A Fly in the Ointment

Before I move on to the complex issue of why the human genome carries one less pair of chromosomes than the other ‘great apes’ (23 pairs as opposed to 24, respectively) — who are supposedly our direct ancestors – I need to explain why virtually all our discussions on human evolutionary history may be based on still another Big Lie, and hence distorted if not outright erroneous from the get-go. Bear with me and see what you think.

In discussing human origins there is almost certainly going to be a giant fly in the ointment – no matter what direction the discussion takes – and that fly is named Michael Cremo. Over the past few days in thinking about Neanderthals/humans/DNA/blah blah, for example, at least 10 times I’d say to myself, ‘Yeah, but what about Michael Cremo?’

I speak of his book, Forbidden Archeology, and the condensed version, The Hidden History of the Human Race, the latter of which I’ve read cover to cover twice and thumbed through (in amazement) more times than I can count. I’ll give you an example of its importance, and its controversial implications. In 1997, Graham Hancock wrote the foreword to Hidden History, starting with this sentence:

‘It is my great pleasure and honor to introduce the abridged edition of Forbidden Archeology. Let me say at the outset that I believe this book to be one of the landmark intellectual achievements of the twentieth century.’

Whoa! Strong words, and agree or disagree with Graham Hancock’s theories, you have to admit he is no scholarly lightweight. I mean, right? Someone to pay attention to regarding the deep history of the human species, at the very least.

Cut to about a year ago. Hancock is on Joe Rogan, talking about human origins and the subject comes up that there are theories saying that modern humans have been around for much longer than the mainstream will admit. (This is what Cremo’s work — with co-writer Richard Thompson — is about.) Cremo’s name is not mentioned but Rogan (whose ignorance knows no disciplinary bounds) says that there are a lot of crackpots working in this area. Laughing derisively — and he’s too ignorant to know that he’s directly referring to Cremo — he blurts that anyone who thinks modern humans have been on earth for millions of years is not only a crackpot but probably clinically insane. He repeats variations of this several times, possibly to let his PTB handlers know he’s doing as he’s been told.

This goes on and on, with Hancock nodding and grunting in agreement as Rogan will just not get off his dumb-ass roll. I’m listening, at first assuming and then hoping Hancock will say… something in Cremo’s defense, but Graham just keeps nodding and agreeing. Note that the first sentence to Hancock’s Foreword is a direct endorsement of the notion that modern humans (‘humans like us’) have very possibly been on earth for millions and tens of millions and maybe even hundreds of millions of years.

Yet he lets the moron Rogan go on and on.

I like Hancock, have spent a lot of time reading him, and get the impression he’s a good man. You may feel the same way. As I did you might at first be thinking, now, wait, Hancock’s Foreword was written twenty years before the show. Obviously, Hancock must’ve ‘smartened up’ in the interim. Right?

Nope. See, almost nowhere in The Hidden History of the Human Race does Cremo state an opinion or even make an inference about human antiquity. Virtually the whole book is mainstream archeological research, research that has been ‘hidden’, even ‘forbidden’ (hence the titles) by the PTB. Research that Cremo has uncovered from their hiding places in the mainstream archives.

Again: It’s not Cremo’s research that indicates ancient human antiquity, it’s the mainstream! A lot of Cremo’s citations are from the 19th century (before the Darwinian PTB really took control) but plenty of it is much more recent too. Research papers and peer reviewed documents that reveal literal mountains of evidence that humans ‘like us’ have been around… forever. 

When I say forever I almost mean it literally, given the intelligence-produced artifact found in a layer of earth dated at two billion years. Cremo describes mainstream research and discoveries of artifacts, bones, and even full human skeletons that have been formally dated at many millions of years; as I say, even hundreds of millions of years.

Okay, before you assume there’s a reasonable explanation here, or that I’ve gone off on a tangent, I strongly suggest you take in at least one Cremo lecture. Best of course would be to read his book(s), but i know that’s asking a lot.

But assume for the moment that I’m not making this up. Do you see the fly in the Darwinian or even the Creationist or even the fringe ointment?

After a lot of thought, here’s the way I’ve come to look at it: Cremo’s evidence is every bit as robust as is the evidence upon which the textbooks and the general human origins zeitgeist that has been drummed into you since childhood are based. So if Cremo’s unearthed research is somehow… wrong… then so is the whole mainstream paradigm regarding how we got here (ditto most of the fringe). It’s one or the other, Cremo’s right or Cremo’s wrong, and either way you go it’s astounding. Either way, no matter who you are or what you believe, it’s likely that ‘everything you know is wrong,’ to quote Lloyd Pye.

