Restricted until 2063

In the book Ancient Celtic New Zealand the author leaks a supposedly official document from the National Archives restricting access to an archeological site in New Zealand until the year 2063.

Does New Zealand Government Departments attempt to withhold archaeological information from the public for a period of 75 years? And if so, then why?

What did the Waipoua Forest Archaeological dig reveal that is a threat to national security? How could 2,000 ancient, stacked stone structures pose a threat? Just what are they hiding, if anything? A pre Maori culture?

Pre Maori stone structures?

Leaked official document

Source: The embargo saga

-MM

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation This isn't the US national archives; the address is in Wellington, NZ and the archive is in Auckland.
The question still remains, what are they concealing?

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

Why withhold any archaeological information pertaining to anywhere on the planet?

How can ancient history and/or artifacts in anyway influence national security?

Unless of course our corporate oogart masters are hiding our history in an attempt to retard our understanding regarding our origins.

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

I've not heard of this book or theory, but having a quick look at his page i'm reaching for my sceptic's hat. It just seems that he doesn't know much about stone-tech and makes a series of assumptions?

Could you post some more on this to give us something to work with though?

I don't know much about NZ really, but it's no secret that there were pre Maori folk over there, seeing as the Maori have only been there several hundred years any way?

Doesn't the pictured document limit access to the documents, and not the site?

A 75 year restriction seems very strong - if they are basing their procedures from UK law, most Government docs are released after 30 years, iirc more sensitive ones are buried for 60 - perhaps longer depending on national security, or even never.

So are issues of national security tied up with something in the archive?

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

Like pteridine already said, this isn't the U.S. Archive (that I can tell from anything on the paper), and it's not the site that is restricted, apparently, but the records seem to be restricted from use by other archaeologists.

As for the 'why' behind that--your speculations are as good as mine.

originally posted by: pteridine
a reply to: MerkabaMeditation This isn't the US national archives; the address is in Wellington, NZ and the archive is in Auckland.
The question still remains, what are they concealing?

I have fixed it now, thank you for noticing and alerting me.

-MM

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

Like pteridine already said, this isn't the U.S. Archive (that I can tell from anything on the paper), and it's not the site that is restricted, apparently, but the records seem to be restricted from use by other archaeologists.

As for the 'why' behind that--your speculations are as good as mine.

The access to the dig seems restricted and visitors are not welcome; if you read the source article the author claims that someone that went to the site in 2001 found the following warning on their car when they came back to it:



, the paper came from a that block belongs to the Department of Conservation - reads like a threat to me. Just what is there to steal at the dig? A rock?

-MM

Giants are buried there......Te Kahui Tipua according to Maori legend. There are a lot of stories about them out on the net. Who knows...could be credible.

One possible reason is to prevent the location of a vulnerable archaeological site from becoming publicly known and thus subject to looting.

originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

I've not heard of this book or theory, but having a quick look at his page i'm reaching for my sceptic's hat. It just seems that he doesn't know much about stone-tech and makes a series of assumptions?

Could you post some more on this to give us something to work with though?

I don't know much about NZ really, but it's no secret that there were pre Maori folk over there, seeing as the Maori have only been there several hundred years any way?

Doesn't the pictured document limit access to the documents, and not the site?

A 75 year restriction seems very strong - if they are basing their procedures from UK law, most Government docs are released after 30 years, iirc more sensitive ones are buried for 60 - perhaps longer depending on national security, or even never.

So are issues of national security tied up with something in the archive?

A New Zealand newpaper called ELocal ran this story on it back in 2011:

In Search of Our Tangata Whenua. Waipoua Whitewash

, so the story seems to be legit.

Here is a relevant quote from the ELocal article:

In 2004, Minister of Conservation Chris Carter was asked just how many archaeological sites such as Waipoua’s were restricted from public visits. The answer will shock you: Carter admitted that 105 sites were embargoed, and that this was because “DOC administers the New Zealand Archaeological Associations Central file” and “file keepers may create sensitive files if this is requested by the site recorder.” A lot of people have been angered by Carter’s admission and that of his Associate Minister at the time, Phillida Bunkle, but let’s not shoot the messengers. The man who decided that Waipoua forest records won’t be available for viewing until 2063 was archaeologist Michael Taylor.

-MM

delete....duplicate post

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

With my Tinfoil hat on, possibly something relating to a Pre Ice Antarctic civilization?

With my more rational hat on, possibly something relating to Colonial crimes against Native populace? That would also explain why it may have such a short (relativiely speaking) time frame on it - enough time to smother any potential outcry.

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

My first guess without thinking too hard about it would be records of the discovery of giant or larger-than-typical skeletons. Our government here in US has been rumored to be hoarding and hiding similar evidence. We're not being told the entire story regarding the history of man.

Uranium deposits or gold imo. Sounds like a national security issue.

originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
One possible reason is to prevent the location of a vulnerable archaeological site from becoming publicly known and thus subject to looting.

Which would mean the site was discovered fully intact and wouldn't have the resources or technology to open her up properly. I would think if such a site was fully intact it would become primary focus for an archeological dig.

I'm curious to the dimensions and whether it could "house" (comfortably) Giants per Maori legend.

originally posted by: Rosinitiate

originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
One possible reason is to prevent the location of a vulnerable archaeological site from becoming publicly known and thus subject to looting.

Which would mean the site was discovered fully intact and wouldn't have the resources or technology to open her up properly. I would think if such a site was fully intact it would become primary focus for an archeological dig.

I'm curious to the dimensions and whether it could "house" (comfortably) Giants per Moari legend.

I think your giants are little pieces of ore. www.teara.govt.nz...

In 1980 NZ quit with the nuclear power push. In 1988 I hypothesize they found ore and sealed it up for 75 years or until needed.

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

Who says there's a threat they are hiding? Who says they are hiding anything?

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

It is just the document which has restricted access. Not the physical site as such.

Reasons for why the document (14 pages) require such a long restriction period, might be just due to an administrative blunder. Someone checking document categories and their corresponding restriction periods was doing that with such a limited touch with reality, that the 75 years restriction period for an archelogical survey report seemed totally ok.

There's plenty of information available, if one takes the time to look for it. Of course, after learning the facts, nobody could make ridiculous claims about giants....

Long story short: There was a 75 year restriction originally placed, but that restriction was lifted in 1996. The most likely reason for the restrictions being imposed, were carbon dating results of a single shell that dated approximately 500 years before the Maori were in the area. There have since been numerous other finds supporting an older (by 500-1000 years) culture.

As for the sites themselves (there are many), they are no longer restricted (more than any other archaeological site), and there are in fact, guided tours available.

There are many, many sources, if one skips past all the fringe websites echoing the same tripe.
Source
Portal to other sources (and actual research papers).

originally posted by: Legman

originally posted by: Rosinitiate

originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
One possible reason is to prevent the location of a vulnerable archaeological site from becoming publicly known and thus subject to looting.

Which would mean the site was discovered fully intact and wouldn't have the resources or technology to open her up properly. I would think if such a site was fully intact it would become primary focus for an archeological dig.

I'm curious to the dimensions and whether it could "house" (comfortably) Giants per Moari legend.

I think your giants are little pieces of ore. www.teara.govt.nz...

In 1980 NZ quit with the nuclear power push. In 1988 I hypothesize they found ore and sealed it up for 75 years or until needed.

Who makes that sort of call. Surely not an archeologist.