badarchaeology Fitzpatrick-Matthews, heavy-handed, lame, institutional dogma, opinionated, unsubstantiated
home    documentary    bibliography  spacer cast    news    the story

13 May 2016: Pre-Clovis occupation 14,550 years ago at the Page-Ladson site, Florida, and the peopling of the Americas
Science Advances magazine by the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Volume 352, Issue 6287
related: November 2002 BBC transcript of radio interview with Dennis Stanford of The Smithsonian and Dr. James M. Adovasio of the Archaeological Institute of America, challengers to the Clovis-First crowd, on how unwelcome their research into blades unearthed in America matching the Solutrean points known in Europe, has been.


Bad Archaeology protagonist exhibits Worst Scholarship: Fitzpatrick-Matthews lame efforts to control mindshare
12 February 2016: Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews patrols the internet, television and other news sources of presumed disrepute on his debunking crusade to enforce respect for the opinions of mainstream archaeology. As a self-appointed thought cop, his duty is pouncing on dissenters of the status quo at   After all, archaeology, as a subjective humanity — instead of the objective science it thinks it is — is cloaked in arrogant omniscience denouncing, in an actual or virtual peer review gauntlet, any discovery or advocate challenging its almighty tenets, dismissive of anyone who doubts its supremacy by enforcing conformity to an institutional dogma fortified over decades. History suffers from this indignity. When peer reviewers are wrong, who corrects them?
Officer Fitzpatrick-Matthews' lack of credibility and scholarship, fueled by his ignorance, bias and policing tactics, must be exposed.

Dr. Barry Fell endures as archaeology's favorite target of disdain. Fell sat for interviews with me in 1984, once at a TV studio in Albuquerque where he was attending a conference, and again at his San Diego home, retired as a Harvard University professor of marine biology. His passion for epigraphy had grown in his worldwide travels. He was convinced ancient adventurers, navigators, explorers, and traders made their way around the planet on the high seas. With few exceptions mainstream archaeology enforces a myth of North America's exemption from any foreign cultural contact until Leif Erikson, briefly, on Nova Scotia's north coast a millenium ago.
Barry Fell's challenge to such dogma earned him the contempt of many — archaeologists, anthropologists, historians and nervous clergymen backing Columbus' perilous reputation. Clearly, Dr. Fell was not without his faults. He had an arrogant streak and committed errors in some decipherments. Pioneers are known to stumble in trailblazing coherent, transformative theories. One thing Howard Barraclough Fell was not, however, was fringe, the condescending adjective many, if not most, archaeologists dredge from their collective vocabularies to tar the reputation of this scholar and author of America B.C. decades after his death.
In September 2011, Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews initiated Since then, the associated blog has counted at least 26 responses not including Fitzpatrick-Matthews' defensive replies. Here are excerpts from his first and fourth:
29 November 2012: "Old World scripts do not appear in the Americas. There are claims that they do, none of which stand up to scrutiny as the products of pre-Columbian explorers: those that actually look like genuine Old World scripts are of recent date, while Barry Fell saw things in scratches that no Old World epigrapher would ever recognise as a script."
26 August 2013: "The problem with Fell's 'evidence' is that it is so poor. His ogham, for instance, consists of irregular scratches on flat rock surfaces. Only someone with complete ignorance of real ogham could make that mistake and in doing so, we can work out (in a forensic sense, if you like) that he learned the ogham script entirely from books, where the lines that make up the characters are indeed drawn on a flat surface, with a line through the centre. Familiarity with real ogham stones would have shown him that this line is not an imaginary mid-point (as he seems to have been convinced) but an edge of the stone: true ogham is written across an edge. That is how it works. To see scratches on a flat rock surface as ogham goes against everything we know about the real thing. This is not speculation on my part. These are the uncomfortable facts for anyone who wants to believe in Fell's supposed ogham." (underlining is my emphasis)
Fitzpatrick-Matthews is either ignorant or dishonest, arrogantly echoing the No Flat Ogham mantra parroted by myopic archaeologists since at least 1977, as if the unwashed believers were somehow equivalent to deranged flat-earthers. Fitzpatrick-Matthews is an archaeologist employed 55 kilometers north of London. The world's motherlode of ogham rock inscriptions, in situ and curated in Dublin, is within 700 km west of his home. To him and his fellow misguided ArchaeoPriests, adopt some humility, halt the bullying of discovery, and take the initiative to actually investigate what is unknown to you instead of echoing ad infinitum lame, shopworn and self-serving untruths as irrefutable fact. I believe Fitzpatrick-Matthews engages in egregious professional malpractice and must be held accountable.
Here's my eye-witness collection of flat oghams, hunted down and captured on video throughout Ireland, accompanied by researcher Kathleen Cain in 1986-87 and by wife Katie in 1988.

