All posts by Paradise Post

Ancient History, Political Science major, Taiwan, Male, Pundit, Writer, Artist, Musician, KoH Embassador,

How Huxley’s X-Club Created Nature Magazine and Sabotaged Science for 150 Years

Ed: This is an excellent article by Matthew Ehret  Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Patriot Review .  Make sure to visit his website!

Amidst the storm of controversy raised by the lab-origin theory of COVID-19 extolled by such figures as Nobel prize winning virologist Luc Montagnier, researcher Judy Mikowits, bioweapons expert Francis Boyle, Sri Lankan Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith and the head of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, an elaborate project was undertaken under the nominal helm of NATURE Magazine in order to refute the claim once and for all under the report ‘The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2’.

This project was led by a team of evolutionary virologists using a line of reasoning that “random mutation can account for anything” and was parroted loudly and repeatedly by Fauci, WHO officials and Bill Gates in order to shut down all uncomfortable discussion of the possible laboratory origins of COVID-19 while also pushing for a global vaccine campaign. On April 18, Dr. Fauci (whose close ties with Bill Gates, and Big Pharma have much to do with his control of hundreds of billions of dollars of research money), stated:

“There was a study recently that we can make available to you, where a group of highly qualified evolutionary virologists looked at the sequences there and the sequences in bats as they evolve. And the mutations that it took to get to the point where it is now is totally consistent with a jump of a species from an animal to a human.”

I think at this moment, rife as it is with speculative arguments, confusion and under-defined data, it is useful to remove oneself from the present and look for higher reference points from which we can re-evaluate events now unfolding on the world stage.

In order to do this, let us begin by asking a new series of questions:

What is Nature Magazine exactly? Is it truly an “objective” platform for pure scientific research untainted by the filth of political agendas? Is this standard-bearer of “proper method”, which can make or break the career of any scientist, truly the scientific journal it claims to be or is there something darker to be discovered?

As I presented a part of this story in my previous instalment in this series The Rise of Optical Biophysics and Clash of the Two Sciences, a very old battle has been waged around political systems but also what sort of scientific paradigms will shape our future.

A Bit of Historical Context

In 1865, a group of 12 scientists under the leadership of Thomas Huxley, Matthew Arnold, Joseph Hooker, and Herbert Spencer (founder of social Darwinism) was created under the name “X Club” with the mandate to reform global British Imperial strategy.

At the time of this group’s formation, Lincoln’s north was on the cusp of putting down the secessionist rebellion which the British Intelligence establishment had work decades to nurture guided by Anglo-American operatives in America itself as well as operations in British Canada.

Having far over-extended itself during the 2nd Chinese Opium War (1856-1860) to the Crimean War (1853-1856) to putting down Indian uprisings (1857-1858) and sponsoring the Southern Confederacy (1861-1865), the British Empire knew that it was on the verge of collapse. The world was quickly waking up to its evil nature, and a new paradigm of win-win cooperation was being exported from Lincoln’s America to nations across the world (American was a very different nation from the Anglo-American dumb giant the world has known since JFK’s 1963 murder -MEK).

Lincoln’s system had been known as ‘American System of National Economy’, a name created by the father of Germany’s Zollverein Friedrich List years earlier. Unlike British Free Trade, this ‘American System’ was premised on protectionism, national banking, long term infrastructure and most importantly placed the source of value on the human mind’s capacity to make discoveries and inventions as outlined by Lincoln’s 1858 speech by the same name. In this system, the Constitutional concept of the General Welfare was not mere ink on parchment but rather the governing principle of monetary value and national policy. Continue reading How Huxley’s X-Club Created Nature Magazine and Sabotaged Science for 150 Years

Tour Armenia Speaks About Noya or Noah

Tour Armenia discusses the Armenian history of Noah and interesting descent from their patriarchs Haik & Togarmah or Torcom, in spite of way too ancient dating.

 

The story of Noya (Noah) forms the basis of Armenia’s Christian religious identity, but in fact there is no recorded account of the Flood in ancestral Armenian mythology until the kingdom of Urartu and later, Christianity. Of all ancestral peoples who left records of their living in the region, there is not one single account of the Flood, which is widespread among other cultures in the region.

