Forgotten Origin

8 x 0 = 0: Archaeology that Adds up to Nothing

8 x 0 = 0: Archaeology that Adds up to Nothing

By Steven & Evan Strong

This article evolved out of a question which I first stumbled upon about six months ago that has no sensible answer. When discussing with my wife the intention to begin this comparison of opportunities denied with this mystery unanswered, she went to the machine I despise and asked the same question. The computer’s response only confirmed what I thought, no-one had a logical explanation, no substantial scientific research has been done and due consideration has never been given.

“Up to Heaven,”(1) Seven

Of all of the experts on the avenue, the relevant scientists and ornithologists have been found wanting in even acknowledging such an elemental question. There are at any given moment, hundreds of billions of birds residing and flying on this planet. Most do not live a long period of time during each incarnation and breed at a rate that would certainly multiply their numbers, so the available corpses available every minute of the day are phenomenal in quantity. That being the scientific truth, why is it that during all my time in the bush, the only very few dead birds seen fell through misfortune due to car impact or hunting by predators. What about the great majority who die naturally from old age, why are they absent and unaccounted for? Whether in the city or country, wherever the location, we should be literally standing knee-deep in feathers.

The problem is that this void in research is merely symptomatic of a compliant society that has lost the art and satisfaction of enquiring into the unknown. I have watched a lot of David Attenborough nature shows, and many others, examining all types of birds doing all sorts of things, but I never saw them dying of old age either singly or en-masse. Lots of mammals, reptiles, fish and insects have been filmed dying through the actions of others, and also as the end result of a decaying body turning off its life-force. But when it comes to birds, they must die somewhere else just out of camera-shot. Then what!? If every person who died was allowed to lay where they fell and allow natural processes to dictate the time of decomposition, the planet would literally stink and disease would run rampant.

We should be standing in and on feathers with pegs on our noses. Of the very few birds taken by predators, their feathers still remain, but the tally doesn’t end there. With billions of birds dying naturally, feathers should be as common as blades of grass. So the question remains suspended in the ether for the best of reasons, there isn’t an answer. Not only did all the experts and academics fail to ask a simple question of cause and effect, in most cases it just never occurred to them to do so. In this respect, this omission is not a fault of scientists alone but an integral part of the conditioning and education systems that underpin the global society. We are not trained or rewarded to ask, merely remember, compliantly retain and never call into question.

Despite the almost total lack of interest in any scientific circle, my wife did find one response that may well be the most plausible explanation, but what was quite revealing was that the age of the person responding was seven. The entry was penned by her mother who is a media personality and producer who specialises in pet animals. She was discussing the same apparent dearth of feathers or corpses, and to illustrate the point she shared with the reader her seven year old daughter’s deceptively quaint response.

“When my daughter was seven years old she actually had this same question but figured out an answer that worked for her: since they have wings, they simply fly up to heaven!”(2)

Just like angels who fly to heaven, so too birds. Marie Hulett is a highly educated adult and relied upon her conditioning and limitations in perspective when then explaining what really happens in the adult world of bird reality. The fascinating part of her rational account is that the opening scene relies on premonitions and deliberate concealment. According to the pet expert, birds sense when they are about to die from natural causes and seek out a hidden niche or corner unseen, then lay down and die out of sight, but never nose. Scavengers and feeders of carrion smell the carcass and quickly devour all but the bones and feathers.

That is it, they die out of sight and all that takes place past that point never reaches our attention. The problem is that the ecology and fauna of the planet is all wrong, with millions of birds dying each week the most dominant species of the planet should be the scavengers. There should be millions upon millions of hyenas roaming the bush and vultures circling every street. Once these hordes of cadaver eating animals consume this massive supply of flesh, we still have the feathers to dispose. No matter where they are hidden one decent wind will spread the load, and how many hiding places are there left on this incredibly over-crowded planet? No matter where the dead birds fall, the grounds should be like a continental pillow.

