The Doheny pictographs

The Doheny pictographs are a small but intriguing group of Native American rock paintings located in San Juan Capistrano, in southern California. They are sometimes referred to as the Doheny State Beach pictographs because of their proximity to Doheny State Beach. They are generally attributed to the Acjachemen (Juaneño) people, the Indigenous inhabitants of this region prior to Spanish colonization. The nearby Mission San Juan Capistrano, founded in 1776, was built within traditional Acjachemen territory.

The paintings are found on sandstone rock surfaces and include geometric motifs—lines, grids, and possibly anthropomorphic or symbolic forms. The pigments were probably made from mineral-based paints (such as red ochre/hematite). Their exact age is uncertain, but they are pre-contact (i.e., created before sustained Spanish presence in the late 18th century). Like many rock art sites in southern California, their purpose is debated. They may have had ceremonial or ritual use, be some kind of vision quest imagery, they presumably involve some kind of territorial or cosmological symbolism. Possibly they could have served as markers associated with trade routes or seasonal camps. So far, though, no definitive interpretation exists specifically for the Doheny site.

One of the Doheny pictographs is often described in popular accounts as looking like a “dinosaur”, it is a figure with an elongated body and projecting forms that some viewers interpret as resembling a long-necked reptile or even something like a brontosaurus. That resemblance has occasionally been used in fringe or creationist arguments to suggest humans and dinosaurs coexisted. The figure, however, fits within the broader southern California rock art tradition attributed to the Acjachemen (Juaneño) and neighboring groups. Many figures are abstract, zoomorphic, or composite forms that don’t map neatly onto modern biological categories. This rock art often uses stylization, exaggeration, or symbolic distortion. What looks like a long neck or tail to a modern viewer may represent something entirely different (e.g., a mythic being, a bird, a quadruped, or a geometric/ceremonial motif). It seems more likely that the figure was a stylized animal (possibly deer, coyote, or other local fauna), or a mythic or supernatural being, or some symbolic/ritual image whose meaning is now lost. There’s no professional archaeological support for a literal dinosaur interpretation.

Preservation aspects.
The pictographs are fragile and have already suffered from natural weathering (sandstone erosion), sadly - vandalism, and also urban development pressure. As a result, access is sometimes restricted, and their exact location is not widely publicized to protect them.
See: The Oakland Museum page: "The Doheny Scientific Expedition to the Hava Supai Canyon, Northern Arizona, October and November 1924". The expedition was led by Samuel Hubbard (Honorary Curator of Archaeology of the Oakland Museum) and Charles Gilmore (Curator of Vertebrate Paleontology, United States Rational Museum).

The Granby Stone

the carved stone

The Granby Stone is a non-authenticated artefact, often associated with out-of-place artifact (OOPArt) collections. It features engraved images that appear to depict dinosaurs alongside human-like figures or elephants. Found in Granby, Colorado, it is sometimes cited in discussions questioning established timelines of human and dinosaur coexistence, though it is not recognized by mainstream archaeology. The discovery of a ‘stone idol’ found at Granby, Colorado is described on pp 36-7 of Hubbard’s 1925 report on The Doheny Scientific Expedition to the Hava Supai Canyon, Northern Arizona, October and November, 1924, published by the Oakland Museum, of Oakland, CA. Reportedly, a Mr. Jordan was excavating for a garage or a cellar and uncovered this stone at a depth of 12 feet. He found many utensils, etc., in the same place, thus giving the presumption of a settlement. The stone is said to be an exceedingly hard green material, and like nothing ever known of in the neighborhood, suggesting that it may have been brought from a distance. The stone features carvings that critics suggest represent Apatosaurus or Diplodocus, often with an accompanying elephant-like figure.

The Granby Stone is generally considered modern or a hoax by scientists, rather than an ancient artefact. The object is now lost, but the hunt for it is said to have recently turned up new leads, pointing amateur investigators north to Minneapolis and the University of Minnesota's Anthropology Department.