History on the Rocks documentary trailer on VIMEO VOD
1985 KRMA Denver VIMEO teaser

2018 indie doc VIMEO teaser
high resolution download
exhibit A: my scaled sketch of the red, monumental Dunloe flat Ogham Stone
now restored vertically with its family, excavated from a cave west of Killarney
click the image for a 3.5 MB grayscale .png enlargement (6125 x 2100 pixels)

19 February 2016: notes from an investigative journalist, me, regarding sourcing, bias, neutrality and credibility
Wikipedia is a favorite online haunt of desk-bound wordsmiths out to spread their Truths. I have no idea of Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews' time spent pounding the keyboard versus undertaking dirty fieldwork. It doesn't matter. My point is he's quite fond of pivoting to Wikipedia when confronted with, and seeking cover from, troublesome contrarians drawn to his blog. So, here's my take on Wikipedia from real-world experience: the good, the bad and the ugly.
To be published on Wikipedia, authors consent to review by the public and by the website's management. A primary distinction Wikipedia's Ogham article attempts to establish is between 'orthodox' (or monumental) inscriptions carved along standing stone corners AND the 'scholastic' style, explained as having evolved only after the literati, introduced to paper and Christianity, began imitating linearity on stone, as well. Flat Ogham, it could be just as reasonably postulated, preceded the adoption of the convenience of using stone edges to define stem lines. What's with the assumption of a binary, either/or, stylistic division, anyway? Multiple styles* co-existed in Ireland. Y'know, different strokes for different folks! Accurate, physical dating of rock inscriptions (or, in this case, a claim the transition from one style to another happened at 600 CE) would be notoriously difficult. It's conjecture given multiple regions and other variables. Everyone has different penmanship, after all. Why should have ancient stone engravers been any different in groove styling than graffiti artists' diversity today? This article's authors deviate from a neutral narrative with a tip of their collective cap toward a favorite, Damian McManus, elevating his beliefs at the expense of trashing those of his 20th century predecessor who catalogued all known Irish and UK Ogham, R.A. Stewart Macalister. This is classic — discretionary editing based on an opinion compliant with an agenda. Macalister's Wikipedia article's been up since 9 December 2012. No one's yet initiated a Wikipedia article on McManus.
And, what about this core text passage in the article's 'Theories of origin' section?
A direct quote excepting re:Macalister parenthetical: Later scholars are largely united in rejecting this theory (re: Macalister assertions of Gaulish-Greco-Roman origins of Ogham circa. 600 BC), however, [McManus] primarily because a detailed study of the letters [citation needed] shows that they were created specifically for the Primitive Irish of the early centuries AD. The supposed links with the form of the Greek alphabet that Macalister proposed can also be disproved.[citation needed] :unquote
Wikipedia article co-author UtDicitur (her/his chosen editorial handle) entered the above passage on 19 May 2008, text that has remained unchanged for 8 years. Inquiring minds want to know: a-) how many scholars were surveyed, b-) were any Macalister backers queried? Archaeologists: kindly support your assertions, reveal your evidence and cast aside your biases!
On 16 July 2010 the superscripts alerting authors of 'citation needed' were added. When a doctoral thesis is tagged with annotation deficiencies by the departmental chair, the candidate had better make corrections. However, in this case omissions do not seem to matter to Fitzpatrick-Matthews. The editor-in-chief enforcer at followed up his No Flat Ogham declaration on 26 August 2013 at his Controversies rant re: Barry Fell, with a link to this article on his next blog. Lacking corroborative annotations, Fitzpatrick-Matthews verifies nothing with this citation. Citing a deficient article favoring one scholar and diminishing another without reason underscores Fitzpatrick-Matthews' spectacular superficiality. The Ogham article is graded 'B' by Wikipedia, and that's generous considering its unsubstantiated claims and unfinished work, undeserving of scholarly merit. While it may escape overt bias, it is not objective.
4 other [citation needed] suggestions are scattered about within 'Theories of origin'. That's the status of the article as of this dateline — archive — the one in force since the latest update 10 January 2016. Clarification, even a revision comporting impartiality, could occur overnight or never.
Scholastic ogham — compare with today's archive live since 25 July 2015 — is a spin-off failure of Ogham. Wikipedia co-author Kwamikagami updated both articles on 13 June 2011, returning to again edit the main article 2 days later. Another, going by the handle Dbachman, modified both articles on 19 November 2010. The subordinate article is such a trainwreck, in fact, that Wikipedia warns with a header: "This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. This article needs additional citations for verification. This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards."
In short, tie your shoelaces, follow your heart, and blindly trust Wikipedia content at your own peril. A particular article may be nothing more than a mouthpiece or a soapbox for an academic looking for likes or the like-minded to jump in to pump their point of view. Not all who publish on Wikipedia make their points cogently (or truthfully). Academics DO gang up on others, who may well be qualified but outside of their sphere of influence, to have them bounced as contributors. I was excluded from Wikipedia's archaeoastronomy article (1 Jan - 13 Apr 2008) when I attempted to balance my opponents' bias. Watch video: Politics of Archaeoastronomy, part 1. Although I supplied multiple, authoritative sourcing for my inserts, they jacketed me as fringe and the arbiters behind the scenes favored the academic whiners who opposed me, 3 against 1, in banning balanced, but as it turned out unpalatable content (to my co-authors) within an independent section far downstream within their article, that could have offset — but just pissed off — those 'experts' in charge (handles: AlunSalt, SteveMcCluskey and a third). Today, their section 8: Fringe archaeoastronomy smears dedicated researchers I've known in an unchallenged dismissal in ¶3. That's an unprofessional swipe I cannot edit, delete, or offer sources in the defense of Ida Jane Gallagher and Barry Fell. That's policy dictated by authorities in archaeology and history, folks, appealing to Wikipedia. Wikipedia favors academically credentialed contributors, disproportionately empowering them at the disadvantage to those they label fringe, a handy, indiscriminate catch-all phrase netting any who disagree with the establishment's grip — in archaeologists' case, a maniacal chokehold — on the information economy, regardless of fringiness. Yes, the reasonableness of some cases is legitimate within an anomalous constellation of many that are ill-conceived. This documentarian, along with countless other citizen-journalists and bloggers bypass the BS web hang-outs, conveying ideas unvarnished to the public on www!s inclusive and judgment-agnostic backbone, rather than the predictably negative filter overarching the dusty, disheveled mind-control corridors of archaeoguru Fitzpatrick-Matthews' pontificating websites, WordPress party-line dogma and stale HTML of a prehistoric (possibly, anti-historic) mindset.
Wikipedia has a credibility grading standard for articles based on the evidence therein presented. Without such a feature, the open-source online destination would not, itself, garner a gram of gravitas.
Incidentally, contemporary know-it-alls who resort to denigrating deceased scholars such as Barry Fell and R.A. Stewart Macalister preclude any possibility of Fell's or Macalister's push-back on doctrine-creep enforced by institutional archaeology. This gaggle of authoritarian dinosaurs on the prowl believes their herd knows best and deserves to prevail.   Bullshit!   Brontosaurus Shit!
*Book of Ballymote (written in 1390, Ogham Tracts): Irish Script on Screen click on Collections, then click on Royal Irish Academy then click on MS 23 P 12 in left column, The Book of Ballymote, then select f.167v - f.177r, and choose four: f169r to f170v)
The scribes writing in the 14th century are closer to Ogham's origins than modern, freshly-minted academic revisionists.