Keepers of Original Lore and Magic are adamant birds can relay messages from the Spirits, that they can be open conduits to both sides of the divide when chosen. Knowing that all depictions of angels are never complete unless two bird wings are attached, could it be that birds straddle the veil between the mystical and pragmatic and upon death, simply move across? Undeniably this a child-like response, very much in keeping with the reasoning of a seven year old child and makes no scientific sense. That is empirically true, but nor can it be said that any other explanation is any better or closer to the truth.

Irrespective of what the answer is as to where birds fall, one thing is undeniable, it is an elemental question relating to life and death which the scientists cannot fathom or begin to acknowledge. That vacuum is real and proven through neglect. What is sadly predictable is that whenever such obstacles to existing theories and conditioning appears on the horizon, the shutters are up and blinds drawn.

Sword Play Without Swords

When it comes to finding an acceptable explanation that accounts for the seventeen centimetre cut across the face of an Original man living in Australia centuries before Cook or the Dutch stepped on Australian soil, there are only two options available and they openly contradict. He was cut by a sword and it happened well “before Europeans were in this country. So it does rule out that this individual was killed by a sword.”(3)

Even though the closest comparative cut is that of a fallen gladiator and all of the science conducted and microscopic analysis performed left no alternative outside a metal sword, the experts cannot walk the extra step. What is not disputed is that the cut was incredibly sharp, consistent in depth and width, and there is no fracturing along the inner rim of the skull thus displaying all the common features of a sword slicing across the face in what was lethal blow. Nevertheless, it just can’t be due to a sword. Without a scrap of contrary evidence or alternative, it is a firm no without any support beyond what they believe took place in Australia before the British Invasion. They know, absolutely, before Cook there was no technology past a stone, stick and bone tool kit. No wheels, metal, bow and arrow, clothes, mining or anything beyond the bare essentials. That being the case, there can be no place here for any metal blade, let alone one capable of creating a cut of that length and delicacy.

So since first discussed in 2015, this anomaly has remained in the ‘too hard basket’ and is still without any support and even less interest.

Sections of the skeleton found near a riverbank on the Darling (Barka) River were first noticed by Barkanji Elder Badger Bates. He made contact with the relevant authorities which led to Professor Michael Westaway leading a group that carefully examined the remains before they were reinterred elsewhere and given proper ceremonies. During the time he had access to the bones a series of tests were conducted. The common expectation of all groups was that because of the obvious blade cut across the face, this young warrior died in the Frontier Wars of the early to mid-1800’s. There has been very little actual archaeological proof of the countless massacres across the country and this absence of evidence has allowed the liberty for reactionary right-wing historians like Keith Windshuttle to deny any massacre legitimacy outside Myall Creek. Their hope was that these bones would go some way towards rectifying this omission, but that did not happen.

A digitalised cat scan on the bones returned a date of between 900 to 700 years old, an analysis of Carbon 14 taken from the bone and tooth provided a result that was no less comforting of 1260-1280 AD and OSL, which measures the last time the sun shone upon sand found inside the skull, provided a date of 700-500 years. What was also found within the skeleton are gastroliths, which are found inside the yabbies were eaten by this fallen warrior. Although a little less reliable the approximate range of between 1400-1600 AD shares one common feature with the three more reliable techniques, this man died in conflict before any European set sail towards or set foot and blade upon Australian shores.

Professor Richard Wright was called in to examine the skull, his experience in analysing bodies in Serbia after the last war in that region, was instrumental in identifying the cause of death. The bayonet and knife were familiar tools of the genocidal trade and the effects were well known to Wright “But whether it’s done with a machete or whether it’s done with a steel axe or stone axe, I don’t know.”(4) Westaway also made note of the sharpness of the blade and with no internal fracturing or splitting inside the skull, it was obvious whatever object was responsible “it wasn’t a really heavy object.”(5)

Head researcher Professor Michael Westaway openly concedes that this man fell before any sign of European sails, boats or genes in Australia, but cannot let go of a manufactured version of the past that is user-friendly yet patently lacking. He is adamant that the soil was “infilled that skull well before Europeans were in this country.”(6) However, what follows next is an assumption that is contradictory and entirely subjective. He added that “so it does rule out that this individual was killed by a sword.”(7)

Nothing in the research and science suggests anything but a sword, and it was used in action before Europeans appeared, that is equally definite. Just because this evidence is at odds with mainstream pre-Cook narratives, that does not allow any expert the right to ignore what the current science insists is a fact. The 17 centimetre cut down the side of his face, is clean, sharp, shallow and caused by a metal sabre or sword, any form of wooden blade has to be thicker and heavier and the resulting blow would shatter and split the bone all the way through.