There is some confusion, the object is sometimes linked to another find a "Granby Runestone" in Sweden, which is a legitimate 11th-century Viking-era artifact, but this is distinct from the, often called, "Granby Stone".

You can buy a replica on eBay, and this is where the photo used here is from.

The Rise and Fall of the South/Central American Spoof Artefacts

(a) The Crespi Collection The Father Carlo Crespi collection in Cuenca, Ecuador, is unique because it involved a mix of genuine artefacts, modern brass items, and bizarre gold-plated sheets. The Collection Begins (1923–1960s): Father Crespi, a Salesian monk, began receiving objects from local indigenous people (the Shuar) as gifts or in exchange for charity starting in 1923.
The Main Period (1960s–1982): The collection reached its peak in the 60s and 70s, filling several rooms of the Maria Auxiliadora Church. It gained global fame after Erich von Däniken visited in the early 70s. Unlike the other hoaxes, many of these items were modern brass plumbing fixtures or copper sheets etched by locals who knew the priest would give them money for "relics."
Current Status: After Crespi’s death in 1982, the collection was largely dispersed. Most of the "precious" metal sheets vanished or were identified as modern scrap metal, though the Central Bank of Ecuador purchased the genuine archaeological ceramic pieces. Today, the collection no longer exists as a singular entity. No new "finds" are reported.

(b) The Acámbaro Figures
The Main Period (1944–1952): Unlike the Ica stones, which spanned decades, the Acámbaro figures had a very concentrated "production" window. Within just eight years, Waldemar Julsrud amassed his entire collection of 32,000 pieces.
Current Status: Production largely stopped after Julsrud died in 1964 and the financial incentive (the 1-peso reward) vanished. The collection is now housed in the Waldemar Julsrud Museum in Acámbaro. New "finds" are extremely rare because the archaeological community has long since dismissed the site.

(c) The Ica Stones
The Ica stones follow a timeline of gradual discovery followed by an explosion of "finds" once a wealthy market was established.
Early Origins (Pre-1960s): Small numbers of stones with simple geometric designs were found in the Ocucaje region. Architect Santiago Agurto Calvo collected several hundred in the early 1960s, but these did not feature the controversial dinosaur imagery.
The Main Collection Period (1966–1970s): The "modern" era began in 1966 when Dr. Javier Cabrera Darquea received his first stone. Between 1966 and the late 1970s, the collection grew exponentially to over 11,000 pieces. This was the "Golden Age" of the hoax, fueled by Cabrera's willingness to buy any stone brought to him by farmers like Basilio Uschuya.
The Decline and "Discovery" Today: Following the 1977 BBC exposé and Uschuya’s confession, the international scientific community has moved on. However, the stones are still being "found" or produced today. Tourists in Ica can still buy "authentic" stones in local markets, and Cabrera’s family continues to maintain a private museum, keeping the legend alive for alternative-history enthusiasts.

(d) The Jalisco Stones (Ojuelos de Jalisco)
The Ojuelos stones from Jalisco appeared later and often echo themes similar to Ica: dinosaurs, advanced civilizations, extraterrestrials.The Early Origins (1940s – 1960s). While many claim the stones were found centuries ago, the documented "modern" history begins roughly in the mid-20th century. Small, unusual carved stones began appearing in the hands of local farmers and residents in the municipality of Ojuelos, Jalisco. These early pieces were often described as small pendants or figurines. The initial "finds" were attributed to locals digging for various reasons or finding them washed out of hillsides after heavy rains.
The collection of these stones transitioned from a local hobby to an international phenomenon in the early 21st century. The rise of the internet and "Ancient Alien" theories brought global attention to Ojuelos. Between 2010 and 2017, thousands of pieces were "discovered." Families in the area began presenting massive collections, claiming they were found in secret caves or buried caches in the hills.
In 2012, a group of researchers and enthusiasts formed a foundation to promote the stones as genuine evidence of extraterrestrial contact with ancient Mexican cultures, which catalyzed a surge in both collecting and tourism.
More recently, the trade has evolved into a sophisticated cottage industry. Many of the carvers are highly skilled, using traditional stone-working techniques to create the "weathered" look that buyers expect. The trade has now moved from the dusty streets of Ojuelos to Facebook Groups, eBay, and Etsy. You can easily find "authentic" Ojuelos stones for sale today, ranging from $50 to several thousand dollars.
The Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia (INAH), Mexico’s official archaeological body, does not recognize these stones as authentic antiquities.