Carl Lehrburger within PathFinder shelter, fall equinox 2004
13 January 2015: Co-adventurer Carl Lehrburger on multiple archaeoastronomical field trips in the high plains drainage of the Arkansas River – see 2006 Ancient American (1.7 MB PDF) article – was interviewed on Coast to Coast AM, a nightly radio program in the USA. At Carl's suggestion C2C invited a mashup of my iTunes vodcasts adding some context to his new book Secrets of Ancient America for which he was being interviewed by host George Noory. C2C included in their online features our 10 minute video on American Archaeology's indifference, even hostility, toward advocates of mid-American petroglyphs indicative of Celtic travel centuries before the voyages of Columbus. After an orchestrated 1977 dismissal, ArchaeoPriests presumed Colorado Ogham rock inscriptions would be ignored and forgotten. Instead, similar sites have been found since 1978 in Oklahoma and since 2000 in Kansas.
author Carl Lehrburger discusses secret and hidden American archaeology on Coast to Coast AM with George Noory on January 13, 2015
graphic link AREAS redirect to appropriate URLs

18 January 2013: The fifth hour-long, weekly episode in the first season of America Unearthed hosted by forensic rock authority Scott Wolter, produced by Committee Films, concludes with a dramatic equinox sunset at Oklahoma's Anubis Cave.
"A Deadly Sacrifice" aired in the series' first season, December 21, 2012 through March 15, 2013, on the H2 History Channel, a US cable network. Most of the last half of this broadcast (Dailymotion timecode 22-29 minutes and 34-42½ minutes) was devoted to equinox heliolithic phenomenon we first documented on video in 1984, updated in our Old News DVD released in 2005, and which is refreshed with my HD documentary Sacred EquinoX.
America Unearthed episode 5 featured yet another stunning sunset black-out on the Anubis Cave's rock easel as the equinox sun set. The complex, ancient solar construct that we'll examine in great detail for Sacred EquinoX was the masterpiece of a remarkable rock art and seasonal cusp memorializer or group a millennium or two ago.

"This incredible story of Mithraism that we just saw play out on the wall, it was amazing. And, really, the only reasonable people that could have done this were the Celts, 15 hundred years ago. I can't think of any other candidates. And, for that reason, this site here should be, I think, designated as a national historic site, and it absolutely changes history in a profound way." — episode's concluding remarks by Scott Wolter, Minneapolis, MN.
Humor Alert: linking Christianity to Mithraism on a 2006 televised BBC celebrity game show in England: origins of Christmas?

21 November 2009: Hacked E-Mail is New Fodder for Climate Dispute, New York Times
"This is not a smoking gun; this is a mushroom cloud" a quote by Patrick J. Michaels, climatologist skeptical of those colleagues who choose to drive man-made global warming as an incontrovertible scientific fact.
"I can't see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow - even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!" — excerpted from an email by Phil Jones, head of the climate research unit at the University of East Anglia.
commentary: Beware Scientific Gate Keepers Corrupted by their own Dogma: With alarming regularity, credentialed specialists in assorted scientific fields display adolescent pettiness and vindictiveness when their dogmatic viewpoints are challenged. Instead of rigorous adherence to a neutral, intellectually scientific moral compass, they descend into political expediency — CYA mode — to maintain the clubby status quo against any criticism, internal or external. So, is it any wonder why skeptics, in a groundswell, see Peer Review as simply a dismissive weapon of know-it-all elitists to handily abort ideas threatening to their collective enlightenments? Academic experts often remind us of their own blesséd books in print as authoritative, desensitized by how myopic or obsolete they are or may be.

