Forgotten Origin

Five Aces in one Hand: Marked Rocks

Five Aces in one Hand: Marked Rocks

By Steven & Evan Strong

Photography by Natalie Jacqueline Paez of Third Eye Society

& Jody Hutton

Surely these marked five rocks clinch the deal. From this point on there can be no other game plan, whatever denial, excuse or misunderstanding has been tendered in previous official responses has reached its expiry date. Whether dismissed as a rare but natural event, bizarre prank, exotic ancient artefact planted to cause mischief or the more popular choice, an outright denial to look or engage, we believe that these five rocks clear up any loose ends and every dead-end.

Admittedly the sheer volume of marked rocks brought to our attention recently has been daunting, but equally within this influx have emerged patterns, lines, angles, shapes and marks that are repeated so often and in such detail it is impossible to ignore or explain away. The chances that all of these marks are not part of an ancient structured formal language of high complexity, are one hundred times less than infinitesimal.

Over the time we have been examining these rocks it has become obvious, particularly so this time around, that the shape and form of each rock is as important in establishing context as the markings cut and imprinted into the rock. The further we progress in our ongoing examination of this expanding collection (which now numbers over 65), the easier it is to see the connection between the new candidates and those that came before. The next marked rock on our list is part of an intriguing and ever-increasing group that now numbers five.

Ros’ Rock 23

This rectangular rock is, as are all that follow after Ros’ Rock 1, a lesser version of the original. It is the fourth rock we have that is part of a sequence that began with the most important and sacred Original rock of the collection. Synchronicity in shape aside, this rock, as do all included in this category, has one side clean and virtually untouched, another that acts as a connector which has very little meaning of itself, and the two principal sides which contain what we believe to be charts/space maps.

PSY_7777

Ros’ Rock 23: Natalie Jacqueline Paez of Third Eye Society

Ros’ Rock 1 and the two that have already followed in its footsteps adhere stringently to the straight and narrow when creating lines and intersection points. However, there is a deviation to that norm on this occasion, on Side 1 there are four lines that are not straight, but curved. This is the only instance of this appearing on any of the five rectangular rocks. Every other line on this side and the others sides is straight or if diagonal consistent in degrees of inclination, but the four curved lines seem to disqualify this rock from inclusion in this category. However, these four lines still maintain the same geometric principles, in that each of the new entries is even and consistent in curvature. This apparently minor variation may actually be additional evidence that these rectangular rocks have cut within them star-charts and the movement of celestial bodies. Perhaps the curved lines represent orbits rotating around the earth and other planets, and if so the use of such lines is appropriate if attempting to chart the night-time skies and activities from above. Especially so when recording these events from below.

We believe that these curved lines can be comfortably accommodated into the fringes of the overall parameters of this category, however not so with a line that is far more perplexing in that it appears to continuously straddle all four sides. That should not be and is a far more serious breach of rectangular rock protocol. So it seemed, but upon further inspection in full sunlight and magnifying glass, it was evident the scribe knew the rules and was prepared to bend, but never break the rules of structure and linguistics. On the almost unmarked side the only very thin line that continues from the other side actually falls short in connection by almost a centimetre. Granted if it had continued it is a perfect fit, but that did not happen. There is a very slight natural ridge that continues onwards and its presence initially deceived my failing eyesight. But upon closer inspection the line definitely stops and allows the natural contour to continue and connect with the next side, so the rules of presentation may have bent a little, but have not been broken.

This rock is possibly the oldest of the five of this classification and in many ways if ignoring its shape and faded geometry, the blandest. There is only one width of cut and it is of quite a shallow depth. There are no spectacular imprints and there has been a fair amount of fraying and wear around the edges, particularly so on the side that contains the majority of markings and all the curved lines. It is noticeably more worn, and this is suggestive of intensive contact with the skin when being held over a long period of time.
Outside the likelihood that this star chart includes earth-bound observations of orbiting bodies or craft, there is little to be gained or added for now except that none of these marks are natural and were made to communicate something of importance. Whether that reverence still holds true is irrelevant, in those ancient times such information was considered sacred and worthy of mention.

