Guest LarryP Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 Issue #2 of Denova or UFO Monthly? Cause UFO's are pure fantasy, Darrell?
Guest Urkelbot Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 (edited) Use Google-earth and start with the following coordinates: Carolina -- 25 55' 53.28" S / 30 16' 13.13" EBadplaas -- 25 47' 33.45" S / 30 40' 38.76" EWaterval -- 25 38' 07.82" S / 30 21' 18.79" EMachadodorp -- 25 39' 22.42" S / 30 17' 03.25" E Then perform a low flying search. Again this area has been studied by real archaeologists for decades. They weren't some discovery no one had seen before. The 200,000 year old ruins are most likely abandoned settlements 500 or so years old. Google "aerial view cattle kraal" looks surprisingly similar to Tellingers ancient alien city. http://www.archaeologysa.co.za/images/uploads/vol_24_no_2_1.pdf journalCode=cast20"]http://www.archaeologysa.co.za/images/uploads/vol_24_no_2_1.pdfhttp://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00020184.2010.499199?journalCode=cast20[/url] http://www.academia.edu/978698/The_Archaeology_of_Mpumalanga Edited February 13, 2014 by Urkelbot
Oonjerah Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 Book: The Enigma of Cranial Deformation: Elongated Skulls of the Ancients Feb 2012 by David Hatcher Childress & Brien Foerster (BTW, Foerster did mention that Dr. Ketchum is the 2nd geneticist on their project.) Education: B. Foerster: BS, U of Victoria, Canada; D. H. Childress attended U of Montana; dropped out to persue interests in archaeology. Biography: The Life and Writings of Julio C. Tello: America's First Indigenous Archaeologist, 2009, by Richard L. Burger. Earlier, back in Peru ... Julio César Tello (April 11, 1880 – June 3, 1947) was a Peruvian archaeologist. Tello is considered the "father of Peruvian archeology" and was America's first indigenous archaeologist. He made the major discoveries of the prehistoric Paracas culture and founded a national museum of archeology. Attended the National University of San Marcos in Peru in 1909, BS in medicine. While still a student, Tello studied the practice of trepanation among natives of HuarochirÃ, amassing a very large collection of skulls. Harvard U, USA, 1911, degree in anthropology; studied archae- ology, Congress of Americanists in England. Is said to be the Father of Peruvian archaeology. ... wiki: "He was the first in Peru to practice a scientific method of archeological excavation, to preserve stratigraphy and elements to establish dating and context. In 1928 the team began to remove the mummies and textiles for safekeeping. His findings and interpretations have been the most significant source of information about the Paracas culture, which dates to 750 BCE – 100 CE." Oonj proposes: If the Paracas skulls had been very different, mutated or inhuman, rather than intentionally deformed, it is likey that Tello would have spotted it.
Guest Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 (edited) There are no results unless they can map them and present them in a meaningful way, for example: where — - black is human - blue is Neandertal - green is Denisovan - red is chimp. Edited February 13, 2014 by Pteronarcyd
southernyahoo Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 Book: The Enigma of Cranial Deformation: Elongated Skulls of the Ancients Feb 2012 by David Hatcher Childress & Brien Foerster (BTW, Foerster did mention that Dr. Ketchum is the 2nd geneticist on their project.) Education: B. Foerster: BS, U of Victoria, Canada; D. H. Childress attended U of Montana; dropped out to persue interests in archaeology. Biography: The Life and Writings of Julio C. Tello: America's First Indigenous Archaeologist, 2009, by Richard L. Burger. Earlier, back in Peru ... Julio César Tello (April 11, 1880 – June 3, 1947) was a Peruvian archaeologist. Tello is considered the "father of Peruvian archeology" and was America's first indigenous archaeologist. He made the major discoveries of the prehistoric Paracas culture and founded a national museum of archeology. Attended the National University of San Marcos in Peru in 1909, BS in medicine. While still a student, Tello studied the practice of trepanation among natives of HuarochirÃ, amassing a very large collection of skulls. Harvard U, USA, 1911, degree in anthropology; studied archae- ology, Congress of Americanists in England. Is said to be the Father of Peruvian archaeology. ... wiki: "He was the first in Peru to practice a scientific method of archeological excavation, to preserve stratigraphy and elements to establish dating and context. In 1928 the team began to remove the mummies and textiles for safekeeping. His findings and interpretations have been the most significant source of information about the Paracas culture, which dates to 750 BCE – 100 CE." Oonj proposes: If the Paracas skulls had been very different, mutated or inhuman, rather than intentionally deformed, it is likey that Tello would have spotted it. I would look for documentation of anyone who has actually studied the same elongated skulls and published what they derived from them. Dna analysis would be preferable.
