Ask yourself: would you drink whiskey from a pilsner glass? Or red wine from a highball?

Different alcoholic beverages are traditionally enjoyed from differently-shaped glasses. For example, a smooth glass of fine bourbon whiskey would traditionally be served in the old-fashioned glass shown above and to the left, while cocktails such as a screwdriver or a gin and tonic are traditionally served in a highball glass resembling the one above right (purists might argue that the glass on the right above is a collins glass, for serving a Tom Collins and other such drinks, but both types of glass usually feature high, straight sides and a narrower mouth than an old-fashioned).

Similarly, various types of beer have their own types of glasses, such as the pilsner shown below left, which has something of an hourglass shape to accommodate a head of foam. Wine connoisseurs will have their own opinions about the best-shaped wineglasses to enjoy a full-bodied red or a crisp white. Typically, reds are served in wider, fuller glasses resembling the one below center, while whites are usually served in glasses with slightly taller sides and narrower mouths than glasses for reds, such as the one below right.



















When we consider these deeply-ingrained cultural preferences for the kinds of glass considered appropriate for the kinds of drink, we might naturally ask ourselves whether these preferences are merely arbitrary traditions that grew up over time, or whether there is an actual functional reason behind the connection of one drink to one glass.

As it happens, there are good reasons that different forms of alcohol are served in differently-shaped glasses. Different glasses deliver the alcohol to different parts of the mouth of the taster, resulting in a different experience. The size and shape of the mouth of the "delivery vehicle" matters as well -- the exact same beer will taste different if it is consumed directly from the bottle than if it is poured into a nice wide-mouthed bar glass. For wines, the size and shape of the bowl of the wineglass will influence the way the air interacts with the wine when it is swirled around in the glass and as it is delivered to the tongue, resulting in different levels of oxidation and different flavor and perception. True aficionados of certain drinks (or of many different drinks) can probably add even more reasons to this list.

The fact that the shape of the glass that holds the drink matters (and matters a great deal) might be a good metaphor for the theory that John Anthony West puts forward in Serpent in the Sky: The High Wisdom of Ancient Egypt. While the book itself deals with many very deep subjects, one of them is certainly the likelihood that the enormous time and energy and resources which the ancient Egyptians devoted to building tombs and temples and other structures was not simply the result of "unqualified superstition" that went along with an obsessive and bizarre preoccupation with death, but rather that all of the various forms of art and architecture were organized according to "specific harmonic laws" designed to actually channel the natural energy according to laws and sciences which we have now forgotten (quotations are from West pages 93 and 92, respectively).

In other words, the actual physical layout and proportions and distances that were built and arranged, often in massive stone, were designed according to a lost knowledge of resonances and harmonics -- that their shape and structure "made a difference," if you will, just as the shape of a wine glass "makes a difference." They were designed, not to deliver wine, but to channel and connect with other forms of energy (we have already discussed the fact that food itself is a form of energy, energy which has been incorporated from the sun and the rain and the soil, and so wine of course is as well).

We might also point the reader back to this post, in which we examine arguments from a completely different researcher who found evidence that ancient cultures and their descendents around the world may have tried to harvest the earth's natural telluric energy and other forms of electromagnetism in order to stimulate the growth of their seed crops -- and perhaps they were able to do so successfully.

As Mr. West writes: "On a practical level, this means that the sages of Egypt were deliberately and knowledgeably organising the ambiance or atmosphere of an entire civilisation in harmony with cosmic requirements" (116).

We have all probably experienced in our own lives the different "vibes" we get from different locations, or from being in buildings of different architectural shapes and layouts, or from working in a cluttered office versus an organized one. This is perhaps another way of getting at the argument that Mr. West, following R. A. Schwaller de Lubicz, is putting forward about the purpose of much of what we find in ancient Egypt.

Another parallel to this discussion would be an examination of the beliefs of Chinese feng shui, which teaches that the orientation and internal arrangements of buildings and rooms have real impacts. Perhaps some of this is mere superstition which has been built up in more recent centuries, but perhaps it also incorporates remnants of the very same ancient knowledge possessed by a very ancient civilization, whether that of ancient Egypt or of some even more remote predecessor of the two. We have already seen evidence that some of the precessional knowledge and numbers that were known and used by the ancient Egyptians turn up in traditional Chinese culture as well.

Those who may scoff at such possibilities should consider other examples from the real world in which energy and vibrations can and do have an actual impact, such as those discussed in this previous post.