The reason for this is simple, if one believes the account of the biblical flood and subsequent regeneration of the human race:

According to the biblical timeline the Armenians are direct descendants of Japheth, one the grandsons of Noah, whose ark landed on the top of Mount Ararat after the Great Flood. During the deluge Noah’s ark came to rest on the Mountains of Ararat, and his sons and grandsons whose progeny increased there had to emigrate to other lands. While some of Japheth’s sons stayed in the vicinity of Ararat, the others went towards Mesopotamia. Haik, who was believed to one of Japheth’s grandsons and the heroic patriarch of the Armenian people, was among those who went to Babylon. Another offspring, Aram, is credited with founding the Syrian kingdom.

“Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah; Shem, Ham and Japheth: and unto them were sons born after the flood.

“The son of Japheth; Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras.

“And the sons of Gomer; Ashkenaz, and Riphath, and Togarmah”.

Armenians consider themselves as coming from the House of Togarmah or Torcom. There is a cuneiform inscription that refers to the walled town of Tilgarimnu near Malatia in ancient Armenia. Others think that Togarmah is made up from two words: “take” (meaning tribe or race in Sanskrit) and “Armah” (Armenia).

Of course some of you may want to suspend some archeological facts for a little mythical belief. However, considering the discovery of Troy was pointed to by a story of the “mythical” Trojan War (which is now known to have actually occurred), and the Old Testament has been more and more shown to indicate actual history, perhaps this timeline does not need to be treated so much as legend but as a symbolic representation of actual events.

For example, there was a flood that covered much of the world around 13,600 BC as the world warmed through a tilting of its rotational axis, causing glaciers to melt. The Bible speaks of the mountain Noah lands on as Ararat or Alarod. In the Aramaic version of Genesis, the bible doesn’t speak of Noah landing on ‘the mountain of Ararat’, but on ‘the mountains (plural) of Ararat’. Later cultures called the region Urartu or Arata. These different words describe the same place.

The consequent raising of seawater inundated all of the lowlands in the Near East. Some speculation is made that rather than being seen as an actual boat, Noah’s ark can be considered as a symbolic embodiment of life (the ark of the covenant, for example, existed both as a thing and as an idea–the compact between God and man). Continue reading Tour Armenia Speaks About Noya or Noah

Is Wikipedia Reliable? – By Questions For Corbett

ANCIENT PATRIARCHS INTRO:   We have posted other articles on the Wikipedia scam, especially related to True History or Propaganda. Wicked Pedia ONLY promotes Darwinian History, which in my view is the greatest propaganda trophy of ALL of the New World Order, as it has destroyed and is still destroying the reality of the Spiritual universe in the minds of many people all over the planet, who were propagandised by this very unscientific theory that promoted the so-called Tree of Life, where all the gazillions of species & kinds originated from each other via the first “one cell micro organism”, from an explosion of a very small dot from NOTHING, NO-WHERE, & NO-TIME, into a gas planet turning cold into rocks & rain that eroded them into a ‘primordial soup’!

And lo and behold it produced a very complicated computer code not just made up of a binary of 1’s and 0’s…, NO sirreee, but instead made up from FOUR elements, A,T,C, & G from which all the gazillions of trillions of fancy proteins which constitute and constructed all forms of organic life on this pretty blue planet, were coded there in. WOW! What an incredible non-planned happenstance!

And how?! ALL that was necessary for it ALL to come together was… CHANCE & TIME! LOTS of it. Nothing less than pure luck! And of course most of you believe it. Why? Because Wicked Pedia says so whenever you look up something for example related to History, anything contrary to their Materialist, Humanist, Marxist, Atheist worldview is put down as “MYTH!” And no Euhemerism is ever allowed, mind you.

Even, believe it or not, Mr. James Corbett of the good video below about WP, himself surely still believes he originated from a “BIG BANG” from NOTHING & NOWHERE that resulted in our Universe, with that uniform static starry sky by which his ancient Sumerian patriarchs so securely sailed, and from which explosion emerged the “primordial soup” that mutated into evermore complex coded information that finally spiraled – of itself! – into our DNA helix and somehow formed his French forefathers in Gaul, some of whom  finally migrated to Canada and produced little James from a tiny egg inside his Mum and that tiny wiggly sperm from his Daddy with that intelligently designed flagellum at its little bottom, into his mother’s holy of holies, and voila… out came Mr. James Corbett!

Now how do I know he believes that? Because he never talks about that conspiracy! Even though he talks about everything else under the conspiratorial sun, as I know because I follow him, but NEVER EVER about the greatest conspiracy that emasculated Mankind or rather castrated his spiritual LOGOS!

