“Marked Rock – Case Closed, the “Mystery” is Officially Solved: ”Nothing to do with Aboriginal (sic) People.”

“Marked Rock – Case Closed, the “Mystery” is Officially Solved: “Nothing to do with Aboriginal (sic) People.”

By Steven & Evan Strong

Of course the claim we are about to make can never be proven and is certainly a subjective call, and one most experts would readily dispute. We believe that Ros’ rock will dramatically reconfigure the foundation stone upon which Australian history is based. However, the academics from the Australian Museum are not so enamoured by our conclusions and see a much simpler and far more comfortable explanation.

Not long after Ros’ rock and the Egyptian tablet were premiered in a public presentation on October 1, Ros received a phone call from a resident “academic” speaking on behalf of the Australian Museum. That they even rang her was an interesting opening gambit, as her last name, place of residence or phone number was never written or shared in any media outlet. The representative from the Australian Museum made contact with Ros two weeks after I had rang and also personally approached the museum explaining I was acting on behalf of others and was the only point of contact. What confirmed that my suspicions something a touch devious was afoot, was that Tessa Corkill asked Ros who was the present holder of the rock.

Her response, that the rock is now with us, was met with a sigh and followed up by a change in tactics in order to re-establish authority. Tessa Corkill went to great lengths to denigrate our credentials when reminding Ros of the two cardinal academic sins of which we stand accused, in that we were “not academics,” and in what only compounded our unworthiness, “they believe in the Pleiades.”

Thus clearing away all the scholarly debris, it was time for the officially anointed expert to issue an each-way proclamation. According to the fact-sheet she was reading from, this rock is an African import dropped in the bush before World War 1 by an African tourist or an Australian who had recently been sight-seeing in Africa. Either way one of them was strolling through the bush near Kariong with rock in hand a hundred years ago and accidentally dropped it then walked off. Believe it or not it now gets trickier and even more convoluted, Academic Corkill claims that over the last 100 years over one metre of sandstone eroded and was directly deposited above the rock. She knows nothing of the site from which this rock was extracted, and if she did she would readily concede that this is a geological impossibility and a claim no geologist, not even a 101 student, would propose in any paper or sensible conversation.

Until this point apart from making ridiculous statements on the phone, no harm was done and what she said could be dismissed as obviously ridiculous and simply ignored with a wry smile and shrug of the shoulders. But it gets decidedly worse as our academic began to expand upon her fictional musings on a rock that she has not held and inspected at length or made any enquiries about the researchers who have written five articles. She told Ros that she would be officially informing the Gosford City Council that this engraved rock has nothing to do with Australia, that it “comes from overseas” and our research and sensational findings should be ignored post-haste. Our five papers have the support and contributions of five academics, two with PhDs and another an ex-professor with expertise in geology (and whose reaction, after over an hour holding the rock, will be discussed in this article), yet none of that was referenced or acknowledged. No inspection or consultation was needed in Tessa Corkill’s case, but as unforgivable a dereliction in academic duties her actions and words were, she then stepped over the breach into something that many could suggest reeks of patronising racism.

Corkill then made a disturbing statement when on the phone to Ros, who confided toin me that she found what was said next so offensive and “racist” she was prepared “to go to court-take a lie-detector test.” In Corkill’s opinion, this rock has “nothing to do with Aboriginal (sic) people.” End of story, she did not offer the name of one Original person who endorsed that view, as there were none. It was an off the cuff remark meant to quell Ros’ objections, but it also went a long way towards revealing some underlying motives and obstacles. To make such an outrageous denial of the truth and origin, that this amazing artefact found beneath the surface of Darkinooong land, which obviously was here well before the British Invasion Fleet dropped anchor, is an import is gob-smacking arrogance. To present such an open-ended statement and behalf on a people who you do not represent can only be done after extensive consultation with Original Elders and Custodians versed in the Old Ways, what happened here is offensive to Original protocol and sensibilities and a public apology should be made forthwith.

So there we have it, now that we have been cavalierly dismissed as non-academic Pleiadian propagandists, all that is left on the negotiating table is the official truth as delivered by the appointed academic. Considering that until the late 1940’s Australia was subject to the White Australia Policy, and that particularly applied to all races of a darker complexion of which Africa has a major contributor, the mere notion of a pre-WW1 African tourist casually wandering through the bush near Bambara with such a heavy rock in hand is ridiculous. Why would he bring the rock into bush, and why take it from Africa? How did he manage to sneak into Australia, and being so obviously of the most unacceptable colour and banned from entry, surely he would have been seen before stepping off the boat? The rock weighs over a kilogram and if it was dropped on his foot bones would break, and if not a solid thump on the sandstone floor would be heard, is he both deaf and African?