If we are careful to use the correct glass when enjoying a Bordeaux or a bourbon, because we realize that the shape of the container has a real impact on the experience, then wouldn't we also want to consider the other ways in which we might be impacted by the shapes and proportions of the world around us?

Caution: certain vegetable oils may be harmful when heated

One of the assertions made in the Mathisen Corollary book and throughout this blog is that it appears not only possible but very likely that the widely held beliefs about the geology of the earth (including the tectonic theory) and the history of ancient mankind are completely incorrect.

Many readers may ask themselves, "Is it really possible that so many people, including so many well-trained academicians and researchers, could be wrong?" In light of the implications for Darwinism, some readers have also asked, "Hasn't Darwinism been proven?" -- in other words, isn't the evidence that has led to the conventional theories so strong and so abundant that the theories can be considered fact for all practical purposes?

Some of these arguments are addressed in the dialogue found in the new introduction to the book. Additionally, we have made the analogy to the conventional wisdom which argues that fat and cholesterol are bad for us, a theory that is so widely accepted and which is supported by so many academicians, scientists, and government officials and bureaus that it seems beyond question (see this and this previous post). Those who examine the research that launched the conventional view that fat and cholesterol are harmful might reasonably expect to be asked quite often, "Hasn't the connection between lipids and heart disease and other deadly problems been proven?"

The answer to this question, just as to the question of whether theories about tectonics, Darwinism, or the timeline of mankind's ancient past have been proven beyond the point of reasonable doubt or criticism, is: "Not hardly."

Before revisiting the apparently tangential topic of whether the food advice we have been getting from our government and our schools for fifty years may be not only wrong but harmful, let us first examine a quotation from John Anthony West's magnificent exposition of the theory of R.A. Schwaller de Lubicz, Serpent in the Sky, a work whose importance was briefly discussed in this recent post.

As part of his larger discussion about the fact that we live in a universe composed of energy and wavelengths, which interact with the human body and which have resonances and harmonies at various wavelengths, resonances and harmonies which the ancient Egyptians appear to have perceived and understood to a very advanced degree, Mr. West writes:

Since Einstein's relativity theory it has been known and accepted that matter is a form of energy, a coagulation or condensation of energy. One consequence of this is that, for scientists at any rate, materialism has been a provisionally impossible philosophy, a fact which has done nothing to prevent most scientists from professing it. 120.

While it does not address the lipid hypothesis which alleges a harmful correlation between consumption of fat and cholesterol and circulatory health, Mr. West's book does explore the evidence that the ancient Egyptians possessed a very advanced medical knowledge, as well as the belief expressed by ancient writers that the Egyptians were the healthiest people in the ancient world (137 - 138). It should be clear, however, from the quotation above that the food we eat contains the energy that is transferred to us, energy that is stored in the grapes or the tomatoes or the grains or the animals that we eventually eat, and that paying attention to this connection between matter and energy may be important in all areas of human endeavor, including health and diet.

It is very interesting, then, to note the arguments found in the excellent 1999 book Nourishing Traditions: The Cookbook that Challenges Politically Correct Nutrition and the Diet Dictocrats, by Sally Fallon. There, the author notes that the theory, called the lipid hypothesis, of "a direct relationship between the amount of saturated fat and cholesterol in the diet and the incidence of coronary heart disease" may rest on very questionable interpretation of the data, beginning with the foundational work of Ancel Keys in the 1950s and continuing through the present day (4).

She notes numerous reasons to doubt this hypothesis, including the fact that coronary heart disease was very rare in America before 1920 and the replacement of the consumption of traditional animal fat with the consumption of dietary vegetable oils in the form of margarine and refined oils, as well as sugar, or the fact that studies of Yemenite Jews who moved to Israel and replaced diets that once consisted of fats solely from animal origin with diets containing margarine and vegetable oil (and lots of sugar) showed little evidence of heart disease and diabetes among those on the old diet but high levels of both diseases among those on the new regime (5-6).

She says, "Politically correct dietary gurus tell us that polyunsaturated oils are good for us and that saturated fats cause cancer and heart disease. Such misinformation about the relative virtues of saturated fats versus polyunsaturated oils has caused profound changes in western eating habits" (10). Polyunsaturated fatty acids remain liquid even when refrigerated, and are found in many vegetable oils from northern climates, such as those derived from canola, safflower, corn, or soy. She then argues that:

One reason the polyunsaturates cause so many health problems is that they tend to become oxidized or rancid when subjected to heat, oxygen and moisture as in cooking and processing. Rancid oils are characterized by free radicals -- that is, single atoms or clusters with an unpaired electron in an outer orbit. These compounds are extremely reactive chemically. [. . .] Is it any wonder that tests and studies have repeatedly shown a high correlation between cancer and heart disease with the consumption of polyunsaturates? New evidence links exposure to free radicals with premature aging, with autoimmune diseases such as arthritis and with Parkinson's disease, Lou Gherig's disease, Alzheimer's and cataracts. 10.