For our notion that these curved lines represent some form of orbit to have substance, there has to be corroborating evidence, another rock that shows all the characteristics of a chart/star map, but also has curved lines which also have a prominent role to play.

Ros’ Rock 24

We are convinced that this rock is also a chart/star map, but equally confident this rock does not belong to the same category as 23. It actually does not belong to any identified group at this juncture, but we chose the star map/chart category simply because it ticks every box bar one.

PSY_7735

Ros’ Rock 24: Natalie Jacqueline Paez of Third Eye Society

It does share so much. This rock is very precise, straight and diagonal. As is the norm two sides contain a huge majority of the lines and marks and two of the co-joining sides do have lines that connect to one of the main sides, but four do not. And that is the crucial point of difference, this hexagon has six sides and a top and bottom flat face, it is not a rectangle.

So, hovering as this rock is in between stations and colleagues, it still has a story in two parts to both tell and confirm. As much as the appearance of six curved lines amongst angles, straight lines and many intriguing shapes is of considerable interest, we have no choice but to begin our investigation by first examining the opposite side. Of the 29 lines on this side 28 are straight, but the 5 dominant lines certainly hold centre-stage. Never before have we seen five lines in a sequence running off the same base-line, if nothing else this arrangement is too contrived and deliberate for any critic to suggest natural causes, but it goes much further than that. Although all five lines share the same horizontal base, each is marginally different from each other in height, slope, spacing and more than likely, meaning.

It may well be that there are two equations/charts at play on this side, a thicker set of lines (which includes the five lines)while a much finer and possibly older set of much thinner lines on the other half of the rock may be from an earlier time and depict a different orientation of the stars and constellations.

Undeniably this side has the ‘wow’ factor, however it is the opposite side which has not only more markings, but also has 6 lines that are curved. While the straighter lines are in the majority, it is quite obvious the arcing or orbit-like trajectory really does come to the fore. The major attraction on this side is a set of 8 small lines that are separate but run along the same vertical path, they run down the entire face of the rock and begin somewhat straight and then become more curved as each line veers more to the left.

When accompanied by 6 other curves, this segmented orbit makes it clear these unstraight lines are not a ‘one-off’ aberration but the main feature on this side.
The sequence of 8 small lines which go to make up the combined curve is very noticeable on this rock simply because there is no opposition. Nothing grabs the eye, there is not a line of any length that spans one face let alone runs across to other sides. This is also another reason that makes us inclined to keep this rock separate in classification. Nevertheless we feel of all the other rocks it is the closest by comparison, yet there are differences.

PSY_7738

Ros’ Rock 24: Natalie Jacqueline Paez of Third Eye Society

The next rock to be very briefly examined, if it had been sent two weeks earlier, would still be unclassified and without a companion to compare and contrast.

Ros’ Rock 25

If it wasn’t for the later arrival of another rock so similar to this marked rock which exhibits the same slightly off-centre jagged lines, this rock would be of lesser interest and most likely in the last group of the fourteen to be discussed. On first arrival through the post outside the obvious excavation of one side the rock there was very little compelling geometry or precision. With the exception of the very fine lines that are only just visible in good light there isn’t a straight line or clean edge to be seen.

PSY_7771

Ros’ Rock 25: Natalie Jacqueline Paez of Third Eye Society

The actual markings were at the beginning of little consequence. Semi-straight at best, untidy and segmented, it looked to me as if the scribe had a ‘bad day at the office.’ It was never the assumed crudeness of the message but the excavation of a large section of rock on Side 3 that first attracts. One third of Side 3 has been excised and removed as one would as if it were wet clay. The whole section (3.5cms x 1.5cms) seems to have been cut and sliced to a depth of 25mms, then smoothed off.

