HEAD ROCKS

dodoso please pass the Tinfoil Hat.

I VISIT AND READ A LOT

of cranks. Many modern, some so old they were cranks before cranks were even invented. I put my interests down to the ‘wotif’ syndrome. You know, the old ‘wotif this rubbish is actually real‘?

THEN I WEIGH FACT

against supposition. Lots of those about, so take your pick. All welcome—whoever controls the purse shrieks the loudest and establishes The Only Truth.

TO NOT DIGRESS

I’m fascinated by ancient stuff. Especially the Pyramids of Egypt and South America (we won’t mention the colossals of China ‘cos the Chinese are frantically hiding theirs under artificial forests); and, of course, ancient stonework that if the reports are true quite simply shouldn’t be there.

SO I INDULGE

(every man can be excused a harmless hobby, no?) by pondering enigmae put up by cranks such as Graham Hancock, Dr Schoch (geologist who re-dated the Sphinx and so embarrassed outraged The Establishment*), Bauval, Jimmy**, J A West, and oodles of others.

Now:

SOME GREAT BRAIN

looked at a few of the works the above cranks were investigating and noted that some of the markings on some of the stonework had patterns suggestive of the appearance of worked plastic stone; ie concrete or similar. One (Davidovitz) even suggested that the Giza pyramid blocks were cast in situ. To each his own, but the commonality here ‘is appearance of worked plastic stone’.

BETTER MINDS THAN MINE

have looked at the finish of some of the stoneworks (even the great Petrie was impressed) and declared that zillions of slaves, whips, and long skinny ramps aside … the precision of the emplaced stonework and associated artefacts precludes oafs with stone pounders (and/or copper chisels).

LEAVING OUT

the less than credible “little green men from beyond the stars” and keeping our problems in house:  how?

I REMEMBERED

reading Fawcett’s book, located my own copy, and had a quick blitz. Fascinating stuff, but I was delighted to quickly find the reference I was after—

PB150044.JPG

—and if you read on from there you’ll find a wee anecdote about nephew’s silver spurs eroding to diddley-squat as he hoofed through some low bushery.

It could of course be a huge giggle at my expense, no? But if true would answer a lot of questions—

finger-pointing-down-animation-gif copy

PB100004.JPG

Ooops … more words than most people like, so I’ll draw a halt here.

Enjoy~!

cerberus-2

 

*  Outraged them, yes … but they cannot refute him.

** Of ‘Bright Insight’ on u-tube. You wanna real crank? Go gettum, Tiger! But is he, though?

Advertisements

DUM’ BRUTES

dodoOR BRAVE

brutes? Been there, done that.

But not quite to that degree … unqualified … (I’m a modern)—

Screen Shot 2017-11-17 at 19.47.52.png

—and what is so impressive here is how ancient stone-age brutes could not only create immaculate (and gorgeous!) works of true art but they could do it so far underground, with nary an LED, tungsten filament or pressure lantern among the lot of ’em.

Lascaux art 1.pngBut art is a digression.

Now:

just look at the scale of the wee enterprise in the image above.

Blow it up large if you have to, then ponder tools, methods, motivations. If you mutter “WTF” please feel free to add “HTF”, which makes better sense ‘cos the ‘wot’ is already established—it’s the ‘How’ that intrigues me, leavened on occasion with an occasional ‘Why?’.  (YTF?)

wassup, Doc?.jpg

a modern, boldly going where no man has gone for many thousands of years …

ARCHAEOLOGY IS

often an ‘assumptive’ science. I.e. guesswork. Is it such a good thing?*

Further still, size is only a crude measure of the power of a brain. After all, our own brains have shrunk by 10% since the last ice age. Analysis of the H. naledi skull has provided evidence that their brains may have undergone substantial organization and specialization like the brains of our immediate ancestors did …

to read more: CLICK HERE

Artistic ability,  size of brain, lust for adventure, stupidity? Are these qualities that define us as humans? Certainly they seem uncomfortably timeless …

Screen Shot 2017-11-18 at 08.10.50.png

If the singer sets the scale … them hairless apes were pretty dam’ tall …

WHEN I DID MY OWN

cave exploring it was from curiosity. No other reason, I was young, stupid**; and no, I didn’t leave any souvenirs or cave ‘art’ …

… and I didn’t find God.