In other words, it appears that adding certain levels of energy (through heating) to some types of foods, especially those containing polyunsaturated fatty acids (which our body needs and which are beneficial in some forms), can change their energy into harmful energy, a change which takes place at the molecular level and involves the pairing or lack of pairing of electrons. The observation of John West about the importance of the connection between matter and energy appears to be extremely relevant to what we eat.

With all of the evidence available that appears to contradict the lipid hypothesis, it is somewhat amazing that more people do not begin to question what they are taught about diet, and that so many people believe that the dietary advice dispensed by schools, governments, and doctors rests on theories that have "been proven" and are therefore beyond question.

Perhaps more people should adopt the attitude that it is important to examine the evidence for themselves, at least when it comes to matters as important as healthy eating, Darwinism, tectonics, and the history of mankind's ancient past.

Bruce Lee, 1940 - 1973

On this day in 1973, martial artist and film superstar Bruce Lee died of mysterious and still-disputed causes, at the age of only 32. During his life, he probably did more to bring the martial arts into the public consciousness than anyone else has ever done, before or since.

Above, Bruce Lee is pictured with a Wing Chun muk jong (or "wooden dummy"). It is taught that the wooden dummy form consists of 108 movements. This well-known fact is not a secret and can be confirmed through a very simple search on the internet for the words "wooden dummy 108."

Less well-known, however, is the fact that 108 is an ancient number of great significance, which appears in some of the earliest mythologies that exist today, from thousands of years BC. The ancient Vedic ritual of the Agnicayana, called "the world's oldest surviving ritual," involves the construction of a ritual fireplace containing 10,800 bricks, which is another manifestation of the same important number.

The number 108 is a precessional number, encoding a sophisticated understanding of the astronomical phenomenon of precession. Those who defend traditional timelines of human history do not admit that mankind understood or knew of precession at all until less than 200 years BC, and they will certainly not admit that ancient mankind understood it to the degree that they could measure its rate with the precision required to obtain the precessional numbers 72, 108, 432 and the rest.

Thus, to the extent in which he participated in martial arts (and at a very high level, to the point that this participation became part of every fiber of his being), Bruce Lee participated in an activity which even today carries hidden aspects of very ancient human wisdom, transmitting them through the ages, from generation to generation.

May he rest in peace.

Happy birthday, Gregor Mendel!

Gregor Mendel was born on July 20, 1822. His pioneering work on genetics using pea plants are commonly taught to students as somehow supporting the theories of Darwinian evolution, although they actually refute Darwinian evolution. Today, his theories on genetics, which are correct, are used as a crutch to support Darwinian assertions, which are incorrect.

Mendel's theories were originally viewed as being contradictory to Darwinian evolution by prominent evolutionary thinkers, such as Alfred Russell Wallace (1823 - 1913), who was really the co-progenitor of the theory of evolution called Darwinian evolution today (and who in fact sketched out the theory before Darwin did), and who recognized that the results of Mendel's work indicated the fact that successive generations (in Mendel's case, successive generations of pea plants) only manifested traits which were already present in the genes of the parents. In other words, when a specific trait (such as light or dark color in a pepper moth, or the color of a pea's flower, the color of its pod, the shape of its pod, or the shape of its seeds) manifests itself, Mendel's laws explain that that trait was passed on from the alleles (gene variants) already present in the parents.

Wallace was so clear on the power of Mendel's experiments to counter the proposed mechanism of Darwinian evolution (which relies upon mutations producing new traits which are then passed on through natural selection) that he declared:

on the general relation of Mendelism to Evolution, I have come to a very definite conclusion. This is, that it has no relation whatever to the evolution of species or higher groups, but is really antagonistic to such evolution! The essential basis of evolution, involving as it does the most minute and all-pervading adaptation to the whole environment, is extreme and ever-present plasticity, as a condition of survival and adaptation. But the essence of Mendelian characters is their rigidity. They are transmitted without variation, and therefore, except by the rarest of accidents, can never become adapted to ever varying conditions. Letters and Reminiscences (1916), 340.

