Continued from Page 18
• Did Australian Aborigines Reach America First? Cranial features distinctive to Australian Aborigines are present in hundreds of skulls that have been uncovered in Central and South America, some dating back to over 11,000 years ago.
http://www.cosmosmagazine. com/news/3774/did-australian-
aborigines-reach-america-first
• Hologram Messaging Like in Star Wars Coming Soon A University of Arizona team says it has devised a system that can make a holographic display appear in another place
and update it in near real-time.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/ science-environment-11685582
• Early Humans More Advanced Than Thought Early humans were using a highly skilled stone tool sharp- ening method 75,000 years ago in Africa, more than 50,000 years earlier than previously
believed, a new study indicates.
http://www.businessweek.com/ lifestyle/content/healthday/
644930.html
• “Jurassic Park” Style Insect Trove in Amber A collection of amber deposits unearthed in northwest India has opened a spectacular window into insect life some 50 million years ago.
http://www.wired.com/wired science/2010/10/indian-amber- insects/
• Electric Current to the Brain ‘Boosts Math Ability’
Applying a tiny elec- trical current to the brain could make you better at learning math, according to Oxford University scientists.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/ health-11692799
Continued on Facing Page 20 ATLANTIS RISING • Number 85
Even mainstream scientists are beginning to question the effectiveness of the peer-review process. The Guardian news- paper in the United Kingdom reported on research in this topic in an article titled “Trial by Peers Comes Up Short” by Sophie Petit-Zeman (Guar-
dian.com.uk, 16 January 2003). Dr. Tom Jefferson of the Cochrane Collaboration Methods Group said, “Peer-review is generally assumed to be an important part of the scientific process and is used to assess and improve the quality of submissions to jour- nals as well as being an important part of the process of deciding what research is funded. But we have found little empirical evidence to support the use of peer-review as a mechanism to ensure the quality of research reporting, and there’s even more depressing evidence about its value in deciding what should be funded.”
Editors of mainstream scientific journals and their peer reviewers often function as gate- keepers for orthodoxy. Thomas E. Lee was a Canadian archaeologist. He discovered stone tools on Manitoulin Island in Lake Huron, in the province of Ontario in Canada. The objects were found in a formation over 70,000 years old. According to standard theories, there were no human beings in North America before 25,000 years ago, maximum. Therefore Lee found it impossible to get mainstream science journals to publish his findings. In the Anthropolog- ical Journal of Canada (1977, vol. 15, no. 1, p. 2), Lee wrote: “A nervous or timid editor, his senses acutely at- tuned to the smell of danger to position, security, reputation, or censure, submits copies of a suspect paper to one or two advisors whom he considers well placed to pass safe judg- ment. They read it, or perhaps only skim through it, looking for a few choice phrases that can be challenged or used against the author (their opinions were formed long in ad- vance on the basis of what came over the grapevine or was picked up in the
smoke-filled back rooms at conferences—little bits of gossip that would tell them that the writer was far-out, a maverick, or an untouchable). Then with a few cutting, unchallenged, and entirely unsupported statements, they ‘kill’ the paper.”
In 1988, George Miller, curator of the Imperial Valley College Museum in El Centro, Cali- fornia, reported that some mammoth bones bearing human cut marks were found in Cali- fornia’s Anza Borrego Desert. Scientists from the United States Geological Survey dated the bones using the uranium isotope method. They got an age of at least 300,000 years. Tests using other methods (paleomagnetic dating and dating of volcanic ash found at the site) indi- cated an age of perhaps as much as 750,000 years. The original reports came in a newspaper article (D. Graham, “Scientist Sees an Early Mark of Man,” San Diego Union, 31 October 1988), but Miller planned on publishing a scientific paper about the discoveries. While I was researching another case for my book Forbidden Archeology, I visited the San Diego Natural History Museum. There I met paleontologist Thomas Deméré. I mentioned Miller’s discovery to him. I also mentioned that Miller was planning on publishing a paper on it. Deméré said he and his colleagues had heard about that. He told me the paper would never pass peer re- view. Minds were made up in advance, before the paper was even read.
In the 1970s, geologist Virginia Steen-McIntyre and some of her colleagues were involved in dating the archaeological site of Hueyatlaco in Mexico. There, archaeologists had discov- ered stone tools and wanted to know how old they were. Steen-McIntyre and her colleagues, using several different dating methods, got an age of over 250,000 years for the site. The ar- chaeologists rejected the age because it contradicted their theories of human origins and the
Subscribe or Order Books, DVDs and Much More!
Virginia Steen-McIntyre
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84