Guest Darrell Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 Cause UFO's are pure fantasy, Darrell? Yes.
Guest JiggyPotamus Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 I am quite disappointed in some of you. How can you be dismissing this already just because Ketchum is involved? Science speaks for itself, and personal biases are quickly recognized if they exist, as the evidence and methodology is what is important, leading to a specific conclusion. This happened with her DNA study, which I still say was unfairly dismissed by many individuals simply because they couldn't understand the methodology in some instances, and it appears that there are going to be such claims again. Just like the DNA study, there were other scientists who are behind this. I suppose they are just incompetent as well, and should therefore not be given a chance of a fair analysis. Maybe they believe the earth is flat. That was a horrible attempt at sarcasm by the way. But seriously, there appears to be "something" to these findings, just like there was "something" in the DNA study. I am not saying that it should all be believed, because the evidence doesn't warrant such action; but what I am saying is that it should be given a proper analysis before it is dismissed. I especially loved how there were actual scientists dismissing the DNA study before they had even read it. I just don't want to see similar things occurring with this. But given that this doesn't really have anything to do with bigfoot, that I know of at least, perhaps people won't be as quick to dismiss everything without probable cause. I have only done a preliminary look in to what is going on with this case, but I will say that it is intriguing, and it has the potential to fill in some major gaps. And who knows, we might be pleasantly surprised by what the evidence suggests.
Guest Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 "Probably the same guy that saw bleu cheese and thought 'hey, it's just a little bit of mold, I bet that tastes good!" Hey that stuff isn't bad in small bites while sipping on a strong hop forward ale...just sayin
Guest Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 I don't really have an opinion of this as yet, But in this case, anyway, there should be plenty of sample left and study for any one who wishes to duplicate or refute these findings by testing them theirselves. Which is what someone should do I think. If their are criiques by qualified scientists, the material should be there to refute the findings. Of course, those testing would have to want to get involved in the issue to begin with. But if scientists blow it off as silliness they should put their money and reputations where their mouths are.
Guest DWA Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 ^^^^Yep. If you go blowing off about any aspect of this topic, and my review of the evidence strongly indicates that you are blowing off out of ignorance, I stop listening to you. On this topic, I have most scientists on Ignore.
JDL Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 There are no results unless they can map them and present them in a meaningful way, for example: where — - black is human - blue is Neandertal - green is Denisovan - red is chimp. Pteronarcyd, I believe the interpretation of this data to be flawed. Clearly black represents turtle. 2
Guest Llawgoch Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 ^^^^Yep. If you go blowing off about any aspect of this topic, and my review of the evidence strongly indicates that you are blowing off out of ignorance, I stop listening to you. On this topic, I have most scientists on Ignore. Instead of ignoring and not listening to everyone who disagrees with you, why not put forward what you think are the best bits of evidence on this topic. Then find out why people disagree with you about them. Just the one or two that you find most convincing. 1
Guest DWA Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 (edited) ^^^Oh, stop describing what you're doing as what I'm doing! I have been twiddling my thumbs 46 YEARS NOW! waiting for a scientist skeptical about this topic to give me an opinion as to what the evidence represents that the garbageman couldn't give me (and produce as much evidence). Until it's forthcoming...[ignore] For one thing and only one: that continual canard "give me one or two or five bits of evidence that you find convincing." THAT IS NOT HOW SCIENCE WORKS! You aren't one, right? Science works on frequency and coherence. The Patterson/Gimlin film is probably a sasquatch. 46 years of continual amassment of evidence - with nothing pointing away from authenticity - says so. That massive pile of evidence that the mainstream isn't addressing backs Patty pretty much 100%. Giving requested little bits and pieces to someone who constantly confuses evidence and proof gets the same tired old response: that isn't proof. Which is numbingly irrelevant. Edited February 13, 2014 by DWA
chelefoot Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 Geez yesterday I checked this thread out and thought wow this is an amazing discovery. Now I find out Ms. Ketchum is involved, bummer. Ketchum was sent some stuff to test but has not finished yet. You know she's famous for that. She and Brien have confirmed that she is not the one who did the testing that got the results that we are discusssing.
Cotter Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 ^Thank you for the clarification Chele.I recall immediately after the BF DNA debacle, on her FB page, she said something along the lines of leaving BF behind and moving on to the Peruvian skulls. Do we have a name yet of the organization that did the testing?
Recommended Posts