Hydroplate theory founder and author Dr. Walt Brown points out this quotation in a footnote on page 50 of the 8th edition his book on the hydroplate theory, and the interested reader can find the entire Wallace quotation for himself in the original 1916 publication of Alfred Russell Wallace's letters, which is available as an online book here.

Mendel's laws were later co-opted by the intellectual descendents of Darwin, who argued that over time, "genetic drift" will introduce changes to the number of alleles in a population, which -- along with mutation -- enable the origin of new traits over time. However, as all breeders know who set about to deliberately select certain traits in domesticated animals (cows, horses, or dogs, for example), the variations available are bounded by certain limits. It is possible to breed taller or shorter horses or dogs (because alleles for those traits are already present, and can be selected in order to produce descendents which exhibit such traits), but it is not possible to breed a dog or a horse with wings or with gills (in fact, breeders realize that the hybrids which are possible hit a boundary long before anything as outlandish as that).

This fact is important when considering one of the principle conflicts between the hydroplate theory and the Darwinian theory. The Darwinian theory relies upon a mechanism of mutations plus natural selection, plus extremely vast amounts of time. Setting aside the fact that mutations are almost always detrimental (and produce offspring that cannot or do not reproduce), the hydroplate theory undermines the crucial ingredient of vast amounts of time.

Uniformitarian theories argue that processes going on today could, given enough time, create all or most of the features we find on the earth today, even features such as the Grand Canyon. The hydroplate theory, which argues that the evidence appears to demonstrate that the features on the earth were formed by the events surrounding a catastrophic flood event in a short period of time, undermines the vast amounts of time supplied by uniformitarian theories. If the Grand Canyon could have been carved in days, weeks or months (rather than tens or hundreds of millions of years), then it could have been formed within the past ten or twenty thousand years, which completely undercuts the long ages Darwinian theory requires for its proposed mechanism of mutation plus natural selection.

On the other hand, Mendel's theories would explain how survivors of a relatively recent flood, from many species including mankind, can now exhibit very different traits and characteristics. Some branches of the human family have a much higher percentage of individuals with red hair, for instance, while other people groups are characterized by being taller, shorter, having more or less facial hair among males, and so forth. These characteristics are not the result of mutations, but of the selection of genetic traits which were already present as possibilities within the human genomes of the parents. This fact of Mendelian genetics is the point which Alfred Russell Wallace recognized as being extremely damaging to his and Darwin's theory.

Wallace also recognized the absolute co-dependence of the Darwinian theory of evolution and the uniformitarian geological theories of their friend and colleague Charles Lyell (1797 - 1875). In this collection of Wallace's letters, he declares on page 78 that:

The evidence for the production of the organic world [in other words, biological species] by the simple laws of inheritance is exactly of the same nature as that for the production of the present surface of the earth -- hills and valleys, plains, rocks, strata, volcanoes, and all their fossil remains -- by the slow and natural action of natural causes now in operation [i.e. non-catastrophic causes]. The mind that will ultimately reject Darwin must (to be consistent) reject Lyell also.

This is a profound insight and one with which we can still agree. It explains the vehement opposition of academia and the scientific community to the overwhelming evidence that the earth's geology was shaped by catastrophic forces and not by uniformitarian processes ("natural causes now in operation," plus enormous amounts of time). Darwinists cannot consider this evidence, because they know that the mind that will reject Lyell is ripe for rejecting Darwin as well. For a catalog of some of this overwhelming geological evidence, see the links in this post, as well as some of the posts published since then, including this one and this one.

In short, it is quite clear that Mendel's work, celebrated by Darwinists as supportive of their theories, in fact undermines Darwinism quite powerfully, as Alfred Russell Wallace himself perceived. On the other hand, Mendel's findings are perfectly compatible with the positions put forward by the hydroplate theory of Walt Brown, and in fact explain the numerous variations that we find within the human family and within other species, which have taken place since the flood. Dr. Brown discusses Mendel's work further on his website, here and here.

Google has chosen to honor Mendel's birthdate all day with a special "Doodle" featuring pea pods (see below). Based on the fact that the company also created a special world-wide Doodle for Darwin's birthday which it ran on February 12, 2009, it may be that the company believes the conventional wisdom that Mendel's work supports the quasi-religious doctrines of Darwinism. However, as the insights of pioneering Darwinist Alfred Russell Wallace make clear, Mendel's work actually refutes Darwinism, as do theories such as the hydroplate theory which expose the fallacy of Lyell's principles of uniformitarian geology.

Why do we listen to beautiful music about heartbreak and misery?