To this day the scientists are unable to find a way to merge their preconceptions into these numbers. The real truth is that the sum total of their attempts at cobbling together a sensible response adds up to nothing, and in that respect Elder Badger Bates summed up the depth of the impasse the experts now seem unable to resolve when commenting that “there is something wrong somewhere.”(8)

More “Something Wrong,”(9) Everywhere

We began this circuitous route looking for fallen feathers and found nothing, examined a seventeen centimetre cut that had all the hallmarks of the blade of a sword and came up empty. The experts assure us that even though there is no alternative it just can’t be a metal sword responsible, so it isn’t a sword, but that is all it can be. So far mainstream science has struck out twice in their collective silence or selective investigation with blinkers firmly attached. Travelling further down a path strewn with questions and ever so few answers, through the examination of six pieces of rigorous genetic science or solid archaeology, leads on to a different narrative, ports-of-call and final destination. The only thing we can guarantee is that up ahead and way behind there will be a lot more ‘something wrongs.’ As always, it is a matter of what not to include. All six offerings, four genetic and two archaeological, are of very recent origin and consistent in Australian geography and genetics.

Homo sapiens sapien Denisovan

In my genetic case, and that of many Original people who have around one twentieth of their genetic code sourced from ancient Denisovan genes, to be called solely sapien falls short. Then in what adds to the discrepancy, throw into the Original mix a dash of Neanderthal and a liberal dose of an unknown mystery gene and what this adds up to it is not ‘pure-bred’ sapien, but something more like a genetic ‘dog’s breakfast.’

The problem is the Denisovan alarm clock went off 44,000 years ago and that date breaks a fundamental assumption underpinning every mainstream account of what happened during pre-historical times, not just in Australia, but the whole planet. According to the latest findings examining the huge peak in Denisovan genes peculiar only to Original people, the experts now know this happened 44,000 years ago. And it wasn’t one casual affair, but a massive exchange of genes and people in face to face relationships.

But where did this happen? According the every book and expert once the Africans reached the northern shores of Australia, no-one else was here and they stayed and spread throughout the continent and kept fully apart from all other people until very recent times. But here we have a lesser-hominid present in Siberia through to Spain from 12-500,000 years ago that never entered Australia, in direct and personal contact with a Homo sapien that never left the same continent. They definitely were sharing genes, but if consulting the acceptable ancient historical narrative, these two hominids could never meet. Well then, if no hominid except sapiens sailed from continent to continent and we are told that for all lesser-hominids this is too difficult a technological feat, then this must mean that the Original people met with these hominids somewhere between Siberia and Spain a long, long time ago.

Homo Sapiens Sapien Denisovan Plus a Mystery Guest

Although acclaimed to be of African ancestry, the Original genes are without doubt lacking in any African genetic markers and carry many signposts totally lacking in African descent. Putting aside the trickle of Neanderthal and deluge of Denisovan genes, both fully absent from all Africans, there is another newly discovered genetic pattern that is only found in the Original race. Exclusive only to Original genes, wherever this interbreeding occurred, what is definite is that no other race was involved. Once again the same questions demands to be answered, when this contact took place a boat is needed if sailing from Australia. However, if remaining inside Australia, then that means another group of hominids were already settled before the next group came. If it did happen off-shore, which is most likely, why is it at 44,000 years both the Asian and European race shunned this group in the physical sense, but were far less discriminating when it comes to the Neanderthals and Denisovans? This absence strongly suggests that the blending of two different genetic patterns happened in Australia and that unknown contributor remained or returned to an off-world location.

