Arkaim, gold and the ancient shamanic rituals

In the previous two posts, we have been examining the implications of the fascinating and newly-discovered geoglyph near Lake Zyuratkul in Russia (in the Urals) that has been dubbed the "Russian Nazca" by some in the media.  See "That's not an elk -- it's a Set-beast!" and "Set-beast and Saiga Antelope" to catch up on the discussion if you haven't seen it yet.

Both posts note that the "new" geoglyph was discovered in a region of the Urals that was already home to significant ancient megalithic monuments, including the stone circles, dolmens, and other structures found around Lake Turgoyak (and particularly Vera Island), as well as the enigmatic circular "city" of Arkaim, discovered in 1987, which has been called a "Russian Stonehenge" (see image above, found in this Russian-language video discussing Arkaim).

The relative locations of the three sites are shown in the map below:

As pointed out in the previous posts, and as is apparent in the map above, the three sites are located in or near some significant mountain ranges -- and not just any mountain ranges but mountain ranges that are clearly "hogbacks," formed when the strata of the earth are "tipped upwards" and broken off, such that the layers form long parallel ridges as they protrude like long spines.  

We discussed these important terrain features in previous posts, such as "Hogbacks of the California Coast" and "The unbelievable bathymetry of Mavericks."

You can create your own model of the formation of hogbacks by holding your palms towards your face while extending the fingers of each hand towards each other, touching the tips of the fingers together (or at least the tips of your two middle fingers).  Then rotate one hand so that the parallel fingers (representing layers of strata) protrude upwards -- these represent your hogbacks, where the crust has been disrupted and pushed upwards such that the layers "go vertical" to some degree, creating a situation where looking down from the air allows you to see the layers that once were beneath the earth but are now protruding.

Below is a close-up view of some of the mountain ranges to the west of Arkaim, clearly showing hogback geology.

We have seen that hogbacks -- perhaps by virtue of their "uplifted" formation mechanism -- often prove excellent locations for mining for precious metals, including gold (such as in California) and copper (such as in Michigan's Upper Peninsula).  Hogback regions can almost be thought of as locations where surface-dwellers can more easily "leaf through the pages" of the earth's strata in search of precious metals and minerals.

This certainly appears to be true of the Chelyabinsk region of the southern Urals where these concentrations of ancient monuments are being discovered.  The area has been and continues to be an important mining region in modern times, and it appears that the ancients also conducted mining activities in the area.  In fact, this extensive discussion of the incredible ancient ruins of Arkaim reveals that not only was this circular city-site a functioning astronomical observatory of great accuracy, but it also contained "remnants of [. . .] metallurgic furnaces, and mines."

This fact is very interesting, especially given the great age and apparent sophistication of Arkaim.  The possibility that this area may have been chosen due to the mining resources may be extremely significant.  Lucy Wyatt (whose work we have discussed in previous posts, such as this one entitled "The shamanic tradition in ancient Egypt") has noted that many other very ancient settlements -- such as Catal Huyuk -- are also located in mountainous regions, which is not what we might expect if we follow the conventional theory that mankind's earliest city-building centered around the transition to agriculture from hunter-gathering.  

Forbidding mountains are not ideal sites for agriculture.  Why are very ancient sites such as Catal Huyuk and now Arkaim located in mountainous regions?  In her book Approaching Chaos: Could an Ancient Archetype Save 21st Century Civilization, discussing the enigmas of ancient civilization and the evidence that it did not follow the pattern our conventional historians propose, Lucy Wyatt argues that these ancient sites were located in these mountainous regions because the ancient civilizers were more interested in gold than in agriculture!

In a chapter entitled "Why Civilization Mysteriously Starts in Mountains," Lucy writes:

What was the reason for spending so much time and effort in such in such difficult and unprepossessing terrain?  What was so important to the ancients about inhospitable mountains both in the Middle East and South America?  Oddly enough, Genesis itself gives one answer: gold. 