Well, I don’t totally blame him. I once believed the same, and was convinced that I came from some kind of primate monkey who birthed some cavemen who began to hunt and gather and slowly grew smart enough to build a ship with a crew who dared to loose sight of land in “1492 when Columbus sailed the ocean blue“! That had NEVER EVER happened before, in spite of all those ancient polygonal megaliths and pyramids all over the world that are virtually identical. But, ‘NO’, says Wicked Pedia, ‘NOBODY ever crossed the oceans before 1492, because that is “pseudo science”,’ and if you look up ‘the Great Flood’ in WP, you are directed to a page called the “Flood Myth”, even though over 700 legends from every race, tribe, nation, and civilisation under the sun believed that their 8 primo patriarchs survived a global Flood.

So even though James Corbett sees by a little light in his carnal mind that WP sucks at lots of truth, he is still partially deceived by that greatest hoax of all time in history, itself. So  pray for poor James that he might see the Light. Nevertheless, he does see through Climate Change, and 9-11, and Corona Clampdown, and other propaganda-s, but he is still in Lala Land as far as our origins. So have mercy and DO enjoy his video below. We love ya James!

Continue reading Is Wikipedia Reliable? – By Questions For Corbett

Wikipedia: A Disinformation Operation?

Published: March 2020; Languages: DE, EN, ES, FR, NL, RO

Wikipedia is generally thought of as an open, transparent, and mostly reliable online encyclopedia. Yet upon closer inspection, this turns out not to be the case.

In fact, the English Wikipedia with its 9 billion worldwide page views per month is governed by just 500 active administrators, whose real identity in many cases remains unknown.

Moreover, studies have shown that 80% of all Wikipedia content is written by just 1% of all Wikipedia editors, which again amounts to just a few hundred mostly unknown people.

Obviously, such a non-transparent and hierarchical structure is susceptible to corruption and manipulation, the notorious “paid editors” hired by corporations being just one example.

Indeed, already in 2007, researchers found that CIA and FBI employees were editing Wikipedia articles on controversial topics including the Iraq war and the Guantanamo military prison.

Also in 2007, researchers found that one of the most active and influential English Wikipedia administrators, called “Slim Virgin”, was in fact a former British intelligence informer.

More recently, another highly prolific Wikipedia editor going by the false name of “Philip Cross” turned out to be linked to UK intelligence as well as several mainstream media journalists.

In Germany, one of the most aggressive Wikipedia editors was exposed, after a two-year legal battle, as a political operative formerly serving in the Israeli army as a foreign volunteer. Continue reading Wikipedia: A Disinformation Operation?

‘The Babyloniaca’ of Berossus – by Stanley Mayer

The Babyloniaca of Berossus by Stanley Mayer Burstein sources and monographs sources from the ancient near east  volume 1, fascicle 5 undena publication malibu  1978 ANET FGrH Grayson JCS RLA RE
ABBREVIATIONS
Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament (1948)
Die Fragmente der Grieschischen Historiker (1923-1958)
Texts from Cuneiform Sources, vol. 5, Assyrian and Babylonian
Chronicles (1975)
Journal ofCuneiform Studies
Reallexicon der Assyriologie (1928-1938; 1957-)
Real-Encycloplidie der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abbreviations …………………………………………………………. 1
Table of Contents . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ……………3
A. Introduction………………………………………………………..4
1. The Hellenistic Period and Ancient Near Eastern Civilization………………………… .4
2. The Life of Berossus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. The Babyloniaca . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . …6
4. Evaluation ………………………………………………………8
5. The Present Edition………………………………………………… IO
B. Book One: Genesis ………………………………………………….. 13
1. Prologue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2. The Revelation of Oannes…………………………………………….. 14
3. The Great Year……… : ………………………………………….. 15
4. The Moon ……………………………………………………… 16
5. The Walling of Babylon ……………………………………………… 17
6. Unplaced Fragments of Book One ……………………………………….. 17
C. Book Two: The Book of Kings……………………………………………. 18
1. Kings Before the Flood ……….·…………………………………….. 18
2. The Flood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3. Sages After the Flood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .·. . . ……………………………….. 21
4. Dynasties After the Flood…………………………………………….. 21
5. Nabu-Nasir……………………………………………………… 22
D. Book Three ………………………………………………………. 23
1. Tiglath-pileser/Pulu ………………………………………………… 23
2. Sennacherib . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . …….. 23
3. Nabukadnezzar II …………………………………………………. 26
4. The Successors of Nebukadnezzar II ………………………………………. 28
5. The Persians . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
6. Possible Fragments from Book Two ………………………………………. 29
7. Doubtful Fragment ………………………………………………… 30
E. Appendices ………..·…………………………………………….. 31
1. The Authenticity of the Astronomical and Astrological Fragments……………………31
2. Berossus’ Chronology of the Dynasties after the Flood in Book Two……………………. 33
3. Berossus’ Chronology of the Reigns of Sennacherib and Esarhaddon……………………. 36
4. The Ptolemaic Canon……………………………………………….. 38
5. Concordance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