Moreover, we know of many types of hominids and off-shoots including Red Deer Cave Man, Homo Enigma, Homo Florensis, Neanderthals, Cro-Magnon Man, Denisovans and other candidates, but when it comes to a face, body, bone or stray gene belonging to this new genetic contributor, there is nothing found or known. Where this merging of two gene banks occurred is irrelevant in one respect, whether Australia or Austria makes no difference as wherever they met this seminal event in the human story cannot be accommodated into any existing acceptable theory detailing human history and genetics.

Perhaps, the reason why the experts are unable to locate any tangible evidence of these genes anywhere on this planet outside what lays within the Original genes, is simply because there is nothing to find, here. Could it be that the unique repetition of the Pleiadian allegory of the Seven Sisters found in every tribal estate has now been found inside the genetic signature of every Original person? Is it possible these mystery genes have an off-world ancestry? Undeniably such suggestions are far-fetched, but at least the Original narrative supplies an identity and distant location, the experts are at a loss to offer anything beyond not here, not yet, maybe later.

A Hollow Victory

An extensive genetic analysis conducted in Australia is a rare beast, especially so when it was a multi-disciplinary Australian study. Quite recently a group of local archaeologists and geneticists announced the results of what they believed led to a logical conclusion supporting the Out-of-Africa theory and into Australia sometime after. The inherent flaw was and still is that their deductions and final assumptions are illogical in contradicting a central tenet of every conventional explanation of how Australia was populated once the first few African mariners set foot in this foreign land.

At first glance, the genetic dates appeared to tick off a 50,000 years entry date from Africa. All over the country whether coast, desert, top or bottom, the same date of 50,000 years kept repeating. Surely, they postulated, this is genetic proof of an African ancestry beginning at the northern tip of Australia some 50,000 years ago?

It depends on who was tested and the numbers aboard this first boat. If they were rabbits it is remotely possible such a rapid spread is plausible, but the speed of movement across the continent and the large numbers required is beyond the capacity of a few stray intrepid adventurers. The contemporary theories are agreed that when the first Africans mariners/fisher-people sailed to Australia, they were few in numbers and understandably cautious in spreading far from the coastal environment and food sources they were familiar. It is suggested that for the first 10,000 years the northern coastal regions of this huge continent, followed by the eastern and western coasts, were slowly settled as numbers began to exhaust the resources of the first point of contact. Then the larger inland rivers were investigated and adapted to before going further inland. All up, a time span of no less than 20,000 years from initial appearance to habitation in the more hostile drier settings is agreed to be fair and reasonable.

Not anymore, according to this group the same date of 50,000 years registers all over the continent irrespective of distance and the huge diversity of eco-systems, climate and availability of water. It is all the same, no matter where, the whole continent was settled at virtually the same time. How big was the first boat and how large the crew? For this to occur there had to be thousands aboard and many were consigned upon landfall to abandon the resources and food they knew so well and immediately set foot towards the far southern reaches of this continent and all points in between with no knowledge of the flora, fauna and ways of the land.

Of more concern to the integrity of this sampling is the issue of which Original group was selected. If it is the gracile population of 50,000 years, who are the ancestors of the present-day finer boned individuals, why was the robust strain ignored? Granted they have been assumed to have become extinct some 6,000 years ago, but they were in sizable numbers from 50,000 years through to about 10,000 years ago and certainly worthy of inclusion. There is an ample collection of bones to analyse and extract mtDNA. Equally, the smaller statured little people often called Barrineans, of which one tribe was genetically viable as it still numbered over 100 in the mid-1930’s. There are relations still living, never full-descent, up around Cairns and Kurunda way, who should also have their blood sampled. A strong case can be made that the Tasmanian Original tribes were of the same genetic strand as the Barrineans and their blood should be gathered and prepared for a spate analysis.

When addressing the oft claimed existence of even smaller little folk with a rather ethereal inclination, along with giants of three metres separate from the Yowies, only adds to the potential blood bank and genetic diversity.

But the list of omissions does not end there, for reasons that certainly are beyond our understanding, no comparison was made with the most famous mtDNA yet assessed and dated in Australia, Lake Mungo Man (WLH 3).

