It's not a question of the scientific community having a 'carefully crafted applecart'. Scientific hypotheses & theories help us explain the world around us in a rational way and the best evidence that the theory holds tight is when you can use it to predict some hitherto unknown phenomenon.newcastle wrote:If you 'google' any of the Ooparts mentioned in the article you will find discussions on them to fill the rest of your days. It's not a question of the scientific community having a 'carefully crafted applecart'. Scientific hypotheses & theories help us explain the world around us in a rational way and the best evidence that the theory holds tight is when you can use it to predict some hitherto unknown phenomenon. Einstein was particularly adept at this with his work on relativity which few of his contemporaries could even understand let alone concur with. So when something is observed which appears to contradict accepted theories it's not a case "hushing it up"...but seeking some rational explanation which fits in with accepted knowledge. What's so wrong with this? We do it all the time in our daily lives.Darkstar wrote:Excellent article I have read quite a few of these over the years, seems strange that none of the archaeological or historian types on this forum have seen fit to post a rebuttal. Could it possibly be that they know the truth, yet, fail to acknowledge it? That would really upset their carefully crafted applecart.
A good example is the human/dinosaur footprints. Most....actually all...scientists in the relevant fields simply don't think the "human" prints are actually human. Annoying I know! They can no more prove that they are, in fact, made by other smaller dinosaur-like creatures than the 'evolutionary-deniers' can prove they are made by humans. But the former explanation is unremarkable whilst the latter raises all sorts of questions for which the proponents have no answer (like...where did these 'early humans' come from & where did they go to). No-one seriously doubts evolution any more....we see it going on around us and the science of genetics has shown us the mechanism by which it operates'
But if you're happy to believe in "mysteries".... "alternative histories"...."a worldwide conspiracy by the scientific community to deny the truth" ....there's no harm in it (although you may have to put up with people thinking you're a bit weird).
Really? In theory yes in practicality no. Dr west Phd (so he must be clever) along with other eminent geologists proved that the erosion on the great sphinx was caused by water namely rain, Zahi hawass banned him from working any more on the Giza plateau, because it proved the sphinx had to be over 10,000 yrs old and not built by Khufu. Please don't try to say archaeology is an exact science, it isn't. There are many examples of this kind too many to go into fully, If an artefact is found that shows they are wrong, it is either lost, ridiculed, or blatantly ignored. I DARE ANY ARCHAEOLOGIST TO PROVE ME WRONG .