. Having spent a great deal of time in
academia (and such time convinced me that I had no desire to spend any more time there), I learned just how some things worked.
First of all, if someone found a discovery, say, a worked concrete wall was found in a volcanic tuff flow that through radio-isotope dating was found
to be more than 8 million years old, 3 million years before the accepted date of inception for austrolopithicus afarensis, the earliest
ancestor of humans (by the way, just such a find has been documented in Colorado... strange that it never appeared in any official journals), the
following would happen:
Before ANYONE would accept such a find as genuine, the Great Elite Stuffed Shirt Brigade (IE, the closest, highest Ivy League wannabe university
historical/anthropological/archaeological PHD staff who couldnt find a real job in the real world) would have to "bless" it, and claim that it was
in fact real.
PROBLEM: Such a find, so far outside of known accepted documented theory is going to violate/threaten SOMEONEs pet theory. (You should know, in
academia, pet theories ARE politics, and PHDs in particular waste no time in ruining peons chances at accreditation if they oppose a pet theory)
SOLUTION: The PHD brigade will likely observe, investigate, and peruse any and all information submitted to them (they have to cover all bases after
all) and will (without fail) issue a ruling, often explaining such a find away as something very mundane, likely making the discoverer look like an
idiot. In very extreme cases, as the above mentioned case in Colorado, they will likely allege fraud, and totally discredit the discoverer, ruining