4 June 2008: The Politics of Archaeoastronomy: How Wikipedia's Archaeoastronomy Article was Hijacked summarizes my experience with status-quo authority using its power and prestige to control what should be told about archaeoastronomy as well as what should be obscured — the unorthodox and culturally-inappropriate. Watch video. Academic heavy handedness denies us the depths of North American history as it could be studied. Many in the empowered club of the archaeologically-credentialled believe they alone are entitled to establish the parameters of the discussion. The sword of peer-review falls harshly. This impacts indigenous Americans, as well. Standing Rock Sioux member and Native American activist Vine de Loria, Jr., a History Professor at the University of Colorado Boulder, told The Atlantic magazine in its January 2000 edition, enthnographies consistent with institutional dogma are those chosen. "There's no effort to ask the tribes what they remember of things that happened. Numerous tribes do say that strange people doing this or that came through our land, visited us, and so on." The professor asserted a reverse racism motive. Watch video (time :51-1:07) based on what was the publication's online article. has remained missing in action online for years. In April 2016 one Atlantic editor ignored my complaint until I ran it up the publication's chain of command. Even then, her supervisor offered a pledge (that's turned out to be disingenuous) the article would be restored, denying any interference in its disappearance resulted from displeased archaeologists registering their contempt for the article's embarrassing revelations.
See an incisive essay at Stones of Wonder that puts archaeology in its place as a dithering, overly-sensitive humanity rather than as a genuine, analytical science. Also, refer to Martin Brennan's books battling Irish archaeological blockheads in the Boyne Valley in the 1980s, investigating what they would not.


17 January 2008: The Pawnee Americans is an obscure 1925 article recently brought to our attention by a reader. Author Mark E. Zimmerman cites archaeological finds along major riverways throughout mid-America as well as Native American ethnographies to theorize Celts, who came to America long before Columbus, had children with the ancestors of a Pawnee tribe, the same one mentioned by Von Del Chamberlain in his 1982 book When Stars Came Down to Earth: Cosmology of the Skidi Pawnee Indians of North America illustrated with a map of the Milky Way preserved on a tanned elk hide. (NY Times article on Adler Planetarium show "Spirits From the Sky" in late 2000). Although Zimmerman believes these "long heads" slowly migrated from the eastern seaboard, through the Ohio River valley to what is today southeastern Nebraska and northeastern Kansas, perhaps more conveniently, Celtic sailors well may have navigated the inland waterways to bring their Ogham and European archaeoastronomy to southeastern Colorado and the Oklahoma Panhandle. Zimmerman's 13 page article, highlighted and including our map, below, has just been added to our online PDF bibliography. Access the 1.2 MB article here. Watch video.
Zimmerman refers to a tribal elder Lenni Lenape historian and the Walum Olum, tree bark pictographs to aid in recalling song verses. More about the largely ignored, Native American ethnographic record on this, can be found at Frozen Trail, a web site describing Norse travels across an ice bridge from Greenland to Labrador. At the bottom of this external web page are links for more about the controversy regarding this artifact, discredited and discarded by much of academia, still simmering in 2008.

satellite map showing selective mid-American riverways and locations

22 December 2007: Winter Solstice Sunrise at Newgrange Heritage Ireland (Office of Public Works) this year initated a live multi-camera webcast of the event December 21 and benefitted from a wondrously clear sunrise. The 6 minute compilation video was posted on YouTube by Victor Reijs.

9 May 2007: Chas S. Clifton's blog, Letter from Hardscrabble Creek, features his account of our four man camp-out and dawn observation on Beltane, Saturday, 5 May, at the Sun Temple with his digital images. Chas, editor of The Pomegranate: The International Journal of Pagan Studies, author of the newly published historical book Her Hidden Children: The Rise of Wicca and Paganism in America and a teacher at Colorado State University-Pueblo, joined authors Martin Brennan, Phil Leonard and me for the weekend excursion to a remote canyon site in southeastern Colorado, believed to have been a memorial with Ogham inscriptions to a 471 CE triple planetary alignment in the Gemini Constellation on the summer-to-fall cross quarter day in August known as Lughnasad, for which the sunrise's position on the horizon on the spring-to-summer cross quarter Beltane is an exact match. Watch video.
excerpt from Chas S. Clifton's blog:
A wall of lightning flickered silently to the north. Some 200 miles to the east, Greensburg, Kan., was being obliterated, but we did not know it. Our part of Colorado, which had been smashed by blizzards last winter, was warm and quiet. A great horned owl and a screech owl called from the cliffs.

9 March 2007: Yale University announced Peruvian Citadel is Site of Earliest Ancient Solar Observatory in the Americas. The University's news release on its anthropology graduate student Ivan Ghezzi's work as lead author in a research paper published 2 March in the journal Science.
2 March 2007: The Thirteen Towers: Peruvian Citadel is Site of Earliest Ancient Solar Observatory in the Americas, University of Leicester press release on its Professor of Archaeoastronomy Clive Ruggles' research role at Chankillo.