Mutated, Tainted and Totally Mistaken

We are very much supporters of Alan Thorne’s three-pronged analysis of Mungo Man all producing dates beyond 60,000 years, but recognise Jim Bowler disagrees believing this ancient original man is more likely to be around 45,000 years old. Either way there is no dissent in his premier status, being the oldest and most complete skeleton found in Australia whose genes were extracted, analysed and extensively compared. If trying to determine who the very first people in Australia was, it would be logical to assume that these genes would be the prime candidate for comparison.

It did not happen, nor is it likely. The reason is simple, the genes do not fit, never has from the first analysis, and it got even worse when a second attempt was made in trying to explain why the first result was such an uncomfortable outcome.

Just over a decade ago genes were extracted from the finger of Mungo Man and an analysis found that although he was certainly part of the Homo sapiens sapien family, there were no other Original genes past or present that matched. What only increases the academic discomfort, is that there is no match in Africa or anywhere else on this planet. Deemed a latent mutation lying dormant since exiting Africa, it was proclaimed an interesting detour that added nothing of genetic substance to what was taking place within the normal community of non-mutated Originals. So a consensus was arrived and it was decided to look elsewhere as this distraction is a genetic cul-de-sac.

Less than a year ago the same ancient genetic pariah was examined through analysing the same genes and came out with a completely different result to yesterday’s absolute certainty. Even though what was found before was incorrect on so many levels, this false information still resides within many texts. It seems that these ancient genes do have a modern-day counterpart: the European race. Proclaimed with the same confidence as the earlier researchers to have within distinct genetic markers, there is only one sensible conclusion still remaining after the huge collateral damage caused by this genetic ‘bombshell.’ Since the genes are least 45,000 years old, born at a time well before the European race came into existence, this individual is a direct ancestor of all Europeans. The mathematics will have this equation and sequence no other way, once acknowledging that the Original people precede the Europeans by thousands of years and carry their genes, the rest is easy.

Nevertheless, just like the sword cut common sense was dispatched with and a fascinating tale concocted. The genes have been ‘tainted’ by Europeans in some way and must be sent back to the banished corner of the room and never spoken of in polite circles. At some time between five to twenty five thousand years before Europeans first evolved, they made their way to Australia by boat and some very up close and personal relationships were the order of the day. It’s bad enough proposing a midnight rendezvous with Denisovan visitors from distant locations, now we have another hominid, and a close relation at that, sailing across the oceans with salt and romance in the air, and neither a body to consummate this intercontinental tryst and no chance of getting one for thousands of years.

So, after four sets of tests employing the latest advances in technology supervised by people with white coats and degrees aplenty, where is the consensus? There is none beyond the only shared fact, no result fitted into the current historic norms and must be forgotten or discretely shelved. A lot of money and experts fell short at every level due to one recurring trait that so much Original archaeology is tainted with, inconvenience. This ancient man does not stand alone in this brazen attempt to hide so many Original truths. Both found thousands of kilometres apart, Mungo Man shares the same disturbing antiquity as a mound of shells in Victoria and an engraving of an aquatic reptile with sharp teeth and a snappy disposition situated in middle of a South Australian desert.

Point Ritchie-the Shunned Midden

Whatever happened at the series of middens found at a beach that caused so much distress will never be known, but it seems the chief archaeologist and his team will never return. Jim Bowler is a staunch advocate of the Out-of-Africa theory, and still is, and because of the new circumstances he was forced to present to the public barely three years ago, that continued belief is quite staggering. A few years ago Bowler announced the results of an intensive and rigorous study of middens found very close the coast in Victoria. It gave him no joy to announce a date of human occupation of no less than 80,000 years, which he conceded to be conservative and more than likely 10,000 years short of the mark.