But what’s up with Graham Hancock? Another PTB limited hangout mole? Maybe. Or maybe he got so successful since 1997 (his books now sell in the millions) that he fears alienating his semi-mainstream fan base. And now that he’s on his ‘comet impact’ kick (as the destroyer of his ancient high civilization) – a semi-mainstream idea to begin with – he’s being extra careful not to look too fringe, and, as usual, let the truth (Cremo’s truth in this case) be damned. (That Hancock completely ignores the Electric Universe paradigm is another strike against him: I cannot for the life of me come up with an innocent excuse for his total lack of mention of it, especially the petroglyph analysis of highly respected plasma physicist Anthony Peratt, which directly affects the ‘comet impact’ roll Hancock is on lately.)

Addendum: if you’re ever in the audience at one of Hancock’s book-promo lectures, please do ask him why he turned on Michael Cremo, and remind him of the Foreword he wrote back in ’97 for Hidden History. I like Hancock – a good writer who walks the walk — but I despise hypocrites. Maybe he can explain himself. I’ve tried contacting him on this issue but (predictably) did not hear back.

I recently read America Before, Hancock’s latest theorizing about his lost civilization (Atlantis/whatever); maybe it was the North American continent he figures, blah blah. Yeah, well maybe it was, but he burns many words on the recent SoCal finding of a 130,000 year old mastodon carcass with obvious ‘human’ artifacts around it. Makes a huge deal out of the date, given the mainstream’s hackneyed bullshit that humans didn’t invade the continent before… what is it?… 13,000 years ago, or maybe it’s 20,000 these days; I forget. Oh, and he burns even more words on the deceit and hypocrisy of how poorly the mainstream treats fringe researchers like himself… well, I couldn’t agree more, Graham, but…

‘What about Michael Cremo?’ You know, the guy who wrote ‘one of the landmark intellectual achievements of the twentieth century.’

You didn’t want to get too fringe, though, did you, Graham, and stand up for Michael? Is that it?

Hancock’s premise in America Before was that ‘humans like us’ were on the continent waaay before the mainstream admits, but not only did he leave out Michael Cremo in his citations, but likewise ignored the work of archaeologist Virginia Steen-McIntyre, who dated an early human site at Hueyatlaco, Mexico at more than 250,000 years, using four mainstream-approved dating methods. (For a brief explanation of this matter, go to 12 minutes in the Cremo lecture.) This article from Nexus magazine is the best detailed version of the Steen-McIntyre scientific disgrace.)

Addendum: For me, the most startling of Cremo’s exposés was regarding the ‘California Gold Mine’ finds. I highly recommend you take a quick look at this video and please do it now, so you understand what’s really at real stake. (It’s the same Cremo Google talk I linked to before; here you go to 29:40. I really do suggest you view the whole video, though, then come back here.)  

This one involves multiple finds of human artifacts and bones from strata dated at 50 million years ago. The California Gold Mine findings are so robust – according to the protocol of mainstream archaeology – that you may understand why I say that Cremo’s body of work, whether you accept it or not, means that the story we’re told about ancient human history is untrue, i.e., is either a lie or a series of scientific blunders, especially about dating. That the California Gold Mines finds directly, hugely, affect the premise of Hancock’s America Before is obvious, considering his brouhaha about a 130,000 year find. Yet no mention…

At first I couldn’t get a grip on why Hancock would fail to mention Virginia Steen-McIntyre’s Hueyatlaco work, given that it not only supported his own premise of human antiquity in the Americas but is also another example of his own horrendous treatment by mainstream archaeology; for ‘following the evidence’ Steen-McIntyre was ostracized and her career ruined; this in spite of the inarguable results of the most advanced dating techniques of the time. Hancock constantly complains about his abuse by these same people.

See, the date of the Hueyatlaco site would not only annihilate the mainstream history of the colonization of the Americas, but would throw into severe doubt the accepted human-evolutionary paradigm, i.e., 250,000 years pre-dates the emergence of modern humans. In short, Steen-McIntyre’s work was a bullet aimed right at the heart of Neo-Darwinism.

Hancock’s ignoring of the Steen McIntyre issue is likely for the same reason as his disrespectful treatment of Michael Cremo: He’s either trying to nuzzle up to the mainstream, or, and I hate to say it, is another limited hangout state mole.

Although I didn’t mean to go off on a rant about Graham Hancock, I nevertheless hope you’ve gotten my point about how Big Lies can throw us off even with issues that don’t appear to be directly related. The matter of Neanderthal DNA we’ve been going over is a good example. If ‘humans like us’ have been on earth for tens or hundreds of thousands of years (or more), what are we to make of that controversy?

One explanation for the finds Cremo has unearthed could be based on… astonishingly inaccurate dating methods, coupled with totally mistaken assumptions regarding the geological history of this planet. As an Electric Universe devotee, this possibility looms very likely to begin with. (There is no doubt whatsoever that the mainstream’s version of the formation of the solar system is completely bogus, so why, one might ask, should we assume they got geology right?)

It’s probably a matter of degree.

And it’s probably not that simple.

In any event, I will next try to deal with the chromosome issue; in doing so I will have to accept certain ‘official versions.’ I do so with trepidation.

Here’s a video from… last night (hence the title):

Allan