"The real goal of archeology is not to find stuff, but to find out what was going on in people's minds in the past. The most important thing is to people the past and make it come alive, and that is what this does," quote of University of Pennsylvania archaeologist Clark Erickson by the Los Angeles Times on 2 March
summer solstice 2003 sunrise at Chankillo
sunrise at Chankillo
summer solstice 2003
©2007 Ivan Ghezzi


28 February 2007: 'Lost Tomb of Jesus' Claim Called a Stunt: Archaeologists Decry TV Film, Washington Post
Jodi Magness, an archaeologist at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, expressed irritation that the claims were made at a news conference rather than in a peer-reviewed scientific article. By going directly to the media, she said, the filmmakers "have set it up as if it's a legitimate academic debate, when the vast majority of scholars who specialize in archaeology of this period have flatly rejected this," she said.
"This whole case [for the tomb of Jesus] is flawed from beginning to end," she said.

"I haven't even seen the film," Dr. Magness told Scientific American on 2 March. "They're presenting it or setting it up as though we have a discovery and you can react and it's all legitimate and valid which it's not."
commentary: Does science typically judge a body of evidence before it's examined? Is peer-review really any more rigorous?
The Archaeological Institute of America publicized Dr. Magness' screed, Has the Tomb of Jesus Been Discovered? A reasoned look at the evidence, instead of a media circus, yields an answer of NO!, written after she saw the film. She acknowledges,
"We have no contemporary accounts of the death and burial of Jesus," in outlining established archaeological views on Jewish burial customs in Jerusalem of the era. Her use of conditional phrases such as, "it would have been unusual", "presumably", "it was customary", and "if we follow Gospel accounts" hint at possible exceptions and deviations. Nonetheless, Magness blasts Tomb while failing to actually deconstruct or rebut ANY of its core logic: analyses of statistical name frequency, DNA and patina samples, fundamental to the film's alternative view. Archaeology contributing editor Sandra Scham did write a critical review of the film without any of the righteous indignation over some filmmaker exercising his freedom of speech.
Do archaeologists such as Dr. Magness feel their scientific discipline is entitled to police thought and muzzle anyone else's conjecture about what's behind historical artifacts? Peer-reviewed journals carefully screen submissions. Those out of step with what passes for legitimate inquiry face ridicule; challenges to the profession's inflexible dogma usually are rejected. This elitist barrier is why documentarians choose to take their stories directly to the public. Critical thinkers outside the bubble of accredited condescension exist in any mass audience, and they are far better equipped to determine merit or fraud than those myopic with institutional bias. By the nature of their training, archaeologists are preservationists. When any outsider tries to rattle beliefs upheld by the scholarly majority, one can ordinarily expect an icy reception and a glacial response. The predictable archaeological posture is to collectively insert heads in the sand, perhaps after hurling a choice insult at the outsider. Their peer-review in particular sifts and resifts minutia, sometimes for years without consensus, essentially a stalling mechanism to resist change. This karma vs. dogma trainwreck-in-the-making keeps trundling down the track fueled by arrogance. Many archaeologists awed by how dynastic traditions of the past conserved power and authority for centuries, long to elevate their academic club, likewise, to incontrovertible grandeur. There are exceptions, of course. See remarks below by Michael Collins in the Stone Age Columbus excerpt and by Professor Emeritus of Archaeology David H. Kelley in a rebuke to his colleagues.

director Simcha Jacobovici entering the reopened tomb
writer/director Simcha
Jacobovici entering tomb
©2007 Discovery Communications Inc.

Having viewed writer/director Simcha Jacobovici's docudrama on the Discovery Channel (premiere 4 March) plus the one hour debate moderated by Ted Koppel afterwards, I share concerns about the filmmaker's underlying agenda and his sometimes-tortured logic. Nevertheless, I defend the absolute right of Jacobovici and executive producer James Cameron to present a story as they see fit --- hyperbole, speculation, warts and all. They are constitutionally and morally entitled to free expression and the quality of their presentation, controversial as it may be, merits an exhibition venue such as the Discovery Channel. Jacobovici's best moment may have been in the debate when he deftly deflected an archaeologist's juvenile assertion that he was trafficking in "archaeo-porn".
It's the same sort of insulting hostility from archaeologists that I experienced --- including accusations of being "racist" and belonging to a "cult" --- as the documentarian of History on the Rocks and, later, of Old News. Access Colorado Daily (PDF) article of November 16, 2004 for another example of academics lockstep in pronouncing their co-ordinated a priori dismissiveness, in my case, in advance of a CU campus presentation along with Phil Leonard. Such is the confidence of the arrogant critic, in stark contrast to the ideal of measured consideration, a hallmark of scientific inquiry. Since the Old News documentary was not a docudrama, my logical deductions were drawn more coherently based on evidence captured dynamically of precision solar illuminations of rock art implicit of human intent. Time lapsed, motion video of the heliolithic animations, temporally, is far more informative, perceptually, than the very best collection of still photos stapled to dusty documents awaiting formal peer review.