It was a reluctant admission hedged with caution and the need for more dates of this magnitude before discarding the current explanations of what happened in Australia before the British Invasion of 1788. Despite the obvious inconsistences now created by this new science, the radical occupation date has stood firm and no retraction or criticism has been forthcoming. What has also been conspicuous in its absence is any further comment or a return visit to such an incredibly ancient site by Bowler. The same leading archaeologist at this site who advises not being rash or bold, must have forgotten that he, along with Gurdup Singh and Peter Ouwendyk, co-signed a paper thirty years earlier proposing that Original people were responsible for a huge spike in charcoal deposits at a site that is now part of the Great Barrier Reef, beginning 186,000 years ago. The agreed evidence of fire-stick farming by humans is at least twice as old as that given to the Point Ritchie midden and is merely repeating the same inconvenient truth.

We sincerely doubt Bowler will ever follow-up on either location, the dates prohibit him offering anything more than silence. They tell us that tens of thousands of years before the earliest agreed entry date for Africa sailors stepping on a beach in the northern Top End of Australia, modern Original humans were firmly ensconced in every part of this continent. With an occupation date at the southern tip of Australia most likely to be 90,000 years that must push back this hypothetical minimum entry date to no less than 110,000 years, which is well outside the maximum date of 60,000 year if settled from Africa. Both coastal locations are far too early, but it gets even more untidy once factoring another minimum date of no less than 80,000 years, but this time around the site is situated hundreds of kilometres from the coast in South Australia, at a location proposed by all experts to be settled no less than 20,000 years after initial entry at the far north of the continent.

Panaramitee-Once Replicated, Twice Hidden

A huge engraving of the head of a salt-water crocodile surrounded by symbols and lines found a considerable distance from the coast or any river should be dated at no more than 30,000 years, but is much older. C.J.Mountford, the archaeologist who found this magnificent engraving and removed it without seeking Original permission, was adamant it was created at a time when salt-water crocodiles were part of the local Panaramitee landscape. The problem is it has been at least 75,000 years since inland areas close to this region (Cuddie Springs) were frequented by any form of aquatic reptiles, let alone one with a head measuring just under two metres.

Esteemed archaeologist Josephine Flood, did no more than restate an obvious Original truth when declaring that “I am going to be so bold as to suggest that it may derive from a time when terrestrial crocodiles and humans actually co-existed in South Australia, although the youngest crocodiles found so far date to more than 75,000 at Cuddie Springs.”(10) Because of “the thick layer of desert varnish,”(11) and that is a grave offense to Original Law and Lore to even consider engraving any object or animal unless it was part of the tribal estate, Flood was compelled to propose a date that is no less than 50,000 years too early for current occupation models.

We have previously written about this engraving and how its existence and antiquity challenge central elements of the Out-of-Africa theory as it relates to arriving on these shores to an unpopulated continent with engravings made by humans 30,000 years before this African discovery supposedly occurred. Also mentioned earlier was the tawdry plastic resin cast taken from the actual rock engraving hidden somewhere deep within the bowels of the Museum, which did lay on the carpet beneath a display table/cabinet. Every relic in the cabinet above was protected by glass and each carried information about the object shown. That courtesy was not extended to the untitled resin head, no information on a panel or even a scrap of paper was on display.

The articles we wrote carried a less than a ringing endorsement for the disrespect shown by the Museum in both removing the original engraving, then compounding the insult by never displaying that same sheet of rock. We do know our comments were read and resented, and perhaps had some part to play in the official response which led to the removal of the resin look-alike. It wasn’t much, less than a token gesture, but at least the synthetic replica did drop hints. Now with the inferior copy consigned to the back door, no printed information in any panel to read and no chance the original will see the light of day, what was partially hidden is now completely gone. Another casualty to the Original truth has fallen by the wayside.

8 x 0 = 0 or Infinity

The only answer tendered by others when examining eight seemingly unrelated examples of anomalous archaeology or science that we believe comes close to the truth, was given by a seven year-old girl. The experts have no sensible answer, and in some cases the question was never considered, but one child was far more forthcoming. Doubly so in choosing to engage with a spiritual reality when dealing with flesh and feathers that never fall to the ground.

Of course, our preference to endorse a child’s wisdom is irrelevant and has no bearing on the other weightier issues researched, but the permanent attachment of blinkers to the most basic fundamentals of life and death is symptomatic of a society that has lost the art of asking. Too busy memorising, selecting that which soothes prejudices and promotion, there just isn’t any time left to pause and reflect if it doesn’t fit into existing models. Once locked into systems that reward and consume obedience, there are lines that must never be crossed for once doing so, that betrayal will never be forgotten nor forgiven.