INTRODUCTION

1. The Hellenistic Period and Ancient Near Eastern Civilization
Alexander the Great’s conquest of the Persian Empire marks a major turning point in the cultural history of the Ancient Near East. Unlike their Persian predecessors, the Macedonians and Greeks were not part of the Mesopotamian culture area, but true aliens, largely ignorant of and unsympathetic to the values and ideals of
the civilizations of their new subjects. True, Greeks had visited the Near East for centuries as travelers, mercenaries and merchants. They had admired and continued to admire the great antiquity and splendid monuments of. its civilizations and had borrowed various artistic motives and techniques and even so important a tool as writing from the area, but they had been and continued largely to be unable to read and understand the cuneiform and hieroglyphic scripts in which the intellectual traditions of these cultures were recorded. 1
Consequently, they were outsiders, dependent for their knowledge on the observations of travelers such as Herodotus for Egypt or romancers such as Ctesias for Mesopotamia and on such information as they could glean from the guides and other members of the Near Eastern cultures who would associate with them. Not surprisingly, the new masters’ view of their subjects was seriously distorted, being based as it was on a curious melange of shrewd if often biased observations and only partially understood oral tradition.
Among those Near Eastern intellectuals who chose to deal with their new rulers we can isolate two essentially  different responses to the challenge posed by them. One group created a literature, both oral and written, of  protest, composing apocalyptic prophecies of the ultimate defeat of their oppressors on the one hand and elaborating still further the folk histories of the great heroes of their cultures’ past on the other. Thus, new conquests were ascribed to Sesostris and Semiramis and alongside them chauvinistic new legends were formed around such figures as Ramses II and Nectanebo II in Egypt, Taharqa in Nubia, Moses and Abraham in Judea 11 -, and Nebukadnezzar II in Babylonia. The other group, however, more willing to cooperate with their new masters, attempted to educate them hy the publication in Greek of authoritative accounts of their respective countries’ history and culture, accounts in which the factual errors of the popular Greek authorities would be corrected; at the same time they provided an introduction to the authentic traditions of their civilizations. The
compilation of such works was a genuine innovation, involving as it did the determination of what constituted the intellectual core of a civilization and then the presentation of that core in a foreign language in such a way that it would be understood by readers almost totally ignorant of it. The greatest and only completely surviving example of such a work is the Jewish antiquities of Flavius Josephus, but the first of them was the Babylonian history of Berossus, composed about 281 B.C. and dedicated to Antiochus I.

————————-
1For examples of late Hellenistic school texts in Greek and cuneiform suggesting that some Greeks attempted to learn cuneiform, see Edmond Solberger, ‘Graeco-Babyloniaca,’ Iraq, 24 (1962) 63-72. laFor Nebukadnezzar II and Taharqa see Megasthenes, FGrH, 3C2, 715 Ff I and 11. For Ramses II see Hecataeus of Abdera, FGrH, 3A, 264, F 25.47-49; Tacitus, Annales 2.60; and for Nectanebo II see Ps. Callisthenes, Historia Alexandri Magni, 1.1-14.
For Moses and Abraham see in particular Eupolemus, FGrH, 3C2, 723 F 1; Pseudo Eupolemus, FGrH, 3C2, 724 Ff, 1-2; and Artapanus, FGrH, 3C2, 726 Ff, 2-3. For this literature see Martin Braun, History and Romance in Graeco-Oriental Literature (Oxford, 1938); and Samuel K. Eddy, The King Is Dead: Studies in the Near Eastern Resistance to Hellenism 334-31 B.C. (Lincoln, 1961).
2Berossus, FGrH, 3Cl, 680 Tt 1-3. For his priorlty to Manetho see Manetho, FGrH, 3Cl, 609 T 11; and Oswyn Murray, ‘Herodotus and Hellenistic Culture,’ Qassical Quarterly, 66 (1972) 209. Paul Schnabel, Berossus und die babylonisch-hellenistische Literatur (Leipzig, 1923) 8-10, dated the work to between 293 and 280. The more precise date of ca. 281 is based on the chronological discussion in Appendix 2. I have followed Schnabel (16) in assuming that the title of the book was Babyloniaca and that the correct spelling of his name was Berossus (3-5). In regard to the latter, however, G. Komor6czy, ‘Berosos and the Mesopotamian Literature,’ Acta Antiqua, 21 (1973) 125, has recently proposed that the form Berosos is correct and that it should be interpreted as meaning ‘Bel is his shepherd.’ Unless otherwise noted all subsequent dates in this study are B.C. 