You Tube20 February 2007: Our 3 minute video clips are now available for viewing on YouTube. Just click on their logo to the right. You are welcome to post public remarks alongside any or all of our clips and to invite others to visit and link to our YouTube vids.

19 February 2007: Coast to Coast AM with George Noory, internationally syndicated overnight program on Premiere Radio Network, recap on 'Ancient Voyages' discussion segment:

During the middle two hours, archeologist and anthropologist Gunnar Thompson discussed the forbidden history of the world before Columbus. There were numerous ancient voyages to the New World before 1492, but most people have a tremendous ignorance of this history, he declared.
A Roman map from the fifth century AD showed a southern continent that is similar to South America, and Egyptian artifacts were found in El Salvador in the early 1900's, he continued. However, most historians adopt a dogmatic view of past explorations and discard this type of evidence as either a hoax or a fraud, he commented.


30 January 2007: Stonehenge builders' houses found, BBC News

Archaeologists say they have found a huge ancient settlement used by the people who built Stonehenge. Excavations at Durrington Walls, near the legendary Salisbury Plain monument, uncovered remains of ancient houses. People seem to have occupied the sites seasonally, using them for ritual feasting and funeral ceremonies. In ancient times, this settlement would have housed hundreds of people, making it the largest Neolithic village ever found in Britain.

commentary: Ironic that archaeologists have just now discovered a large habitation site near this world-class monument, while Colorado archaeologist Al Kane clearly mocked the theory of ancient Celts in Colorado on the CBS Evening News of March 23, 1987, "If the people were here, the Celtic people were here in such numbers that they made all these inscriptions, you would have to have settlements here, and they're plain, flat are not here." English archaeologists have surely been hunting for Stonehenge's predictable companion habitation site for decades by now. Meanwhile, their mid-American counterparts refuse to turn a single shovelful of dirt in search of ancient Celtic encampments, assuming none exist. Must the only field research done be to verify an expected outcome? Likewise, why must new ideas be trashed by archaeologists demanding to be shown evidence whose absence is certified by their own complacency? Why authorize any excavation which risks contradicting a dogmatic and frozen perspective? It's a profound indictment of their lack of scientific curiosity they have ignored the potentially target-rich vicinity in and around Crack Cave. They've ignored the US Geologic Survey's Dr. Robert K. Mark's urging after his observance of the cave's targeted illumination on the autumnal equinox of 1986, "I think a lot more research has to be done. I think it would be desirable to bring to the sites more of the experts who have expertise on various aspects of either archaeoastronomy or the ancient languages. Perhaps some excavations could be planned. I'm not an archaeologist. I think that a reasonable case has been made that there's something of interest here that deserves further study and I would hope that it gets that sort of study."

Two University of Cardiff researchers have confirmed the mysterious device found in 1901 aboard a Roman shipwreck was an amazing, elaborately-geared mechanical computer designed to mimic fine eccentricities in solar and lunar movements calculated --- literally cranked in by hand --- for the past, present and future. Having sunk near the Greek island of Antikythera about 65 B.C., the Roman vessel had sailed from Rhodes. Thus, some scholars believe the enigmatic Antikythera Mechanism found in the wreckage may well have been the handiwork of ancient Roman astronomer Hipparchos.
1 December 2006: Mysteries of the ancient Antikythera Mechanism revealed,

Anyone who has seen pictures of the Antikythera Mechanism knows that it is a technology that seems to be a product of the 16th or 17th centuries rather than the first century BC. I remember as a kid wondering whether it was a remnant of some alien civilization, or perhaps an artifact from Atlantis.
The reality is even more interesting. Scientists now believe that the device was a complex and very accurate astronomical computer that could predict the positions of the sun, moon and planets, and even forecast lunar eclipses. The Antikythera device is the oldest-known device that used gear wheels and is by far the most sophisticated object from the ancient world.

29 Nov 2006, An Ancient Computer Surprises Scientists by John Noble Wilford, New York Times (requires member log in)

A computer in antiquity would seem to be an anachronism, like Athena ordering takeout on her cellphone.
The Antikythera Mechanism, sometimes called the world's first computer, has now been examined with the latest in high-resolution imaging systems and three-dimensional X-ray tomography. A team of British, Greek and American researchers was able to decipher many inscriptions and reconstruct the gear functions, revealing, they said, "an unexpected degree of technical sophistication for the period."

commentary: Acknowledging many of our ancient ancestors had sufficient navigational skills to find their way around the world is long overdue. For far too long dogmatic archaeologists have fiercely spurned the growing evidence of worldwide diffusion by biblical era seafarers. As Gloria Farley implored in 1984, "Why do we think that people who were ancient were primitive?"
Antikythera Mechanism
School of Physics and Astronomy
Univ. of Cardiff, Cardiff, Wales, UK
30 Nov issue of journal Nature


10 October 2006: Learning how to live off the sea may have played a key role in the expansion of early humans around the globe, BBC News

Professor Jon Erlandson says the maritime capabilities of ancient humans have been greatly underestimated.
Anthropologists have long regarded the exploitation of marine resources as a recent development in human history, and as peripheral to the development of civilisation. This view has been reinforced by a relative lack of evidence of ancient occupation in coastal areas. Shifting sea levels since the last Ice Age, combined with coastal erosion, would have erased many traces of a maritime past, Professor Erlandson explained.
"I grew up on the coast and I always thought this didn't make much sense. Coastlines are exceptionally rich in resources."