Here, kitty kitty kitty ...

Argus … you didn’t go down deep enough~!

Kismet

*  Your guess is as good as mine …

** by today’s standards

BUGGER~!

EVOLUTION …

… I really wish they’d quit monkeying around with it—

bashes-rock

As an old dog with the lame brain of a dead duck and the outlook of a disappointed cynic I just cannot keep up. Honestly …

… just when we thought it was safe to get back into the gene pool, with our immaculate pedigrees dating back via Neanderthals and such to a few tatty monkeys in Africa, some blasted egghead springs stuff like this on us—

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2153242-ancient-skull-from-china-may-rewrite-the-origins-of-our-species/

—and this (same only different)—

http://www.newsweek.com/archaeology-skull-evolution-homo-sapiens-homo-erectus-human-710973

—and I just can’t keep up. Does it all mean that books will have to be rewritten, theories rethunk, facts made de-facto and/or disenfacticated?

Will this guy get (gulp~!) … demoted?

finger-pointing-down-animation-gif copy

Screen Shot 2017-11-17 at 10.26.07.png

 

 

 

dodo

A QUICKIE

pcQUIZ

Open to all comers. Winners won’t be notified but will upon deceasement be sent hot-foot direct to Heaven. (Trust me, I have the word of The Lord on this.)

YOUR QUIZ

Just the one question, herewith below:

Q/  Is the nice chap in this image—

Screen Shot 2017-11-16 at 07.32.17.png

(a)  a genuine Public Benefactor? Or

(b)  a genuine Religious Nut, or

(c) a very very very astute* business man?

To visit source (you get more clues that way) (free) click on the nice man’s piccie above. As for answers, there’s only two correct responses but I am not going to make it easy for you until after you’ve made your own call.

cerberus-2

* It means clever. (It can also mean shrewd, sharp, crafty …)

TIME TO GET

BOOOOORINGpc

again.

First, your (not boring) quote—

=====================================================

Screen Shot 2017-11-15 at 09.25.05.png

=====================================================

—to read at source:  CLICKETH HERE 

and ponder (if you will) all possible connotations of the word “Wow~!” And now ponder the Truth uttered by one ‘Scientific Christian’. Yep, I said truth (ya wanna make something of it?).

Ol’ SC says it right there, out loud in B & W for all the world to ignore (so I’ll say it again, it’s too good to gloss over with robotic glass eyes) :

PEOPLE BELIEVE

WHAT THEY ARE TAUGHT

—and nobody has ever put it better than that. Not even me, and I’ve said it often enough too.

Sadly people don’t believe what they think — ‘cos most don’t think. They don’t know how so they just accept the words of their chosen experts. Not good.

SO HERE’S A CHALLENGE

for everybody (and this includes YOU, Bub!)

 

How can you get people to think?

 

As the Weasel (Buck) says in that Ice Age movie “C’mon Mammals, think!” …

Screen Shot 2017-11-15 at 09.44.03.png

—and it ain’t easy.

Again I offer as a starting point* the Law of Contradiction. (If it’s a bit much after your years of indoctrination, at least offer it to your kids—they’ll see at a glance what to do with it …)

Kismet

* Pretty bloody reliable starting point.

MY AMERICAN

SISTER

gave us a copy of  ‘Moana’. Very enjoyable and will become much loved but I admit that I still prefer ‘Frozen’.

Moana is based loosely around the Polynesian skills in navigation. (At school in NZ when I was a lad the fashionable paradigm was ‘hit and miss’ coupled with oodles of luck and  starvation arrivals. Sometimes.)

BUT AS I’VE

matured my current thoughts are that ‘civilisation’ has been cyclic, literally coming and going. We seem to have been high achievers and then knocked back to the stone age more than once. But as eyebrow raising as the thought may be nobody can deny that the ‘stone-age savages’ were brilliant navigators. Blown at random from island to island? Yeah … sure. Oink.

MY CURRENT HEROES

include deluded cranks like Graham Hancock, Robert Schoch, Bauval, West and others. Guys who think outside the bottle and dare to raise questions.