In mentioning the first river to flow out of Eden, the Pishon, Genesis states that this river flows around 'the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; and the gold of that land is good.'   [. . .]

Mesopotamia to the south had a word for gold, KU.GI, but no gold itself [Potts, 1994, p164].  It all came from the mountains -- either the Taurus Mountains to the north, or the Zagros Mountains to the east.  When the king of Uruk made his demands in cuneiform tablets on the mountainous kingdom of Aratta in the third millennium BC for large amounts of gold and silver to be sent for the temples in the south at Eridu and Uruk, his request may have been typical of an exchange that had been taking place for millennia beforehand [Rohl, 1998, p75, p130].  

[. . .]  Quite possibly gold deposits were the reason for the ancients being there in the first place -- after all, pottery could be made from clay found anywhere.  66-67.

What gives this argument added strength is Lucy's remarkable analysis of the importance of gold.  She believes that its use went far beyond simple decoration or demonstration of wealth, and that gold in fact played a key function in enabling the out-of-body or shamanic travel undertaken by the priest-kings of ancient civilization.   If these out-of-body shamanic experiences were used to gain critical knowledge -- as the evidence seems to suggest -- and to keep ancient civilization on track for hundreds and even thousands of years, then obtaining gold was not just a luxury: it was a necessity.

As discussed in that previous post on evidence of shamanic out-of-body travel by pharaohs in ancient Egypt, Lucy believes that the qeni garment (also described as the "embrace of Osiris" in ancient texts) may have protected the king's heart during the experience, during which electricity and ultrasonic energy may have also been involved, perhaps interacting with the gold or with a powder made from the gold.  

She also believes that the "Opening of the Mouth Ceremony," which conventional historians describe as a strictly funerary ritual, may have been conducted on the living pharaoh during the ritual. This ceremony involved a ritual adze, which is often shown being brought towards the mouth of the pharaoh by a sem priest.  Lucy asks:  "Have we misunderstood 'opening the mouth' when in fact it might have meant 'keeping open the mouth'?  If the pharaoh were lying on his Heb Sed bed in a shamanic trance, then the iron adze might have been necessary both to conduct a mild electrical current and perhaps to stop him from swallowing his tongue" (170-171).

As noted in the first post on this subject of the ancient monuments in the Urals, it may be extremely significant that the one tool singled out for mention as being most prevalent at the newly-discovered "Russian Nazca" shape (which I believe may represent a "Set-beast") is the adze.

Thus, these little-known but extremely interesting (and fairly newly-discovered) sites in the Urals of Russia appear to contain important clues that may support Lucy Wyatt's bold thesis:  They are located in close proximity to hogbacks and in a region known for extensive mining activity (including gold mining).  The site of the enigmatic circular city-compound of Arkaim contains clear evidence of smelting and mining.  They are very old.  And they appear to contain important symbols (in the form of the adze) relating to the civilization-affirming ritual that Lucy believes the ancients needed all this gold for in the first place.

This is an extremely interesting line of inquiry, and (it would appear) an extremely promising one.

Set-beast and Saiga Antelope

The previous post, entitled "That's not an elk -- it's a Set-beast!" discussed the evidence which suggests that the recently-discovered geoglyph near Lake Zyuratkul in the Urals in Russia may not depict an elk at all but rather a creature known to historians as a "Set-beast" (because the ancient Egyptian god Set or Seth is often depicted with the head of a creature that, unlike most other Egyptian deities, does not seem to be an actual terrestrial animal but a sort of anteater-like creature with tall rectangular protrusions on its head).

However, the astute Mr. TRB of California wrote to me soon after that post was published to point out the animal pictured above -- the Saiga Antelope, which bears a more-than-passing resemblance to both the Russian geoglyph and the distinctive Set-beast!

This could be an important connection and one which could earn him a PhD if he were to pursue it (or another PhD, if he already has one or more).  Perhaps the Saiga Antelope, a critically endangered species today but one which once roamed from the British Isles to the Bering Strait and even into Alaska and what is now the Yukon, was the inspiration for the geoglyph -- and perhaps there is a connection to the Egyptian god Set as well.  