Mel Gibson appearing in trailer for his movie Apocalypto
director Mel Gibson & actor
in his movie Apocalypto
in 'easter egg' flash frame
@1:46 into teaser/trailer
©2006 Touchstone Pictures

27 September 2006: Director Mel Gibson fueled new controversy with "work in progress" previews of his Mayan epic, Apocalypto, to native American audiences and a Texas film fest. See the Apocalypto page in our section on archaeoastronomy in dramatic cinema.
At the Fantastic Fest in Austin, Texas, Gibson remarked that the USA seems to him to be following the same path that led to the tenth century CE downfall of the most advanced civilization in the western hemisphere prior to European colonization. "I don't mean to be a doomsday guy, but the Mayan calendar does end in 2012, boys and girls. Have fun!"
Winner of the Directing and Best Picture Academy Awards® for Braveheart in 1995, Gibson directed the $30 million Passion of the Christ in 2004, to mixed reviews. His production company, Icon, budgeted under $50 million for Apocalypto. A magnet for controversy even before his vocal drunk driving arrest, Gibson is accused of taking dramatic license with the Popul Vuh, use of a modern Mayan dialect, where the film was shot and mass human sacrifices attributed to the Maya. "After what I experienced with The Passion, I frankly don't give a flying f*** about much of what those critics think," he told TIME in March.
26 April 2006: Kennewick Man Skeletal Find May Revolutionize Continent's History,

What the experts were able to ascertain from their brief encounter with Kennewick is that he did not look like a Native American. In fact, Berryman says Kennewick's facial features are most similar to those of a Japanese group called the Ainu, who have a different physical makeup and cultural background from the ethnic Japanese.
Some of Ainu's facial features appear European. Their eyes may lack the Asian almond-shaped appearance, and their hair may be light and curly in color. However, this does not mean that Kennewick Man necessarily was European in origin. His features more closely resemble those of the natives of the Pacific Rim than those of Native Americans.


13 March 2006: TIME cover story: The Untold Saga of Early Man in America, by Michael D. Lemonick & Andrea Dorfman,
TIME cover story, March 13, 2006
The Clovis-first theory is pretty much dead, and the case for coastal migration appears to be getting stronger all the time. But in a field so recently liberated from a dogma that has kept it in an intellectual straitjacket since Franklin Roosevelt was President, all sorts of ideas are suddenly on the table.
At least a couple of archaeologists, including Dennis Stanford of the Smithsonian, even go so far as to suggest that the earliest Americans came from Europe, not Asia, pointing to similarities between Clovis spear points and blades from France and Spain dating to between 20,500 and 17,000 years B.P.
All this speculation is spurring a new burst of scholarship about locations all over the Americas.

Late Winter/Spring 2006: Celebrating the Triple Spiral: a Pagaian Cosmology, by Glenys Livingstone, Ph. D., in Gaian Voices, Vol. 4, Number 1 & 2,, Fryeburg, Maine
It is significant that places like New Grange, Stonehenge and Silbury Hill can only be comprehended when one is actually there and observes the relationship between the place and the cosmic/seasonal events - the Moon and Sun over a period of time, over years - and this is what the researchers had to do. These sites are alive texts - that still speak when the receptive observant mind is present.
Martin Brennan spent years at New Grange observing the interplay of Sunlight and the inner engravings and bowls. He was among the first to assert that New Grange was not a tomb, but was a ritual centre. Brennan says that the Triple Spiral is "perhaps the most powerful representation" of the sacred heritage of ritual celebration of eternal Creation represented in the Wheel of the Year, the phases of the Moon and the lives of all beings.

Newgrange Kerbstone
inscribed kerbstone at
entrance of Newgrange,
NW of Dublin, Ireland

19 February 2006: First Americans May Have Been European, by Bjorn Carey,

19 February 2006, Ancient People Followed 'Kelp Highway' to America, Researcher Says, by Bjorn Carey

21 November 2002: Horizon radio programme on BBC Two, 'Stone Age Columbus' transcript, excerpt:

DR JIM ADOVASIO: On these surfaces that you see before us we have signs of repeated visits by Native Americans to this site. These discolorations literally represent a moment frozen in time. Just below the surface I'm standing on roughly 11,000-11,200 years ago is where the conventional Clovis first model says that the earliest material should stop basically, that there ought not to be anything beneath it, no matter how much deeper we dug.
NARRATOR: But then Adovasio did the unthinkable - he dug below the Clovis layer - and that's when the trouble started.
JIM ADOVASIO: The artifacts simply continued and we recovered blades and blade cores like this all the way down to 16,000BC.
NARRATOR: If Adovasio was right then someone had been in America thousands of years before Clovis. It was an astonishing revelation. In fact it was too astonishing. When Adovasio published his findings he was simply dismissed out of hand.
JIM ADOVASIO: The majority of the archaeological community was acutely sceptical and they invented all kinds of reasons why these dates couldn't possibly be right. People have invested in the Clovis first position for more than 70 years. For a lot of people they think that this is not only a repudiation of a well accepted dogma, it's a repudiation of themselves.
NARRATOR: And so it was for other scientists. Anyone who dug back beyond 11,500 years ago had to be either mad or worse.
MICHAEL COLLINS: The best way in the world to get beaten up professionally is to claim you have a pre-Clovis site.
DENNIS STANFORD: When you dig deeper than Clovis a lot of people do not report it because they're worried about the reaction of their colleagues.