Why do we human beings write beautiful songs about heartbreak and misery? Above is a video of Dwight Yoakam singing his classic heartbreak song, "It won't hurt," demonstrating his ability to take the genre to a very high level indeed. In fact, a catalog of Mr. Yoakam's songs would reveal that a very high percentage of his work deals with heartbreak and misery (even more than most country music, which as a whole has a higher percentage of such work than other categories of music). The studio version of this particular song can be purchased on this album.

Country music, of course, is not the only style which writes beautiful, harmonic music about heartbreak. Here is a link to a classic Peter Tosh song, "Why must I cry," which shows that reggae, perhaps one of the most upbeat and "happiest-sounding" styles of music ever made, can be just as evocative and deal with the subject of heartache and misery just as eloquently as can Dwight Yoakam. The song above can be purchased as part of Peter Tosh's outstanding first solo album.

So, what motivates the age-old human urge to write such beautiful melodies about such a miserable experience? Those who have experienced heartbreak in love probably know the answer instinctively -- because such music is actually therapeutic. Music can heal -- the ancient Greek god Apollo was both the god of music and the god of medicine.

We have discussed in previous posts the fact that the mere sound of a drum or other rhythm evokes a physical response in us, almost unconsciously. It is clear that music and sound (which is composed of wavelengths) has an actual impact on the human body, which is itself designed to resonate. We have also seen that, at least in shamanic cultures, there is a perceived link between time, rhythm, and the planets.

It is well-known that some people believe that talking to plants in a positive way will be beneficial for their actual growth. While this has never been clinically proven thus far, there are plenty of anecdotal stories suggesting that there may be some truth underneath this widespread belief. There is also the incident recorded in Matthew 21 and Mark 11 in which Christ curses a fig-tree, which then withers. He tells his disciples:

Verily I say unto you, If ye have faith, and doubt not, ye shall not only do this which is done to the fig tree, but also if ye shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; it shall be done. Matthew 21:21.

This is clearly a very heavy subject, but it relates directly to the thesis outlined in Serpent in the Sky: The High Wisdom of Ancient Egypt, by John Anthony West (first published in 1979). In that book, which examines and elaborates upon the insights of R. A. Schwaller de Lubicz (1887 - 1961), Mr. West demonstrates that the ancient Egyptians were well aware of the power and importance of proportions, harmonies, and the Golden Ratio, and that concern for the impact of these harmonies was foundational to everything they did for nearly four thousand years.

The Golden Ratio is related to music and harmony, because sound is made up of waves, and changing the wavelength changes the tone that is produced (just as it changes the color of light). This principle is the reason that guitarists place their finger on various strings to change their vibration and the wavelength of the tone they produce.

The Golden Ratio is found in countless monuments of antiquity, not just the pyramids of Giza but also Stonehenge (which is closely related to the pyramids, as discussed here), the Parthenon, and numerous others in the New World and the islands of the Pacific as well. It is also found in numerous proportions in the natural world, in plants, trees, flowers, insects, amphibians, reptiles, and even the human body.

The importance of the Golden Ratio and its prevalence in ancient monuments is discussed in one chapter of The Mathisen Corollary book. However, the work of John Anthony West really takes the examination of this subject to the deepest level and proposes a completely revolutionary thesis regarding what the ancient Egyptians were all about.

Those who are skeptical of the power of proportions and harmonies should consider the power of music, which they have probably experienced themselves. There is much more that can be said on this subject.

Let's go to Mars

Today, the Mathisen Corollary blog visits the planet Mars to investigate features on its surface that appear to have been carved by powerful flows of liquid water. Scientists are still at a loss to explain how liquid water could have been present on Mars.

The image above shows the mighty Ma'adim Vallis, one of the largest canyons on Mars, over 435 miles long and almost 1.25 miles wide in places. Most scientists agree that it was formed by powerful flows of liquid water, although there is considerable disagreement as to how this could have taken place. Mars is extremely cold, colder than any place on earth (including Antarctica in the winter), averaging 80^o F below zero. As we would expect from such conditions, water on Mars is typically only found in frozen form (including as wispy frozen cloud vapors).

Additionally, the lower pressure on Mars means that water freezes at higher temperatures than it does on earth. Thus, conventional scientists are forced to come up with theories to explain some kind of massive "climate change" on Mars which resulted in the massive drops in pressure and temperature from a postulated ancient past in which Mars had more atmospheric pressure and warmer temperatures to support liquid water -- a difficult task!

This NASA website, for example, explains that "geologic features provide ample evidence that billions of years ago liquid water flowed on the surface of Mars" (this is clear from the image above and the image below, among thousands of others from Mars which could also illustrate the obvious presence of liquid water in the past).