So right now I’m ploughing through Hapgood’s ‘Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings’ (some of which I understand). A brief clue here, one German scientist* gave it a glowing write up which my own el cheapo copy doesn’t have in it. Bugger.)

IF YOU READ ME

at all you’ll know my opinion of ‘science’ and education. Don’t get me wrong, science can revive corpses and stuff; education can create scientists and all combine to give us ‘thought’. But again I state that too often yesterday’s fact is today’s hilarious giggle.

But don’t ever misquote me: I am NOT an ‘ancient astronaut’ nutter. (Loopy, yes, but that far outside the square, not.)

HERE, HAVE A

1

 

nice book that I’m also currently re-reading.

I bought my own copy from an old bookshop in a back street in Aberdeen (the one shown is from a Google) and guess what? Yup~!

I found the reference I was looking for, about a wee bird of the Amazon, and shall soon be posting a screenshot of the page and my reasons for wanting it.

 

dodo

AND NOW TODAY’S SNIPPET

it is clear that in the 13th century, Tahitians used sophisticated navigational skills to travel the 2,500-mile distance and settle the Hawaiian Islands. Archaeological and linguistic evidence shows that navigators from Tahiti’s neighbor islands the Marquesas had settled the islands even earlier. Skepticism over the validity of those navigational methods has long muddied the waters. A most notable naysayer was ethnologist Thor Heyerdahl whose 1947 Kon Tiki raft expedition advanced the drift idea that colonization occurred only as vessels simply traveled on the tides. But the 1976 voyage of the Hōkūleʻa—guided by Micronesian navigator Pius “Mau” Piailug—resolved the debate. Piailug demonstrated his profound skill for reading the night sky and the ocean swells and safely guided the massive ocean-going canoe from Hawaii to Tahiti.

Read more:  CLICK HERE 

And as wonderful as ol’ Thor was, perhaps he goofed. (The bugger should’ve read Hapgood), Now get thee to the ref and have a read.

And then go watch Moana, if only to see how a foxy wee minx can kick godly butt.

Screen Shot 2017-11-13 at 10.42.21.png

 

finger-pointing-down-animation-gif copy

Kismet

* A guy who played around with atoms and things (name of Einstein).

 

TITANIC

MOVIE …

no, not that one. The earlier one, vintage 1958

p1885_p_v8_aa.jpg

—which Spouse and I have just watched thanks to the modern miracle that is the Dvd. A bit dated now (aaaah, black and white—we had real movies in those days!) but still a trifle unsettling.

Spouse always has problems with me at the end and as much as I try to be placid, gentle, forgiving, and a good christian I am torn between two polar opposite emotions.

On the one hand I am in the ‘live and let live’ camp. Provided they do harm to neither me nor mine I can tolerate human foibles to a remarkable degree. I’m kinda sweet like that. But—

I cannot stand sanctimonious craptrap and/or confidence tricksters making a bloody good living out of people’s fears, injuries, bereavements and other petty problems.

TOWARDS THE END

of the movie survivors of a busy night are gathered in a large room aboard the rescue ship that got there a wee bit too late to save some fifteen hundred souls from an absolutely torturous death—

—and there’s a sanctimonious bastard priest ‘earning’ a foul/filthy living by standing before them and excreting endless paeans of praise to the Great God Almighty … you know, the Holy Divinity of unbounded compassion, love, and infinite mercy (I think he mentioned grace too).

SPOUSE

won’t let me ask simple questions ‘cos she’s heard ’em all before—

(a) when that ship was launched, did God not know that it was going to run into the iceberg that as Creator of all existence HE alone had set in motion—

(b) having planned it all even before The Creation? Or—

(c) did the omniscient Lord of infinite wisdom not know? And could the omnipotent not intervene to save at least some of the wee children who died?

BUT WAIT

it could get better—any genuine Christian reading this should (around about … now) bleat to the effect that He did; not all of the kids aboard were drowned or frozen to death so who saved the survivors, hey?

It’s really all too tough for an old primate like me.

I leave such thoughts to the more clever among us who can resolve contradictions into acceptable polar opposites…

bashes-rock