There is a Mundane Reason Why These Look the Same

Another day, another 'mystery':

No, I would just call it gullibility and superficiality. The one on the left is an unprovenanced object from the Crespi collection of fakes. Which could easily be checked before posting sensationalising and attention-attracting clickbait on social media.

Ummm...

This is now doing the rounds.

 

“Speed of light: 299,792,458 m/s. Coordinates of the Great Pyramid of Giza: 29.9792458°N” and not 29°58'44.29"N as Google Earth has it? How can you have "97 minutes"? Did the ancient Egyptians measure in metres per second? Who wrote this?

(Reddit, 2022: orthonut20 r/interestingasfuck 4y ago " What else did they know that is being hidden from us?")

However, as somebody has pointed out, this whole issue has been dealt with before, including by Leo Benedictus 31 March 2020, "The Great Pyramid’s location isn’t as spooky as this post makes out".

"Ancient Aliens" Crisis?

 

Recent reports and schedule changes indicate that the TV series Ancient Aliens has faced an unexpected mid-season disruption in February 2026. The History Channel has inexcplicably pulled new "Ancient Aliens" episodes from its schedule four weeks into the new season. After the premiere of Season 22 on January 15, 2026, the History Channel aired four consecutive new episodes. However, the planned fifth episode, "UFO Hot Spots," which was widely scheduled for February 12, appears in several listings to have been pulled or replaced without explanation, leaving a gap in the expected 2026 broadcast cycle. The show's talking heads have also mostly gone silent on social media. A significant factor contributing to the "silence" and potential production pause is the death of Erich von Däniken on January 10, 2026. As a cornerstone of the Ancient Astronaut theory and a frequent series lead, his passing may have necessitated a re-evaluation of the current season's production and promotional schedule.

Although the sales of books in the "ancient aliens" genre have declined in recent decades, being eclipsed by ideas of authors such as Graham Hancock, the TV version (first broadcast in 2010) is still doing well. Airing on the History Channel, the series averaged over two million viewers per episode at its peak in 2010-2. Even in later seasons, it remained one of the network’s top-performing programs, frequently dominating Friday night cable ratings. The show is in fact currently the third most popular program on the History Channel. Its popularity has extended beyond television: the show spawned “AlienCon,” a large touring convention that attracts thousands of attendees, demonstrating that its fanbase is not only active but willing to invest financially in live events and merchandise. The program also has a substantial international reach. Broadcast in more than 150 countries, it has found particularly enthusiastic audiences in parts of Latin America and Southeast Asia, where narratives of ancient mystery can intersect with post-colonial critiques of traditional Western archaeology.

The enduring popularity of Ancient Aliens is not necessarily evidence that most viewers fully accept its central claims. Rather, its appeal may lie in its ability to cultivate speculative, escapist, and fantasy-driven modes of thinking. The program operates through a “what if?” dynamic, framing its assertions as open questions rather than definitive statements. By repeatedly asking, “Is it possible?”, the show sidesteps the burden of proof and positions itself less as a scientific argument than as a form of imaginative entertainment. It functions as a kind of “mystery box” series, continually promising hidden knowledge just out of reach and inviting viewers to participate in the act of conjecture.

Its structure also makes it highly accessible. The format, with familiar recurring experts, dramatic narration, rapid editing, and the reinterpretation of familiar archaeological sites, creates a sense of continuity and narrative familiarity. Viewers do not need specialized knowledge to follow the arguments; the show flattens complex historical debates into visually compelling, easily digestible segments. The repetition of key themes across episodes reinforces a coherent alternative worldview, giving audiences the feeling of gradually uncovering a grand, interconnected secret history.