2. The life of Berossus
By the early centuries of our era Berossus had become a legendary figure. He was credited with the invention of a common type of sundial and honored in Athens for his prophecies with a statue in one of the city’s gymnasia. A family was even invented for him including a wife, Erymanthe, and a daughter, appropriately
one of antiquity’s famous sibyls, Sabbe, the Babylonian sibyl.3 Unfortunately, however, the known facts about Berossus’ life are, in contrast to the legendary, few and undramatic.
In the preface to his Babyloniaca Berossus stated that he was a contemporary of Alexander the Great, and this taken together with the fact that he wrote his book about 281 and lived for a time after that year allows us to set the date of his birth no earlier than about 350. In addition, he identified himself as a priest of Bel of Chaldaean origin. This implies, and the fragments of his book confirm, that he received a normal scribal education in the traditional Sumerian and Accadian classics. 4 Further, his ability to write in Greek, his familiarity with popular Greek conceptions of the Babylonian past, and the very fact of his writing a book such as the Babyloniaca for the instruction of Antiochus I points to his being a member of the Seleucid court, (perhaps one of the Chaldaean astrologers consulted by Seleucus I and his predecessors.5 Finally, some time after 281 Berossus abandoned Babylon and settled on the Ptolemaic island of Cos where, we are told, he became the first to give formal instruction to the Greeks in Chaldaean astrology.6 .
Scant though they are, these few facts about Berossus’ life in contrast to the later “Berossus legend” are helpful in the understanding of his book. They identify Berossus as an individual suspended between two cultures, Babylonian and Greek. Steeped in the traditions of Babylon and of its priesthood and proud of them, Berossus still accepted the new Greco-Macedonian regime as legitimate and had adjusted himself to it. For such a person the ignorance of the Greeks and Macedonians he associated with must by itself have been annoying, but Seleucus I’s deliberate policy of degrading Babylon and its shrines by transferring most of its population to his new capital city of Seleucia on the Tigris and the consequent friction between him and the priesthood can only have been deeply disturbing.7 It is tempting to think that Berossus saw in the accession of Antiochus I, long resident in Babylon as governor of the upper satrapies, the possibility of reversing this policy and wrote his book in the hope that a true account of the Babylonian past and its significance and of the proper relationship between the Chaldaean priesthood and a king might aid in inducing Antiochus to
repudiate his father’s policies. If so, then Berossus’ abandonment of Babylon in old age for Cos, Continue reading ‘The Babyloniaca’ of Berossus – by Stanley Mayer

Germania by Tacitus; 2000 Yr. Old History of Tuisto-/Tuisco-land, Twiskland, & Deutschland

In 1498, a monk named Annio da Viterbo published fragments, (put down as “Pseudo-Berossus”) stating that Babylonian records had shown that Tuiscon or Tuisto, the fourth son of Noah, had been the first ruler of Scythia and Germany following the dispersion of peoples, with him being succeeded by his son Mannus as the second king. Later historians (e.g. Johannes Aventinus) furnished numerous further details, including the theory by James Anderson that Tuiscon was in fact none other than the biblical Ashkenaz, son of Gomer.