There are too many unanswered questions wrapped around a proposal that falls short on every level bar one, they have a back-up theory, a second offering just in case the first is found wanting. They simply reverse the geography, parameters and players and remain faithful to the scenes concocted for their first piece of fiction. In Act 2, Scene 1, an Australian tourist went across to Africa pre-WW1 and picked up the rock while holidaying, then brought it back to Australia and kept it in hand while walking through the same bush and dropped it on the ground, leaving none the wiser. Despite the real fact that there was no surge in tourism from Australia to Africa before the first World War, and that the very few that did venture forth were primarily interested in shooting innocent wildlife, and even less of the few had any interest in geology, this is the approved second and final verdict on the rock’s history.

We will make no further comment on this rather insulting response, it is as if they couldn’t even be bothered making up a plausible lie and assumed that any old rubbish will suffice, as long as it is delivered by a suitably qualified “academic.” But sadly the officials are locked into a series of fictional replies. The “academic” openly conceded the technology evident is too sophisticated and therefore came under the jurisdiction of another continent, and that was her base-line. However, once insisting such technical proficiency was never present in this country before Cook, they are wrong and will never get close to the truth and must continue championing tales of an increasingly inferior quality. The reality is that all of these denials are background noise and inconsequential, despite the intransigence the Original truths will continue to be revealed.

The Rock has been Identified

The rock is most certainly not local to the area, nor is it from elsewhere in the Universe, it is actually a very hard river chert. The photographs taken were a touch deceptive, in that it heightened the colour to such an extent that what seemed to be black was actually brown, and it really isn’t even a dark brown chocolate, but more like a milk chocolate. What was interesting is that the very first suggestion Professor X tendered was river chert, and the same verdict as to the make of this rock was given within seconds of sighting and holding the rock.
I do remember some of our readers were getting frustrated that we would not be more definite in declaring a geology, but we consistently made the point that we do not have the expertise to be that definite and until an on-site inspection by a geologist of stature took place, we were not going to budge from our fluctuating ‘maybe stance.’

Too many Questions

Professor X spent nearly all our time together with the rock in his hand. It never left him for over an hour. His examination and wonder never ceased, there were things he could see that did not fit into any explanation. This rock is, as he remarked on many occasions, a “mystery.”

 

In total there were five features discussed that held our attention and triggered questions rarely considered in polite academic circles. The most prominent being the 44 lines engraved into the three faces of the rock. Professor X was adamant that if we went to the closest hardware store and bought a chisel with a steel blade, it would not be able to leave any mark on this rock. If a blade/chisel of incredible delicacy and strength was used, three different widths of incision can be seen. On each face the general direction of engravings/cuts are not coordinated when compared to the other sides. That lack of a commonality in alignment convinced John that there is no chance this is due to natural agents.

In what really had our adviser animated was his discovery of one much fainter line which he claimed was not only much older and thus this rock was ‘worked’ twice. What only added to the intrigue was the evidence of polishing on not only the younger, but older cut. Professor X gave no date, he wouldn’t be that bold yet, but we suspect a solid entry in the five figure column is a bare minimum date.

What caught us unawares and a touch embarrassed for not seeing what was literally there right in front of our eyes, what was at some time in the past a hole or depression in this rock was packed with an aggregate of foreign minerals/rocks, then secured back into the rock. Once pointed out, it was obvious that this spherical inset (6mmx4mm) has a much greyer tinge, and that the lip of the original rock can still be felt, along with the gentle depression that sits below the surrounding level of the original rock. Now highlighted, we can see why our guide was so animated. To pack any substance into a hole is not a great feat nor a technological anomaly, but to find a way to ensure it would adhere in perpetuity to one of the hardest rocks available is something else again, and a fact and exotic feature Professor X returned to throughout our meeting.

The next observation made was ours, it would be impossible not to notice that a portion of the right hand-side of Side 3 is missing. The triangular section of rock which we estimate 7mms wide, 10 mm high and 35 mm long, has been removed. The resulting slope is not smooth and I can identify what seems to be seven separate impact/percussion points, six on the top row and the seventh below the sixth making that area the widest part of what was chiselled off the rock. We are convinced that the chisel was applied from left to right, and this contribution only expands the ancient tool kit. The larger blade was not meant to inscribe and create fine points of intersection, but smash and remove. The surface is bumpy and each impact mark is consistent in dimensions, clear and distinct and there was no attempt made to smooth the surface, or is there evidence of any engraving or pecking. All we can deduce is that this refashioning, thus creating a fifth artificial side, was of importance in passing on another message hidden within the angles, shapes and interface created.