What only reinforces our belief that this section of rock was literally sliced off as a potter would with clay there are four separate lines/points of removal cut along the ridge. The longest cut begins at the shallower end and as the thickness increases the next three lines are correspondingly shorter in length. The resulting ledge is 32mms x 14mms, absolutely flat and smooth and is adorned with 15 separate lines of which only one extends over the rounded edge connecting to Side 2. All other lines are very small thus starting and finishing on the ledge.

The variety of tools needed and hardness of blade or intensity of heat required asks many questions. However, advanced technology of this sophistication in such an ancient setting is nothing new and is evident on every rock we have researched thus far, not so the markings on this rock.

On Sides 1 and 2 there are a total of sixteen lines/elongated shapes, many of which began through adhering to precise geometric principles. It is the first time such a less structured and looser form of marking has been seen. At the centre of half of these depressions are very fine straight lines which was obviously the first point of contact. From that exact point of entry it would appear to the untrained eye that the sides have been widened to varying degrees through scratching or gouging without regard for maintaining a common line, angle or form.

Apart from the two sides of irregular shapes of ragged lines interspersed with an occasional straight line this rock was, at this stage of proceedings a low priority without precedent or interest. Of the fourteen in this set, it was vying for last place. It soon became a fading memory thought to be worthy of one paragraph, or two at best, when reporting of the last of the fourteen rocks. However, once seeing Jody Hutton’s rock, a new chapter began to unfold and this rock immediately scaled the list.

Jody’s Rock 26

Of a very similar shape, but missing the minor excavation work of the previous rock, the markings on this rock are not straight and look very much like the marks on the last rock. The only noticeable difference is the quantity, this rock carries a larger load and seems to bear witness to a more coherent narrative. It would appear that the entire assembly of marks are connected, whereas in the previous rock there was no carry over from one side to another.

IMG_0515 - CopyOn the main side there is one vertical line running down the face and dozens running across with nine intersection points. They continue around all sides and even when in mint condition was nearly completely marked out with the very bare minimum of chert still remaining. The volume of information encoded into such a small space is immense. The lines are not as ragged as the previous rock, but nor are they as precise as is the norm elsewhere in this collection. Irrespective of minor variations, the similarity in shape, colour, thin coat of chert and script is sufficient to place 25 and 26 in the same category.

There is another associated feature of Jody’s Rock 26 that warrants mention, and she is part of a pattern that has been repeated without exception. Jody is a woman, as has been every person who has approached us with Original marked rocks. Equally all women share the same story, the same compulsion or attraction to seek this rock out, all women have independently volunteered their version of how they were drawn to the location of the rock before sighting.

This rock has a lot of marks, angles and lengths yet to be measured. The chert on top is worn, the story ancient and there is a method here even though the geometry is awry. The main point of comparison is that one can now be made, and that the marks on these two rocks are yet another branch of an ancient rock language that is so complex it raises questions and implications that will never be fully understood.

Ros’ Rock 27

The last marked rock in this selection is more predictable in markings and much easier to classify. However, within this conversion to conform there is one fascinating point of convergence never seen until now. There is one dominant focal point on this rock, and there is no question the notch at the top edge is indeed the path that each line either directly or indirectly is set. The 37 lines on both sides that pierce the chert surface are aligned or connected to the top gap and micro-cliff. Such is the volume of lines converging to one central point on Side 2 it has actually weakened the integrity of a part of the rock surface, which has fallen away at a later date.

PSY_7761

Ros’ Rock 27: Natalie Jacqueline Paez of Third Eye Society

Never in any of the rocks seen has one point monopolised centre-stage with no competition. In what only accentuates the importance of this dual point of convergence is that one side only has straight lines and the other none, everything is jagged and irregular. Despite the opposing style of script both serve the greater good and principal focus by merging at the peak.

PSY_7767

Ros’ Rock 27: Natalie Jacqueline Paez of Third Eye Society

And it is this stark contrast between the types of lines present at both sides that is of further consideration. We have seen many examples of both types of script together on rocks, others where it is either one or the other, but never before have we seen such a delineation restricted to one side or the other with nothing in-between.