I have argued, following Jane B. Sellers, that the distinctive shape of the Set-beast may derive from a celestial source -- the constellation Lepus, located beneath the feet of Orion (a constellation closely associated with Osiris and hence with Set as well).  Jane Sellers presents convincing evidence that Set was associated with the adze-shaped stars of Taurus, which are above Orion and eventually (through precession), "usurped his throne."  The Memphite Theology relates how the Nine Gods ruled in judgement after this event and placed Set below Osiris instead of above him.

However, there is no reason to believe that the stars of Lepus (which are easily found beneath Orion, and quite visible this time of year, particularly after midnight and in the hours leading up to the dawn) could not have suggested the head of the Saiga Antelope to the ancients, which means that there could be a relationship between Lepus, Set, and this distinctive beast, which has a most unusual proboscis (see images below).

At this point, however, some readers may be wondering why we need to bring Lepus or Set into the picture at all, now that we have identified an actual terrestrial animal that could have served as the model for the Russian geoglyph.  It is possible, of course, that the geoglyph has no celestial significance at all, but I doubt it, for the simple reason that it is located among numerous other ancient monuments which clearly have celestial connections.

Not far from Lake Zyuratkul, where the "new" geoglyph was found, is Lake Turgoyak, home of six islands, the largest of which is called Vera Island or the Island of St. Vera.  Vera Island is dotted with an extensive array of dolmens, menhirs, and stone chambers.

I have never been to Vera Island, but the images of the ancient stone structures there strongly remind me of the ancient stone structures of Connecticut, Massachusetts and New Hampshire, which I have visited (for a discussion of some of these, see previous posts entitled "Gungywamp," "Mystery Hill, New Hampshire," and "Ancient knowledge of accurate latitudes and ocean landmarks prior to 3500 BC," among others).

Below is a map showing the proximity of Turgoyak and Zyuratkul -- about 92 km by road (57 miles).

While it may be just a coincidence, it is noteworthy that these megalithic sites are found among geology with distinctive "hogbacks."  For more detail on these distinctive geological features, see the discussion in the previous blog post "Hogbacks of the California coast."  We recently noted that the ancient copper mines of Michigan's Upper Peninsula were situated among hogback features, as were the amazing and unique fossilized whale-brains of San Luis Obispo County.

Below is a terrain map showing the hogbacks in the area.

Finally, Mr. TRB who pointed out the Saiga Antelope connection in the first place has also pointed out that the amazing ancient circular ruins and city of Arkaim are located in the vicinity of the geoglyph as well -- another 380 km to the south of Turgoyak (about 236 miles). Arkaim has extremely precise celestial alignments, which argues that the "new" geoglyph may well depict more than just a terrestrial animal (whether it be moose, elk, Saiga, or Set-beast), and that it may have celestial connections as well.

It would be very interesting if other geoglyphs are discovered in the vicinity of the "Set-beast" or "Saiga-shaped" geoglyph, and especially if one were found which corresponds to the constellation Orion.

Thanks again to TRB for the insightful comments and links!

That's not an elk -- it's a Set-beast!

Recently, a newly-discovered ancient outline composed of massive lines made of stones of various size, located near the remote Lake Zyuratkul in the Urals has been making news, and rightly so.  

At 900 feet in size at its widest two points, it is larger than even the largest animal-shaped geoglyphs among the famous Nazca Lines in Peru, which it resembles so much that it has been called "Russia's Nazca" (see search results below, or conduct a search yourself).

Like the Nazca outlines, the image is so big that it is really best seen from a high elevation.  In this case, the geoglyph was apparently first noticed by an astute observer named Alexander Shestakov (story here), who noticed the outline while poring over satellite images (which satellite images is not currently stated in the reports that I have seen, but it may have been the satellite images on Google Maps or Google Earth, as the image is visible from those satellite images).