There is another history that Tuitsch was a leader and/or descendant from a tribe of Assyrians that moved up into Europe long before this Roman History below was written by Tacitus. Tacitus relates that “ancient songs” (Latin carminibus antiquis) of the Germanic peoples celebrated Tuisto as “a god, born of the earth” (deum terra editum). These songs further attributed to him a son, Mannus, who in turn had three sons, the offspring of whom were referred to as Ingaevones, Herminones and Istaevones, living near the Ocean (proximi Oceano), in the interior (medii), and the remaining parts (ceteri) of the geographical region of Germania, respectively.

GERMANIA by TACITUS

Chapter I

TACITUS, Roman historian

Geography of Germany. “The various peoples of Germany are separated from the Gauls by the Rhine, from the Raetians and Pannonians by the Danube, and from the Sarmatians and Dacians by mountains – or, where there are no mountains, by mutual fear. The northern parts of the country are girdles by the sea, flowing round broad peninsulas and vast islands where a campaign of the present century has revealed to us the existence of some nations and kings hitherto unknown.

The Rhine rises in a remote and precipitous height of the Raetian alps and afterwards turns slightly westward to flow into the North Sea. The Danube issues from a gentle slope of moderate height in the Black Forest, and after passing more peoples than the Rhine in its course discharges itself into the Black Sea through six channels – a seventh mouth being lost in the marshlands.

Chapter II

The Inhabitants. Origins of the Name “Germany”. The Germans themselves I should regard as aboriginal, and not mixed at all with other races through immigration or intercourse. For, in former times it was not by land but on shipboard that those who sought to emigrate would arrive; and the boundless and, so to speak, hostile ocean beyond us, is seldom entered by a sail from our world. And, beside the perils of rough and unknown seas, who would leave Asia, or Africa for Italy for Germany, with its wild country, its inclement skies, its sullen manners and aspect, unless indeed it were his home?

In their ancient songs, their only way of remembering or recording the past they celebrate an earth-born god Tuisco, and his son Mannus, as the origin of their race, as their founders. To Mannus they assign three sons, from whose names, they say, the coast tribes are called Ingaevones; those of the interior, Herminones; all the rest, Istaevones. Some, with the freedom of conjecture permitted by antiquity, assert that the god had several descendants, and the nation several appellations, as Marsi, Gambrivii, Suevi, Vandilii, and that these are nine old names.

The name Germany, on the other hand, they say is modern and newly introduced, from the fact that the tribes which first crossed the Rhine and drove out the Gauls, and are now called Tungrians, were then called Germans. Thus what was the name of a tribe, and not of a race, gradually prevailed, till all called themselves by this self-invented name of Germans, which the conquerors had first employed to inspire terror.

Continue reading Germania by Tacitus; 2000 Yr. Old History of Tuisto-/Tuisco-land, Twiskland, & Deutschland

Proof a Mysterious Lost Ancient GLOBAL Civilization Spanned Virtually the Entire Planet…Suppressed by Academia! Why?

This video creator must have visited our site, as he copies some of our very own discoveries, like for example the universal ‘Oannes’ buckets‘ or ‘handbags’ in early Sumerian and Meso American art (SEE: Veracruz Venta Stele above right), but he sadly misses the quintessential point of it all, the ultimate conclusion of WHY all this has been suppressed. His video blurb states, “This (video) will likely blow your mind. 250+ photos and comparisons of ancient sites around the world, show that there is a LOT more to the story of our ancient past. Proof of a lost ancient global civilization that has been hiding in plain sight, for thousands of years. “

The giant Atlas, father of eponymous Atlantis, who mapped the stars by trigonometry and sailed across the Atlantic, duly named after him.

“Hiding”?! The proof hasn’t been hiding; The proof was purposely hidden, but not just hidden it was purposely suppressed? And what exactly was suppressed about it? The logical conclusion from all the true facts that this video brings out, that there was indeed Universal Pre-Columbian Cross-Oceanic Traffic by one shared megalithic polygonal building civilisation of one kind of people, the megalith builders during the true first Megalithic period.  And this earliest Megalithic periodisation was suppressed by (qu)Academia because they – for purely ideological reasons – prefer their asinine periodisation which doesn’t make sense in light of the discoveries in this MUST WATCH video below.

These ideology hucksters prefer the untenable ‘Paleolithic & Neolithic‘ (old stone & new stone ages) periodisation invented by 19th century John Lubbock, a friend and contemporary of Charles Darwin & Lyell Hutton. This rich banker boy under the auspices of the leading naturalists of the British elite’s Royal Society and supported by other bankers & Cecil  Rhodes’ of the ‘Round Table’ secret society (& his Rhodes scholars spreading it everywhere) invented this fraudulent idea that there was a so-called “pre-historic Stone Age” before the Bronze,  Iron, & Industrial Ages.