The image below, from the Mariner 9 mission (1971 - 1972) shows a multi-braided channel whose "character indicates it might have been eroded by fluids," according to H.E. Holt of NASA in Mars as Viewed by Mariner 9 (1974). Note the "teardrop-shaped" islands which geologists recognize as characteristic of very powerful flow of water or other liquid, with the blunt end upstream and the pointed end downstream. This particular channel is 28 miles wide, indicating a massive volume was required to create these features.

As the NASA site above indicates, scientists agree that the liquid in question was probably water (other candidates being absent on Mars, which does have water in the form of ice at the pole caps and in the atmosphere, as well as in frozen form in the surface). They just don't have a good theory for how it could have flowed upon the surface in such volume. Following the NASA page further, we read that:

scientists who studied images from the Viking orbiters kept encountering features that appeared to be formed by flowing water - among them deep channels and canyons, and even features that appeared to be ancient lake shorelines. Added to this were more recent observations by Mars Pathfinder and Mars Global Surveyor which suggested widespread flowing water in the planet's past. Some scientists identified features which they believe appear to be carved by torrents of water with the force of 10,000 Mississippi Rivers.

There is no general agreement, however, on what form water took on the early Mars. Two competing views are currently popular in the science community. According to one theory, Mars was once much warmer and wetter, with a thicker atmosphere; it may well have boasted lakes or oceans, rivers and rain. According to the other theory, Mars was always cold, but water trapped as underground ice was periodically released when heating caused ice to melt and gush forth onto the surface.

In either case, the question of what happened to the water remains a mystery. Most scentists do not feel that Mars' climate change was necessarily caused by a cataclysmic event such as an asteroid impact that, perhaps, disturbed the planet's polar orientation or orbit. Many believe that the demise of flowing water on the surface could have resulted from gradual climate change over many millennia as the planet lost its atmosphere.

Beyond the fact that these theories are speculative and lack a clear mechanism to explain what took place beyond hazy generalizations, the features themselves do not indicate the kind of geological shaping that would have taken place on a Mars with more abundant water and thicker atmosphere on which water flowed for centuries or millennia before disappearing due to some unknown "gradual climate change [. . .] as the planet lost its atmosphere."

In a 1980 article entitled "Geologists theorize floods carved out Martian landscape" published in the Arizona Republic and written by Grant E. Smith, NASA chief of planetary geology Joseph Boyce is quoted as saying that while "water is probably the center for all the studies" attempting to explain the geology of Mars, studies of the features indicate that water appears to have acted once with great force over a very limited time in each instance. "Each channel has run only once," Professor Boyce said ("Geologists theorize floods carved out Martian landscape," Arizona Republic, January 16, 1980).

Another problem for those who believe in a theory of climate change on Mars (above and beyond the incredible scope of the climate change in question) is the fact that the source of the water does not appear to have been from rainfall or precipitation out of the atmosphere. "If it was atmospheric, such as the rain here on Earth," Dr. Boyce says, "there should be a lot of tributaries flowing into the channels. There aren't. Oh, there are a few, but not nearly as many as there should be."

Instead, the evidence points to some sort of massive water release causing rapid flooding, Dr. Boyce is quoted as saying in the article. "We've studied the mechanics, and it's possible there was a tremendous, catastrophic release of the water from some structure there, such as possibly a glacier. It would be like an artesian well," he said.

It just so happens that, just as it explains the phenomenon of the cratering pattern found on our own moon, the hydroplate theory provides a scientific and coherent explanation that is far more satisfactory for explaining the geological features found on Mars than are the vague speculations of those who argue for a hypothetical warm and moist Mars of billions of years ago which somehow lost its atmosphere over the millennia.

The hydroplate theory of Dr. Walt Brown argues that the event which produced a worldwide flood on earth was violent enough to launch tons of debris and water from earth into space. This debris and water ended up (in frozen form) as comets and asteroids, and some of it ended up on the moon and on Mars as well.

On this page of his website (a website which contains the entire text of his book for anyone to access free of charge), Dr. Brown explains:

Icy asteroids and comets bombarding Mars released liquid water, which often pooled inside craters or flowed downhill and eroded the planet’s surface. (Most liquid water soaked into the soil and froze.) Each impact was like the bursting of a large dam here on Earth. Brief periods of intense, hot rain and localized flash floods followed. These Martian hydrodynamic cycles quickly “ran out of steam,” because Mars receives relatively little heat from the Sun. While the consequences were large for Mars, the total water was small by Earth’s standards—about twice the water in Lake Michigan.