Nine down, Five to go

We began by insisting that if the evidence we are researching is as legitimate and sensational as claimed, these rocks will rewrite sizeable portions of not only Australian, but global prehistory. We threw down a challenge to our critics and the apathetic who should know better in declaring that the archaeology on these rocks has been resolved in the Original affirmative. With 27 rocks examined, albeit ever so briefly and more than double the number yet to be reported upon, all telling the same story abiding by the same rules of presentation, it really has reached the stage of the case is won and there is no other alternative.

Here is what we know as absolute truths upon which we will never enter any negotiations. We have seen and inspected over 80 Original marked rocks, all of which were held by Original custodians and deemed to be special and sacred. What has come out of our many hours of examining, reflection and consultation with Original men and women of knowledge are two general observations, and one recurring case of incredible clumsiness I just can’t shake.

Before expanding upon these two rules of engagement we do need to set a solid base. The technology needed to mark these rocks, the range of blades and points required assisted by temperatures of four figures is not supposedly the province of any Original toolkit before the arrival of Cook. It is that simple, whatever conjecture follows is secondary to the principle point of contradiction, what is on the rocks and the processes and skills needed to ensure the First Language has never died rewrites the entire Original past and much more.

Now, about those rocks, their make is still a mystery, even the top layer which we refer to as chert is an ‘educated guess’ given by expert who has held Ros’ Rock 1 in his hand. Irrespective of what it is or isn’t there is one geological truth that has to be appreciated first hand, and in my case out of hand, and what makes it considerably worse is that I am a self-confessed serial offender.

It all goes back to the second time I met a trusted geological adviser and showed him Ros’ Rock 1. He was mightily impressed and helped us with many astute observations. Amongst all the comments and expertise, to emphasise how taken he was by the incisions into this rock he gave us two very user-friendly examples of the hardness the surface of the rock it was cut into. He assured us that a trip to hardware store would not find a tool capable of making marks like these on this rock, such technology does exist in specialist applications using the most sophisticated technology accessible, but for the everyday person it could not replicated because of the hardness of the top veneer/surface is beyond the capacities of the stock at Bunnings. Equally, he promised us that if we were to drop this rock on to another rock, or even worse a concrete floor, the rock would be unmarked.

I took his word for it, I remember vowing that I have no intention of ever finding out whether he was actually right. The mere thought of dropping what we strongly suspect to be the most sacred rock in this country, adorned as it is with so many lines, angles, imprints, infills, to even chip or crack it was a sacrilege we could not even begin to think about. So there it is, the anonymous expert assures those he has never met it is hard. Other authorities in geology whose names we cannot give have also contacted us suggesting he is right. Undeniably, none of these officially uncorroborated rumours are convincing proof as to how hard the coat of rock is on Ros’ Rock 1.

I Never played in the Slips

That chert, as we suspect it to be, covers every other rock in this ensemble, and what goes for one goes for all in relation to dropping these rocks from height onto concrete or hard brick pavers. I remember smiling a touch when mention of the store-bought chisel or concrete-drop was first made, and also remember ruefully reminiscing within a millisecond of the first time I dropped one of sacred rocks to the time of that guarantee. And of the panic and dread that overwhelmed once registering the reality of this rock laying on the garage concrete floor.

It bounced! The rock is so heavy it actually hit the concrete and momentarily ascended before receiving a second battering. It took five seconds before I mustered up the courage to bend down and survey the carnage, or just maybe our adviser was right. It took one second, followed by absolute relief, not a mark, nothing. However, the impact was not without a victim, there was some collateral damage in that the concrete floor has a small dent. The other rock, Ros’ Rock 1, was dusted off and got back to business without a mark.

Since that unforgivable disaster, I have been unsuccessfully grappling with two insurmountable problems, in that most the writing and research of the rocks takes place in the outside garage overlooking the rainforest, and when I played cricket I refused to play in the slips as I was an atrocious slips fielder. On three of the four further occasions the rock was sitting in my lap and I forgot about it until I had risen. Nonetheless on each fielding opportunity the falling rock did touch my fingers on the way down, and on each collision with the concrete I saw the same faux-ascension before falling yet again onto the hard floor.