It is for this reason, and many others already discussed, such is the complexity of factors, synchronicity of alignments and delicacy of cut, we are very disposed towards Richard and Judith Gabriel’s belief there is a micro-message that is also part of a subtle multi-layered narrative/map/ prophecy and esoteric riddle. In that mystical vein, the last point discussed was probably the one that interested Professor X the least. He thought it was possible this was done, but did not seem to place much importance upon why or what.

With that section of rock removed it creates a perfect grip, ready-made, the thumb sits at the top pointing in the same direction as the three open vertical lines on Side 3. Side 1 sits in the palm and the third finger also has a slight depression to rest upon. So perfect is the balance manufactured with thumb and third finger positioned, the other three fingers can pull away and it makes no difference and adds no discomfort. We believe that this is too deliberate to be accidental and feel it was deliberately made to be held in the right hand with the placement prescribed by the depressions fashioned into the rock. But for what purpose?

It seems to have been made to be pointed, but which side up, or is it both? When you place Side 3 in the palm another depression, which again appears artificial, is the most comfortable place to rest the thumb, and once again another small channel is set at the best angle to accommodate the third finger. With the same balance and digits in attendance, and another three lines from Side 1 pointing in the same direction as the first outstretched finger, the balance feels exactly the same. As before, the other three fingers serve no apparent functional purpose and bear no weight. Both sides, same grip, and in each case we can see evidence that the positioning of the fingers and thumb was prescribed by the ancients. If the way this sacred rock was held was of such importance, what was coming in and going out? Is this yet another dimension to this rock that is yet to be understood?

And that was the upshot of Professor’ X’s inspection in hand, he resolved one uncertainty in relation to the classification of the rock, but there are so many questions yet to be answered. He added to the tally of areas to research and openly conceded that this was indeed the genuine article. What we are yet to understand is what this means, it is a “mystery.” That word was used by our guide in geology more than once, and we do remember that towards the end of our meeting he shared with us an account of the paper he wrote when sitting for his PhD.

Two Mysteries Still unsolved

This certainly was an unexpected tale of a dichotomy in ancient species taxonomy of which we knew nothing. He wrote a paper on an organism that could not be satisfactorily categorised, it was either a plant or an animal and our adviser wrote his paper advocating his understanding that it was a plant. He confided with us that now he is not so sure, but it was a mystery then and still is. So too, he added in concluding his anecdote, is the rock he now held the equal in mystery to the enigmatic topic of his paper that gained him his doctorate.

As our meeting came to a close Professor X put on his university ‘face’ and ‘hat’ and stared directly at Evan, who was taking notes of our conversation and advice given. His parting comments were the slowest delivered and he watched as Evan recorded every word as spoken, making it very clear that this was his summation of events.

“The rock is not ironstone. This rock came from a river and is a well-polished slightly jointed block hard sedimentary rock. The in-filling took place sometime after and I have no idea how the marks were made.”

There are so many unknowns, outside identifying the rock as being chert nothing is certain. The engravings on the three faces are definitely linked, as to whether they connect into one large map as two of the researchers in our group suspect, or is a combination of map and narrative as we suggest is yet to be determined. Whether it is a map with applications on Earth or elsewhere is another of the unknowns. Whatever or if ever there is an agreed interpretation, there is so much more to unravel. How it was done, and with the assistance of what type of technology is still a long way off, but amongst all the questions yet to be resolved one stands as first among equals. Why is it that officials and academics are absent through apathy? They know the engraved rock exists, we made sure of that by approaching government and private media outlets, a university in Sydney, and of course, the only organisation that did respond on the sly, the Australian Museum.

The answer to this inertia, the jaded defence of the easiest and most reassuring routes is merely par for the course. Our last observation in this article will certainly gain no converts within the many who refuse to look or engage, but it was observed by others who also are not “academics” when the rock was first shown to the public and deserves consideration. We have already mentioned the presence of two sets of artificial depressions which we feel were formed so that the rock can be held in a prescribed way. As asked earlier in this article, what purpose could this holding-pattern serve?

A definitive response is well beyond our abilities, but there are clues and indications. There is quite a deal of talk about the reactions of individuals to this rock that sit well outside the realms of modern-day science and falls into the embrace of what is mistakenly called the ‘paranormal.’ The mere mention of events and reactions deposited in the ‘twilight zone’ of mainstream science, for many is the ultimate condemnation. Quite simply, if it is outside the province of test tube, microscope or laboratory, then whatever is alleged will never earn the ‘official’ tick of approval.

But in this case and artefact new rules are already at play, so why not continue down the same unfamiliar path and embrace the mystical elements of this rock and see what eventuates? The rock is of great spiritual and cultural significance to the Original people, and there are messages engraved into the surface of the rock, and then there is what lays within. From this esoteric vantage point we intend to investigate two areas, one of which we can already answer.

Does this rock contain or relay an energy/power/force? Yes! What is this energy? We have no idea, but with more time and guidance …