Atlantic Monthly's January 2000 cover story OFF-LINE FOR 5 YEARS and counting...

The online-periodical's management has been unresponsive to my 2016 outreach to have this article restored to access in its public search of archived articles. The Diffusionists Have Landed by Marc K. Stengel has been missing in action, although articles dating back to 1857 are accessible online. Why? Is it that outraged mainstream archaeology pressured the Atlantic into self-censorship in neglecting its institutional anti-diffusionist dogma?
[Rock Sioux tribe member Vine] Deloria bridles at what he sees as the reverse racism implicit in the establishment's dismissal of all things diffusionist. To him, the mainstream academic position that defends the Clovis-only hypothesis smacks of paternalism. He marvels at "the isolation of archaeologists today," and has written, "I have in the neighborhood of 80 books dealing in one way or another with Precolumbian expeditions to the Western Hemisphere." These books, he says, range from utter nonsense to some quite sophisticated reinterpretations of archaeological anomalies in light of new findings.
Scrubbed!: the once active URL link — — for the article yields only the article's title, subtitle and author — the Internet Archive Wayback Machine confirms this in its initial web-crawl capture of 15 September 2014. Furthermore, The Atlantic's ensemble online January 2000 edition also omits the content of the article's 3 sections, but displaying title, subtitle and author's name. The thumbnail image of the cover promoting this article recently disappeared, after notice was given. An actual printed copy of that edition verifies the excerpt, transcribed verbatim, above. I suspect archaeological whiners complaining to the periodical's editorial staff resulted in squelching an unflattering, but comprehensively researched, article illuminating evidence and insights the establishment would rather not have the public read. I contacted both the publication and the author inquiring about a reason for the scrubbing or inadvertent omission.
The Atlantic's Digital Strategy and Operations Product Manager Jess Remington emailed me April 4:

We are in the process of investigating why this article is missing.
By April 13, having heard nothing further, I emailed Remington re-requesting an explanation. This reply arrived within 5 minutes:
The article body is missing for technical reasons: when we imported older articles into our new web template, there were bugs in some of the articles. Since this is a much older article and since we have limited technical resources, we cannot guarantee a timeline for when we'll be able to make this fix. I can guarantee you that we do not surreptitiously remove controversial content from our website.
Unconvinced by this rushed "no-fault" dismissal, I've asked for a supervisory review by The Atlantic. Before "The Diffusionists Have Landed" vanished, one of its 3 sections had survived for months or years. Before then, the complete article was online for a decade or more. As a webmaster since 1995, I've encountered catastrophic "bugs" in URL files invariably destroying ALL content, but never exhibiting selective content deterioration phased over time. The Atlantic's hasty response after 9 days of unresponsiveness appears to be a bogus excuse. The Atlantic boasts of nearly complete archives of all editions published since late 1995 alongside some of its earliest features by Ralph Waldo Emerson and Harriet Beecher Stowe published in 1857, successfully imported "bug-free" into their new web template!

Author Marc K. Stengel and The Atlantic's Digital Strategy and Operations Manager Betsy Cole both responded April 14. I understand that although the publication's exclusivity to the article's copyright has expired, both parties approve of the expedited return of "The Diffusionists Have Landed" article. I am not satisfied with The Atlantic's explanation of the fault of old technology responsible for the omission. The magazine assured the article would be restored by the summer of 2016, yet it is now apparent editors have no intention of following through. Citations such as mine cannot be independently verified with immediacy, online. As the article's blackout persists, it's not the technology at fault, but a dark agenda. Regressive archaeologists everywhere achieve what they so desire, a public dialogue parameter excluding what they know to be meritorious criticism of how they characteristically act as obstructionists using such unilateral and arbitrary practices as "peer review" exclusion of above ground evidence contradicting their collective mindset.

Spring 1990: Review of Archaeology, Past Issues, Volume 11, Number 1, 'Proto-Tifinagh and Proto-Ogham in the Americas (Review of Fell; Fell and Farley, Fell and Reinert, Johannessen, et al.; McGlone and Leonard, Totten),' article by David H. Kelley, Professor Emeritus of Archaeology, University of Calgary, acknowledging tempered respect for fellow epigrapher Dr. Barry Fell's breakthrough work:

I have no personal doubts that some of the inscriptions which have been reported are genuine Celtic ogham. Despite my occasional harsh criticism of Fell's treatment of individual inscriptions, it should be recognized that without Fell's work there would be no ogham problem to perplex us. We need to ask not only what Fell has done wrong in his epigraphy, but also where we have gone wrong as archaeologists in not recognizing such an extensive European presence in the New World.
play video Carl Lehrburger link More link videoplay