Social media accout "Whateversnext" (
@Whateversnext1 "
Follow-up AND remember what you find", .
Joined Twitter December 2020) claims
You [archaeologists] fail to realize now that we have access to historical reports and have the ability to dicuss with each other we have found time and time again that these academics are not honest. They decide the story first and then withhold everything they dont like.
When challenged to document that, comes out with
this extraordinary flow-of-consciousness list of accusations (14 closaely consecutive tweets obviously pre-composed and pasted up in fragments, joined here unedited into a single text):
1/14 You ask what archaeology hides, how it's dishonest, wanting evidence, not vibes? Here's my take with specifics: Göbekli Tepe cover-ups, rigged debunks, myths proven real. Naming names like Surovell. Let's show the rot. 2/14 Making Up Stories: One artifact (0.0000001% of sites) sparks wild tales. Ex: Ian Hodder at Çatalhöyük admits in papers symbols labeled "ceremonial" lack proof, yet taught as fact. Pure overreach, selling guesses as truth. 3/14 Copper Chisel BS: Claim pyramids, Göbekli Tepe built with basic tools. Ex: Zahi Hawass pushes this for Giza; failed replicas (Roger Hopkins’ tests) ignored. Precision cuts hint advanced tech—hiding it? 4/14 Arrogant Blindness: Excavated <1% but claim full history. Ex: Baalbek’s 1,650-ton stones ignored (Jean-Pierre Adam’s Roman claims dodge pre-Roman feats). Degrees mean zilch when making up shit, closing minds. 5/14 Colonial Garbage: “Abandoned” labels erase cultures. Ex: Cahokia mounds called “primitive” until Cyrus Thomas proved Native origins. British Museum keeps looted artifacts, framing non-Western history as lesser. 6/14 Political Twisting: Evidence bent for nationalism. Ex: Turkish gov’t halts Göbekli Tepe digs (Klaus Schmidt found, Lee Clare notes narrative control) to fit “cradle” myth 7/14 Soft Science Cred Chase: No standards, guesses mixed with data. Ex: Ian Hodder admits subjectivity in Antiquity. Hollywood spikes looting (Interpol notes post-Indiana Jones surges), yet they fake rigor. 8/14 Trashing Sites: Digs ruin context. Ex: Roque Joaquín de Alcubierre’s early Pompeii work wrecked layers for quick finds; ICOMOS ethics ignored. Hiding stories for glory, no accountability. 9/14 Media Narrative Push: Science, Nat Geo hype mainstream, bury rest. Ex: C. Vance Haynes pushed Clovis-First despite Tom Dillehay’s Monte Verde (18k yrs, pre-Clovis proof). Alternatives silenced. 10/14 Elite Control: Rich institutions sideline locals. Ex: Great Zimbabwe dismissed as non-African by Karl Mauch, James Bent, Richard Hall till Gertrude Caton-Thompson proved Shona origins (1929). World Archaeology. 11/14 Stuck in Past: Slow on AI/satellites. Ex: LiDAR found Mayan cities (Takeshi Inomata 2018, Ivan Šprajc 2023 Ocomtún), but adoption lagged decades. Remote Sensing studies show tech ignored. 12/14 Bullying Thinkers Like Hancock: Called “fringe” for Göbekli Tepe’s 12k-yr age shaking timelines. Ex: Trees planted over site to “preserve” (Turkish reports), halting digs. Egos trump truth. 13/14 Rigged Debunks: Black Mat (nanodiamonds, Pulse 1B). Todd Surovell’s 2009 PNAS paper skipped protocols —thick samples, no microscopy— to miss evidence; malice, per Carlson. Sunken Continents: David S. Anderson attacked Atlantis careers. 2021 Icelandia confirmed (N. Atlantic) 14/14 Admitted Liars: Shinichi Fujimura (planted Japan artifacts, 2000); Reiner Protsch (faked fossil dates, 2004); James Mellaart (forged Çatalhöyük items, banned). “Internet bad” credentialism is tiresome—every paper, book is online. You protect a BS narrative for cash. They sneer “saw it online?” like it’s junk, but every paper, book’s there—exposing their lies. Hawass pushes chisel BS, Surovell rigged debunks, Anderson mocked Atlantis, then Icelandia proved it. Their “only we’re smart” hubris is a scam to guard their narrative.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please keep it civil and clean. Don't attack other posters. No anonymous contributors please (and remember the comments are for making a contribution to the discussion) terms as here: [ https://paul-barford.blogspot.com/2010/12/note-to-comment-posters.html ]
Thanks