He notes that this process would explain the distinctive erosion channels that are found high on the crater walls of craters on Mars, where water that was frozen at the surface of Mars from previous impacts (especially from those which took place right after the flood on earth and which soaked into the Martian surface and froze) melted from the impact of a meteorite and then flowed down into the huge crater that was now scooped out below the surface.

The gullies appear to originate in large amounts at the level of the former Martian surface (on the edge of the crater rim) and flow downward into the new gully until the water runs out in smaller and smaller gulleys, exactly the opposite of what happens on earth where rain causes smaller gulleys in mountains and ridges, which then join together into larger and larger streams, carving larger and larger channels.

Dr. Brown notes that this evidence also appears to discredit the other speculative theory quoted above from the NASA site, which states that rather than having a warm climate with rain in the past, Mars has always been cold and arid but that subsurface water which had been "trapped underground as ice" somehow worked its way up to the surface and "gushed forth." As Dr. Brown explains, any water trying to migrate upwards from deep within Mars would freeze miles below the surface.

Further, if the water's source was deep below, we would not expect to find the erosion channels that originate from water that was at the rim of the crater alone (with no water deeper down), which is exactly what is found on the craters of Mars (see the images in Figure 171 of this previously-referenced page in Dr. Brown's site). The evidence supports Dr. Brown's explanation that water came from above at some point in the past and soaked into the topsoil of Mars in certain places, where it froze. When a later impact of enough violence melts this water, it cascades down the sides of the crater, beginning at the rim and then petering out. Such features could not have been created by conventional rainfall (as in the wet-warm Mars theory) or by subterranean gushing (as in the dry-cold Mars theory).

Furthermore, such features are still being formed today, as comparisons of images taken by successive Mars missions over the past four decades have proven! The 2006 article "Present-Day Impact Cratering Rate and Contemporary Gully Activity on Mars" published in the journal Science by Michael C. Malin, Kenneth S. Edgett, Liliya V. Posiolova, Shawn M. McColley, and Eldar Z. Noe Dobrea explains that "new gully deposits, formed since August 1999, are light toned and exhibit attributes expected from emplacement aided by a fluid with the properties of liquid water: relatively long, extended, digitate distal and marginal branches, diversion around obstacles, and low relief." The authors conclude that "The observations suggest that liquid water flowed on the surface of Mars during the past decade." This information should effectively silence the arguments that Martian geological features were carved billions of years ago during a hypothetical "warm-moist" Mars that underwent speculative "climate change."

The striking features of Mars clearly support the details of the hydroplate theory, which explains their existence far better than any other theory (even the authors of the article just mentioned cannot explain their findings by any conventional theory: they say that an "as-yet unrecognized processes of denudation must be operating"). The surface of Mars is just another piece of evidence in a long line of such evidence which supports the hydroplate theory.

Interestingly enough (and not surprisingly), the hydroplate theory which explains so many geological mysteries both on earth and on Mars also explains many mysteries of human history related to the pyramids, Stonehenge, and other controversial subjects from mankind's ancient past. These are discussed in the Mathisen Corollary book, the first work to apply this groundbreaking theory of a catastrophic global flood to the evidence that mankind's past was far different from what we are taught in school.

The skeleton from Olduvai Gorge

In their groundbreaking 1993 study Forbidden Archaeology: the Hidden History of the Human Race, Michael A. Cremo and Richard L. Thompson chronicle page after page of anomalous archaeological evidence which casts serious doubt upon the foundations of conventional anthropology.

The authors go on for fully 828 pages listing evidence of skeletons, tools, incised bones, coins, copper rings, hearths and charcoal from fires, footprints, pierced teeth, and even iron pots, nails, and gold and silver chains and other jewelry found in strata that the conventional theory dates to periods well before the supposed evolution of modern man some 250,000 to 150,000 years ago.

In this post, we will examine only one of the literally hundreds of pieces of evidence available in their book, the infamous skeleton of "Olduvai Man," found in 1913 by German archaeologist Hans Reck in the Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania. This skeleton, anatomically modern in every way, was unearthed from a layer of Olduvai bedrock that is conventionally dated to approximately 1.15 million years ago. This contrary evidence immediately attracted doubters, who refused to believe that an anatomically modern human could be found in a stratum of that antiquity, and who generally advanced the theory that a later group (perhaps recent Masai tribesmen) must have dug down into the ancient stratum and buried the man there.
