Once he told researchers, they went airborne to confirm the existence of this immense ancient geoglyph, apparently using a "hydroplane" (probably meaning a flying boat or seaplane: the image is located very near to Lake Zyuratkul -- also spelled Zjuratkul -- in the Urals) and a paraglider.

This fact alone is noteworthy, and reminiscent of the Nazca lines of Peru (located on Peru's Nazca plateau and taking their name from that location).  As Graham Hancock wrote of the Nazca lines in his groundbreaking Fingerprints of the Gods in 1995:

Their sheer size is equally noteworthy and bizarre.  The hummingbird is 165 feet long, the spider 150 feet long, the condor stretches nearly 400 feet from beak to tail-feathers (as does the pelican), and a lizard, whose tail is now divided by the Pan-American highway, is 617 feet in length.  Almost every design is executed in the same cyclopean scale and in the same difficult manner, by the careful contouring of a single continuous line. 39-40.

It is remarkable that the image near Lake Zyuratkul also appears to be composed of a single continuous line.  To see the image of the geoglyph for yourself on Google Maps, simply search for "Lake Zyuratkul" (if a map image does not come up, click on "Maps" from the horizontal menu bar at the top of the Google results page, where you have choices such as "Search" and "Images" and "Maps").  Locate the lake itself, and then look to the north and west of the lake (see location of the image relative to the lake in the picture below):

The first news stories to describe this important archaeological discovery and window into the ancient past of the human race are describing the outline as "elk-shaped" or "moose-shaped" (here are a couple examples: "Mysterious elk-shaped structure discovered in Russia," "Russian 'Moose' Geoglyph Predates Nazca Lines").  While it is certainly possible that the ancient designers intended to convey a moose or an elk (other reports say "an elk or a deer"), the creature's elongated snout is certainly much longer than any found on an elk or even a moose, and it has two distinct and vertical rectangular "ears" that do not look at all like antlers but are in fact strongly reminiscent of a very different ancient creature depicted in ancient art.  

I believe that this ancient geoglyph may represent the animal known as the "Seth-beast" or "Set-beast."  That's right: I believe the "Russian Nazca" image may depict the animal that is also found on the head of an important Egyptian god -- you heard it here first!

While this may seem like something of a stretch, bear with me while I explain the reasons for this conclusion.  First, the shape of the outline itself, with the twin vertical rectangular "ears" and elongated anteater-like snout are highly suggestive of the head of the Egyptian god Set (or Seth), brother of Osiris (and murderer of Osiris).  See image below, from the Small Temple at Abu Simbel (reign of Rameses II, c. 1303 BC - 1213 BC).  

You will note that the snout and the ears of the image above clearly resemble the outline of the "Russian Nazca" geoglyph, which also has an elongated snout which tapers to a point, and two rectangular "ears" almost identical to those of Set shown above.

I discuss the reason that Set may be depicted with this unique and distinctive head in Chapter 5 of my Mathisen Corollary book.  I agree with the arguments of Jane B. Sellers in Death of Gods in Ancient Egypt, where she gives evidence that Set's head resembles the stars of the constellation Lepus, located under Orion and representing the judgement of the Ennead (or Nine Gods) which is recorded perhaps most fully (out of the texts we have today) in the Memphite Theology (the text inscribed on the Shabaka Stone).

It is quite evident that the Nazca lines of Peru may have astronomical significance and depict prominent constellations (many analysts have provided evidence for this interpretation, which the reader can readily ascertain through various searches on the web and in literature about the lines of the Nazca plateau) -- it is therefore not ridiculous to suggest that this new "Nazca-like" geoglyph in Russia does as well.