The sword cut was expected to be a quick investigation into an example of archaeology of minor interest. Outside confirming there was a real war between the rightful custodians and an illegal Invasion in contravention to the International Law of the Sea (as agreed to by the colonial elite), that was the sum total of what seemed to be part of the normal historical narrative. Everyone approached this assignment comfortable in expecting results that only confirmed what was written and accepted without question.

Four separate means of analysis, and in each number given only one truth escaped the backlash, this warrior fell in conflict before the tragedy of colonialism had taken hold anywhere. He died in battle before any European set foot in Australia. He died due to the immediate effects of a 17 cms cut made by metal blade. Despite there being no alternative, and until the dates returned such unexpected numbers everyone involved rightly assumed the cut was due to a sword wielded during the Frontier Wars in the early to mid-1800’s, they are obliged to deny the obvious and refuse to enter into sensible discussion.

More often than not when the numbers get too big and genes cross self-imposed restrictions, the discussion becomes muted or selective and invariably another Original truth falls apart. Every geneticist knows that Original people of today can have up to 6% of their genetic pattern Denisovan in complexion and that is cross-fertilisation occurred 44,000 years ago. They are very comfortable with when, but when addressing where, there is a deafening silence. What has to have happened is that either Denisovans (a lesser species of hominid) sailed to Australia, which is less likely, or the more logical route of Australian sapiens sailing abroad was taken. That is all there is! It has to be one or the other, but that being the case, nothing was offered beyond that this genetic rendezvous is real and it took place somewhere.

Then with half the implications of this long distance romance thrown in the too hard basket, another set of genes turns up exclusively in the genetic blueprint of the Original people. This time not only is where dispensed with, but the experts cannot even supply who. Without a face or place, lacking in a time frame or earthly precedent, all they can assure us of is that this mystery genetic bank had no contact with any other race and there are no bones, artefacts or clues as to who they are or where they lived.

Another recent offering, or perhaps retraction is a more fitting description, is the second serving of the Mungo Man saga. Agreeing that this male is the oldest modern human found in Australia and he is unlike any other Original person yet found, the experts have decreed that this test is the final word. And the word is, the Original person buried at Lake Mungo so long ago has a European genetic signature, which means before this much younger race came into existence they were walking around the same countryside as the Original people. While doing so, the genes are adamant they were enjoying each other’s company.

Then, amongst all the unfriendly genetic research there was what seemed to be one solitary ray of hope. The problem is not so much the quality of research, but the narrow focus that sets the parameters and dominates between the lines. The repetition of dates of 50,000 years everywhere, presumably within minutes of stepping ashore, demands numbers, motivations and behaviour when entering foreign lands that contradicts every model based on the assumption African mariners sailed to Australia 50,000 years ago. Sampling one strand of no less than three, and possibly many more, will not supply a comprehensive date of first settlement or genesis in Australia, and never could. Nonetheless, as erratic and contradictory this finding is, it is the only study that has received extensive mainstream press coverage. In what only adds icing to this cake, there has been no discussion as to the many flaws and inconsistencies, only resounding commendations for this ‘discovery.’

Returning to the real archaeology, to a very solid date of human occupation taking place no less than 80,000 years at the far southern end of Australia, it is still difficult to understand how these geneticists are proposing a time 30,000 years younger than this confirmed date, knowing that Australian archaeologists must be aware of Jim Bowler’s work at Point Ritchie (Victoria). We sincerely doubt that Bowler will return to do any further research at these middens, but the damage is already done. The date has been announced, the rigour and sophistication of techniques is unchallenged and nor has Bowler withdrawn his conclusion. Once factoring in the shuffling of engraved crocodiles, both rock and resin, dated to be the same age or older and found in the desert of South Australia, we cannot understand why any academic would remain steadfastly attached to the Out-of-Africa theory once placed into an Australian context.