The layers of rock found at Olduvai Gorge are labeled in the sketch above. The bed in which the anatomically modern skeleton was found by Reck, Bed II, is currently dated as being 1.15 million to 1.7 million years old. As Forbidden Archaelogy explains:

Reck identified a sequence of five beds at Olduvai Gorge. The first four beds are water-laid volcanic tuffs of various colors. bed I is grey and yellow. Bed II is generally of a buff color, although the upper portion has a reddish tint. Bed III is bright red, while Bed IV is grey, or brownish. Bed V, a loesslike deposit, is brownish. 628.

The conventionally accepted ages of these strata are currently:

• Bed I: 1.70 million to 2.00 million years old
• Bed II: 1.15 million to 1.70 million years old
• Bed II and IV: 700,000 to 1.15 million years old
• Bed V: divided into several formations dating back to about 400,000 years

Reck understood the general ages of the strata, which were considered slightly younger than they are today but still placed Bed II at around 800,000 years old (when the supposed distant predecessors of man such as Java man were thought to have been living), and knew that the finding of an anatomically modern skeleton at such an early period would call into question modern man's descent from Java man, and therefore he "carefully considered the possibility that the human skeleton had arrived in Bed II through burial or earth movements" (Cremo & Thompson 630).

Reck himself wrote in 1914:

The bed in which the human remains were found, without any accompanying cultural objects, showed no signs of disturbance. The spot appeared exactly like any other in the horizon. There was no evidence of any refilled hole or grave. 630-631.

However, this possibility is exactly what the debunkers of his find fastened upon, having little other choice besides accepting that modern humans were on the scene long before their accepted timelines, or else accusing Reck of out-and-out fraud.

One of the first challengers was Louis Leakey (1903 - 1972), who examined the skeleton in Berlin and said that it must be more recent than Reck thought. He suggested that the find must have come from Bed IV. He visited the site of the find with Reck in 1931, and after studying the geology conceded that Reck was correct, and published a letter in Nature to the effect that the skeleton had come from Bed II and not from Bed IV. He would later change this view.

As Cremo and Thompson relate, in 1932 Percy George Hamnall Boswell (1886 - 1960), a geologist of the Imperial College in England, reported in Nature that another geologist (who had been alleging for a few years that the skeleton must be a modern Masai tribesman intrusively buried in Bed II) had produced chips and pebbles from the site indicating digging that would indicate a later burial in the area.

Both Reck and Leakey, who had examined the site specifically to look for such evidence, had not found any such evidence (638). Reck had written (in an unpublished manuscript):

The sediment . . . is so constituted that the artificial breaking of the bed with its visible layering by the digging of a grave would necessarily be recognizable. The wall of the grave would have a definite border, an edge that would show in profile a division from the undisturbed stone. the grave filling would show an abnormal structure and heterogeneous mixture of excavated materials, including easily recognizable pieces of calcrete. Neither of these signs were to be found despite the most attentive inspection. Rather the stone directly around the skeleton was not distinguishable from the neighboring stone in terms of color, hardness, thickness of layers, structure, or order. 631.

Further, it should be noted that the Masai rarely buried their dead. Also, the material of the bed was so hard that it took men with crowbars days just to excavate a couple of feet. Finally, the skull itself was distorted as if by great pressure, which a later geologist (W. O. Dietrich in 1933) believed argued against a recent shallow burial (Cremo and Thompson 631).

In spite of all this evidence, modern analysts now confidently assert the fact of a recent burial (see here for example). The possibility of modern skeletons in such supposedly ancient strata is too destructive to the Darwinian theories that grip academic and scientific thought.

Mr. Cremo and Dr. Thompson do not explore the possibility that the strata themselves might not be of such tremendous age -- they simply argue that all these anomalous finds indicate that modern man must have existed on earth for millions of years. However, as explained in this previous post, it is very possible that the strata themselves were laid down simultaneously and fairly recently by a world-wide flood event. The evidence in favor of such a theory, which is in line with the hydroplate theory and discussed in detail by hydroplate theory founder Dr. Walt Brown, is quite substantial. This interpretation would immediately remove the primary objection of the modern scientists, although it would create a much bigger problem for their theories at the same time, as it undermines the long ages they need for their theory of Darwinian evolution.

It is clear that the hydroplate theory sheds new light on some of the most pressing mysteries of the "alternative archaeology" field, and that it should be considered by everyone who perceives the major problems with the conventional timelines of history. The skeleton from Olduvai Gorge is just one more data point among hundreds of others which support the hydroplate theory.