If that banker boy Lubbock would be alive today, like “Back to the future”,  he would be so embarrassed by what his foolish theories about history have triggered: As would Charlie Darwin as well. They would be red with shame to have been so self-deceived and plain off kilter. Perhaps they are… ashamed..  down there in Hades, watching all the philosophical, religious, cultural, psychological misery they caused with their mental philandering, causing untold tragedy and confusion.

This “Stone Age” has been caricatured to us in popular culture as populated by fresh-from-the-cave morons with an IQ of 27 who could only produce arrowheads, dragging their females by the hair into their caves before evolving into ‘hunter gatherers‘ who eventually ‘learned‘ agriculture & then built houses in communal dwellings that finally “evolved” into modern man & his “smart cities.” That’s us! Ha. This video totally destroys that notion.

We are squatting, cause we used to walk on all fours not so long ago! Our graphic designer says!

There never was such a thing as a “Paleolithic” where Man majored only on un-polished arrow heads, nor a “Neolithic” where they produced polished arrow-heads, but this video gives ample proof of a universal “Megalithic” when the sea-worthy navy-building Sea Kings, a seafaring astronomy savvy, star-guided, early group of smart megalith builders majored on a unique architectural style & technique with a raw material we never knew nor invented.  And these humans were way smarter and taller than us, and for that very reason are actively suppressed by (qu)academia because of their universal Darwinist dictatorship, where every university in the world now teaches their nonsense.

WATCH this video and have your preconceived notions about history rigorously destroyed by true history.

WIKIPEDIA NONSENSE…

Continue reading Proof a Mysterious Lost Ancient GLOBAL Civilization Spanned Virtually the Entire Planet…Suppressed by Academia! Why?

2000 Yr. Old Greek Antikythera Computer Defeats Caveman Nonsense & Stumps Darwinist Historians

There is a YouTube comment under the ‘must watch‘ video below, that says, “They ‘handpick’ which ‘discoveries’ are revealed! Some discoveries are much more incredible but hidden and never told about! This is actually nothing in comparison to what they are hiding!
I am afraid this observation is very true, when one just thinks of the Vatican who refuses to reveal all secret artefacts & documents in its vast underground vaults. This article will explain why.

The Antikythera mechanism is an ancient hand powered Greek analogue computer which has also been described as the first example of such a device used to predict astronomical positions and eclipses for calendar and astrological purposes decades in advance. It could also be used to track the four-year cycle of athletic games which was similar to an Olympiad, the cycle of the ancient Olympic Games.

This artefact was retrieved from the sea in 1901, and identified on 17 May 1902 as containing a gear by archaeologist Valerios Stais, among wreckage retrieved from a shipwreck off the coast of the Greek island Antikythera. The instrument is believed to have been designed and constructed by Greek scientists and has been variously dated to about 87 BC, or between 150 and 100 BC, or to 205 BC, or to within a generation before the shipwreck, which has been dated to approximately 70–60 BC.

The device, housed in the remains of a 34 cm × 18 cm × 9 cm (13.4 in × 7.1 in × 3.5 in) wooden box, was found as one lump, later separated into three main fragments which are now divided into 82 separate fragments after conservation efforts. Four of these fragments contain gears, while inscriptions are found on many others. The largest gear is approximately 14 centimeters (5.5 in) in diameter and originally had 223 teeth.

It is a complex clockwork mechanism composed of at least 30 meshing bronze gears. A team led by Mike Edmunds and Tony Freeth at Cardiff University used modern computer x-ray tomography and high resolution surface scanning to image inside fragments of the crust-encased mechanism and read the faintest inscriptions that once covered the outer casing of the machine.

Detailed imaging of the mechanism suggests that it had 37 gear wheels enabling it to follow the movements of the Moon and the Sun through the zodiac, to predict eclipses and even to model the irregular orbit of the Moon, where the Moon’s velocity is higher in its perigee than in its apogee. This motion was studied in the 2nd century BC by astronomer Hipparchus of Rhodes, and it is speculated that he may have been consulted in the machine’s construction.