The last time around I do recall mentioning to my wife how sure I was that the ‘testing of the waters/concrete’ was just never going to happen again. Within an hour it was all down to a very ordinary dropped catch when passing between fingers, and there I was after yet another clumsy attempt still sitting in the chair watching the extremely clean coat of Ros Rock 18 crash into the concrete. The whole event actually seemed much slower, and probably wasn’t, but what had changed was my reaction, I took five seconds to rise and recover. The difference was that this time around I barely looked at the rock and my heart didn’t raise a beat, I was more obsessed by how uncoordinated I was when holding these treasures. As for the rock, by now I knew what to expect, nothing, not a scratch.

The point is, no matter how circuitous the route taken by us in finding concrete proof, these rocks are extremely hard to mark and need tools that were not supposed to be anywhere at anytime on the planet until the last hundred years. But the rocks are here and are thousands of years old. There is no other conclusion available, the rocks are just too hard to be cut, and remember not chiseled but cut, and done so with such finesse and of in a variety styles that has no boundaries, but obeys strict formulas. If it was marked on soft sandstone, it is vaguely possible a highly refined object sourced from a stone, bone and stick technology could be responsible. Not here, not on any of the rocks we are representing, the coat is too hard. And how do we know this to be true? Five accidental drops with five perfectly untouched results.

Technology, Intent and Intelligence

We have made it clear from the time we made a report on Ros’ Rock 1, and many times after, that any interpretation we offer in relation to possible meanings is couched in degrees of maybe, there is no certainty in trying to read this very ancient script. The path we have chosen instead is less complex and much easier to navigate. Our task is simply to decide whether all these marked rocks we are viewing were made by humans using advanced technology. To achieve that end we have assigned three benchmarks that must be satisfied unconditionally before any marked rock can be given accreditation and a number in the Ros’ Rocks series.

All of the 27 sacred Original rocks examined to this point, with much more than that sitting in the ‘reserves bench’ awaiting examination, must display indisputable evidence that it is not only unnatural, but shows clearly human intent, intelligence and technology. There has to be no doubt whatsoever that human hands were working with the intention to mark these rocks, that what was incised, marked and baked was due to an intelligent plan and that the technology responsible is incredibly advanced.

All of these rocks, and so many more, have or will be found worthy of membership into this elite group of sacred rocks, there is no question about that. They are genuine, they are Original and tell a story of a technology, intelligence and the history of an ancient Australian civilisation that was never lost and is still written into these rocks.

The next question to be answered in relation to these marked rocks has nothing to do with the meaning or means of production and everything to do with why is it that not one representative from any Government or University in this country has shown any interest in these rocks? They know of the rocks, we have made sure of that but there has been nothing in return, no phone call, nothing through emails. It seems whatever rock is found irrespective of whatever is marked, it will be ignored, not seen and no comment will be made. And we get constantly ridiculed for doing bad science?

2 comments

  • Chris McGrath

    I am not a geologist. I have enjoyed the beauty of rocks for many years.

    I love being reminded by nature that we are critters. That we are not the centre of everything on our planet. I wonder are the claims being made about these rcoks another example of humankind following our well worn anthropocentric pathway?

    These rocks are interesting and beautiful. Why do we, as humans, have a need to attribute phenomena, like the patterns, as being ” … no doubt whatever that human hands were working …”.

    Does it necessarily follow that because we have the intellectual capacity to observe and measure the patterns using criteria we have devised that these same patterns are made by an intelligence similar to ours?

    Do they necessarily have any relationship with us other than being anomalous and being on Earth?

    And if they are examples of an “intelligence” using “technology” then I will be delighted. Especially if there is a message about living in harmony with all forms on our beautiful planet.

Leave a Reply

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

Scroll Up