8 x 0 = 0 or 50,000 XXXXXXXX

The maths is wrong eight times over, the only two answers that must always be incorrect is either nothing or 50,000 years. There is no genetic link to Africa yet found in any Original person, nor did Africans sail to an unpopulated continent 50,000 years ago. Wherever the truth lay, these two assumptions are not part of any Original equation.

From our perspective, the recurring problem that faces any researcher of Original truths is the methodology. When investigating a culture and Lore that is steeped in pagan mysticism using yardsticks that extol technology, materialism and power the exercise is destined to fail. How can the decision to shun such advances be seen as anything other than stagnation or even regression, if compared against today’s competitive race to the top rung, when indeed it was an informed intelligent decision and lifestyle choice. The academic’s clothes and degree can see little of worth in a naked Original person lacking in classroom or book, and what was an inspired decision to walk with the spirits was quickly relegated to simpler times with naïve inclinations that have no place in today’s chaos and aggression.

Good scholarly research demands that the merits of either style of living should not be a factor when drawing conclusions, but it is, and in this respect ancient Original society is mistakenly believed to be unable to invent the bow and arrow and everything else further up the technological chain. That bias clouds the vision of the researcher in the field. Which means when uncomfortable evidence found on country with a solid base in archaeology or science is presented, the report is read seeking fault, claiming ambiguity, vandalism or deceit. Such an inclination towards choosing a negative response when disturbed inevitably happens when in a permanent state of denial.

So what we have is an academic climate based around absolute certainty investigating an ancient way of living that reveres mystical qualities science denies actually exist. Unable to see the forest with all senses firmly focused on one tree, until an extremely old way of looking and sensing the mysteries and inner truths becomes part of the way every piece of Original archaeology and sacred site is investigated, the experts are merely the tinkering with the outer shell. This cultured inability to comprehend magical facts and logical deductions that may appear radical is so ingrained sites like Point Ritchie will never be followed up. The magnificent engraved salt water crocodile head will never be shown to the public and every uncomfortable example of genetic research will ever so briefly be allowed fifteen seconds of public airing to three journalists, then will be filed away for another day.

Perhaps, it is not coincidental that the same fate awaits every article we write and each piece of archaeology we have been shown. Deemed to be ‘nutters,’ ‘pseudo-archaeologists,’ ‘amateurs’ and vilified in diatribes attacking our integrity and conduct when on country, it seems whatever we do find is dammed by association and undeserving of a cursory inspection. Quite literally, we could stumble upon Stonehenge and simply because of who we are, no-one will look. As it turns out, the Standing Stones Complex is at least of that importance and much more, and we are confronting an incredible resistance to look, acknowledge or conduct science on this site. If there were respected academics standing beside us, access to the Complex would be granted, grants will flow, channels would be open and the media will be there.

The reasons we have offended are many, of which the main infringement has to be our insistence in prosecuting the Original narrative at the expense of every other accepted scientific channel. Once contacting the appropriate keeper of Lore and Old Ways, the answers are given and all we have to do is ask the right questions. What we always do before entering any country is make sure the right Original people lead us onto country and set us on the right path. May we suggest, if other academics did behave in a similar fashion through obeying protocol as the prime directive, more Original truths about sacred country and artefacts would be shared and openly discussed.

In the meantime, the Original truths and humanity’s ancient past remains hidden and whether directly culpable or merely a link in the chain, those who cannot or will not, should not anymore.

 REFERENCES:

(1): Marie Hulett, 2014, “Where do birds go when they die?”, Marie Hulett’s Animal Files & Other Stuff!. http://mariehulett.blogspot.com.au/2014/04/where-do-birds-go-when-they-die.html

(2): Ibid.

(3): 2015 (7th April), “Toorale Man murder mystery” (Transcript), Catalyst, (A.B.C.), http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/4211835.htm

(4)-(9): Ibid.

(10): Josephine Flood, 2004, Archaeology of the Dreamtime: The Sory of prehistoric Australia and its people”, (JB Publishing: Marleston, South Australia), 180.

(11) Ibid.

 

 

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll Up