The knowledge of this technology was lost at some point in antiquity. Similar technological works later appeared in the medieval Byzantine and Islamic worlds, but works with similar complexity did not appear again until the development of mechanical astronomical clocks in Europe in the fourteenth century. All known fragments of the Antikythera mechanism are now kept at the National Archaeological Museum in Athens, along with a number of artistic reconstructions and replicas of the mechanism to demonstrate how it may have looked and worked. WATCH THIS AMAZING DISCOVERY.. Continue reading 2000 Yr. Old Greek Antikythera Computer Defeats Caveman Nonsense & Stumps Darwinist Historians

Irreducible Complexity: The Challenge to the Darwinian Evolutionary Explanations of many Biochemical Structures

The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

“If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.”
–Charles Darwin, Origin of Species

With this statement, Charles Darwin provided a criterion by which his theory of evolution could be falsified. The logic was simple: since evolution is a gradual process in which slight modifications produce advantages for survival, it cannot produce complex structures in a short amount of time. It’s a step-by-step process which may gradually build up and modify complex structures, but it cannot produce them suddenly.

Darwin, meet Michael Behe, biochemical researcher and professor at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania. Michale Behe claims to have shown exactly what Darwin claimed would destroy the theory of evolution, through a concept he calls “irreducible complexity.” In simple terms, this idea applies to any system of interacting parts in which the removal of any one part destroys the function of the entire system. An irreducibly complex system, then, requires each and every component to be in place before it will function. Continue reading Irreducible Complexity: The Challenge to the Darwinian Evolutionary Explanations of many Biochemical Structures

Charles Darwin’s Hidden Agenda for Science – (re post)

The standard, long held view of the connection between Darwin’s religion and his theory is wrong. Supposedly he was a Christian who studied at Cambridge to become a minister. But then, during his voyage around the world on the Beagle, the scientific facts persuaded him to believe in evolution and give up his Christian faith. However, an examination of the various influences upon the youthful Charles Darwin reveals an entirely different story.

Family Background.

Charles’ grandfather, Erasmus, a successful and wealthy physician in the 18th century, wrote the book, Zoonomia (Laws of Life), which portrays a pantheistic world in which all life and species evolved. Erasmus’ close friend, industrialist Josiah Wedgwood I, embraced Unitarian theology. Erasmus’ son and Charles’ father, Robert Darwin, also a wealthy physician, probably an atheist, married Susannah Wedgwood. Other marriage ties between the two families followed. Not surprisingly, Darwin males generally were freethinkers, following the Unitarian, pantheistic and atheistic views of their principal sires.

The Son, His Father and His Wife.

Charles Darwin, was born in 1809. His dominant, atheistic father, Robert, advised him to conceal his unorthodox beliefs from his wife. Should he predecease her this would spare her from unnecessary grief because of her spouse’s dying an unbeliever. Charles never spoke publicly about his religious views. However, before he married Emma Wedgwood in 1839 he told her about his rejection of Christian faith. Though probably not herself evangelical, she was nevertheless pious, and the rather gross unbelief of her husband was painful to her. But during his life and even after his death she protected his reputation by concealing his unbelief.

Charles’ Education

Robert Darwin sent his son off to Edinburgh University in 1825. The sixteen-year-old boy found himself in a university community which was in a continual ferment of radicalism of all sorts advanced by dissenters from the Anglican church, freethinkers, anti-Christians and atheists, materialists and evolutionists. Evolution was in the air. Most influential in this phase of Charles Darwin’s life was Robert Grant, a dozen years his senior. Holding the medical degree from Edinburgh, he had made himself the leading British authority in invertebrate zoology. Grant was an avowed atheist, and evolutionist, and also a social and political radical. On zoological field trips with Grant young Charles listened to his persuasive private lecturing but kept his own counsel. Deeply interested in biological science, Charles abhorred medicine The sight of blood sickened him. After two years he returned home without a degree.

Disappointed, father Robert Darwin decided to send him off to Cambridge University for a degree in theology, after which he could purchase for him a “living” in an Anglican country church. There he could be a sportsman, a scholar, or an amateur naturalist, supported by a government stipend for life. Charles dutifully signed onto the Thirty-Nine Articles of the Church of England and entered Cambridge. He surely saw the hypocrisy in an atheist father’s financing his son’s preparation to be a minister of the gospel. Continue reading Charles Darwin’s Hidden Agenda for Science – (re post)