Practical considerations further explain its longevity. Compared to scripted dramas, a talking-head documentary format is relatively inexpensive to produce. Archival footage, location shots, and studio interviews can be reused across seasons, and the material has an almost unlimited shelf life in syndication and streaming. For the History Channel, this makes the series a low-risk, high-return investment. The series reliably fills programming slots and manages to maintain a dedicated global audience.

Part of the explanation for the show’s broader decline appears to lie in a clear demographic shift. While it continues to attract viewers, ratings figures show that it currently struggles significantly with younger audiences. For example, the January 15 season 22 premiere drew only 27,200 viewers in the key 18–49 demographic, with the overwhelming majority of its audience falling into the 50+ category. In other words, its continued survival seems to depend less on sweeping cultural influence and more on advertising efficiency: it delivers a stable, older viewership that remains attractive to certain advertisers, even if it no longer commands the wide, cross-generational impact it once enjoyed.

"Echoes of the Ice" How Migrations Made Ancient Civilizations

Mehmet Kurtkaya 2026. Echoes of the Ice How Migrations Made Ancient Civilizations

"For generations, we were told civilizations rose in isolation. Archaeogenetics has shattered that myth. This is the story of humanity’s hidden engine: movement, admixture, and encounter—spanning 50,000 years".

The book is a self-published work (available on Kindle via Amazon) that the author claims provides an accessible, up-to-date synthesis of the major breakthroughs in archaeogenetics [the study of ancient DNA from human remains] as of 2026. It argues that recent genetic evidence has dramatically overturned traditional narratives of human history, replacing ideas of isolated, locally developed civilizations with a picture of constant large-scale migrations, population mixtures, and cultural exchanges. Key examples include the mass influx of Anatolian farmers into Europe (replacing much of the hunter-gatherer population), the steppe migrations of Yamnaya herders that spread Indo-European languages across Europe and parts of Asia, revised origins for Uralic languages tied to Siberian sources near Lake Baikal, subtle Mesopotamian genetic contributions to ancient Egypt, and the discovery of the "ghost" Ancient North Eurasians (ANE) population from Siberia whose DNA unexpectedly forms a major hidden component in billions of modern people worldwide, including Europeans, Native Americans, and South Asians. The author covers pivotal periods and cultures, from Ice Age sites like Sungir (with its lavish burials hinting at early hierarchy and spirituality) and the Mal'ta boy, to the peopling of the Americas via Beringia, and influences on later civilizations like Sumer, Rome, and China attempting to integrate genetics with archaeology, linguistics, and mythology to emphasize humanity's shared, mobile, and admixed past.

The author openly admits in the preface and an appendix that a significant portion of the book was compiled with heavy use of AI tools to accelerate research, synthesis, and drafting, though the content is grounded in primary scientific papers and the author's own expertise. This makes it a quick-reference guide and entry point for readers interested in the "new" genetic history of humanity, with a call for ongoing updates as fresh studies emerge, while cautioning that AI alone cannot replace deep domain knowledge or staying current with peer-reviewed research.

Kurtkaya claims that "mainstream (sic) archaeology was an echo chamber before the archaeogenetics era and many scholars who pointed out the unpopular truth were ostracized. It was exactly like corporate media". He claims his book was written on the basis of science to counter this. It seems to me however that this book is really a reworking of old hyperdiffusionist ideas, directly borrowed from the Theosophists that "migrations made ancient civilizations" (that c-word again) and they were population movements from one centre to a new location of people with particular genetic features. Kurtkaya's vision equates totally with the "root races" evolutionary stages of humanity's civilizational development proposed by Helena Blavatsky in "The Secret Doctrine" (1888). In one place, he's even been chasing some "Hyperborean" ideas too. The author's qualifications in [archaeo]genetics are not stated, the book extracts sound very Wikipediaish and lack any links to any texts in journals proper to the topic and when discussing research results he should have told his AI to use more words like "emerge", "revise", "question", "determine", than "shatter" and "overturn". It would create a better picture for the reader of how research proceeds.