As for the objection that it is outrageous to suggest the presence of Egyptian Set-iconography at a site so far from Egypt, take a look at the image below, which is from a Maya codex known as the Codex Tro-Cortesianus:

As discussed in Hamlet's Mill (by Giorgio de Santillana and Hertha von Dechend, 1969) and also in the Mathisen Corollary book, the above image is extremely suggestive of the images from ancient Egypt showing Horus and Set pulling on a central pillar by means of papyrus and lotus reeds (which are replaced by a serpent in the Maya image above, as well as in the versions of the same scene found in India and Cambodia and other parts of the world).  Notice that the figure on the right in the Maya image also has the elongated "snout" typical of the Egyptian god Set or Seth.  Below is a version of the same scene from the throne of the Pharaoh Sesostris I (thought to have reigned from 1971 BC to 1926 BC):

If imagery representing Set can be found in the New World codices of the Maya, then it is not ridiculous to examine the possibility that the geoglyph discovered in Russia might also represent the animal of the same long-snouted deity. 

There is another important clue that analysts so far have not seemed to tie in to the newly-discovered geoglyph in the Urals, a clue which could help them realize that this outline may represent a Seth-beast and not an elk or a moose (which it does not really resemble at all).  That important clue is mentioned in some of the articles about the new discovery, such as in this article (already linked above and entitled "Mysterious elk-shaped structure discovered in Russia").  That clue is the presence of numerous stone implements described by Stanislav Grigoriev, of the Russian Academy of Sciences Institute of History & Archaeology, who is one of the leaders of the ongoing research at the site of the geoglyph.  The article says:

Among the finds from the excavations are about 40 stone tools, made of quartzite, found on the structure's surface. Most of them are pickaxe-like tools called  mattocks, useful for digging and chopping. "Perhaps they were used to extract clay," he [Mr. Grigoriev] writes in the email. 

As discussed in the Mathisen Corollary book during the examination of the importance of Set, the adze was an ancient tool which was shaped very much like the head of Set, and which may well have been associated with that deity.   The image below shows why there is reason to suspect a connection:

Notice that the email from one of the researchers on-site describes the preponderance of the tools found so far at the geoglyph as "pickaxe-like tools called mattocks."  A mattock is a tool of which one end is an adze (shaped like the snout of the Seth-beast) and the other end is either an axe (an edged tool with a vertical blade) or a pick (a pointed tool).  It doesn't matter whether the mattock is an axe-mattock ("cutter mattock") or a pick-mattock -- what they have in common is that each features an adze.  A mattock, for the purposes of this examination, is an adze, and an adze was (I have argued) associated with Set.

For these reasons, I believe that the recently-discovered geoglyph in the Urals in Russia may depict a Set-beast.  

Amazing amber fossils, DNA, and Jurassic Park

Here is an amazing recent discovery: the first known fossilized example of a spider bearing down on a victim trapped in its spider web.  The spider and its victim, a male representative of an extinct genera of wasp who became entangled in the strands of web still visible and preserved, were entombed in amber, preserving the dramatic ancient scene in all its glory.

Professor George Poinar (professor emeritus of entomology at Oregon State University) and amber collector Ron Buckley recently published a discussion of this remarkable set of fossils in Historical Biology, entitled "Predatory behaviour of the social orb-weaver spider, Geratonephila burmanica n. gen., n. sp. (Araneae: Nephilidae) with its wasp prey, Cascoscelio incassus n. gen., n. sp. (Hymenoptera: Platygastridae) in Early Cretaceous Burmese amber."

Professor Poinar has published numerous studies on fossils trapped in amber, and is credited as providing the inspiration for the novel -- and blockbuster movie -- Jurassic Park, based on his success in extracting intact sequences of ancient DNA from fossil insects in amber.  

However, other scientific studies have recently provided evidence that DNA cannot survive for the millions of years that scientists ascribe to these ancient amber fossils.  This recent study of fossilized (but relatively recent) moa bones from New Zealand, some of them with some DNA intact, has caused analysts to conclude that DNA has a "half-life" of only hundreds of years (521 years, to be precise).  

This means that DNA from fossils many tens or hundreds of thousands of years old would be quite rare, while DNA should be completely degraded once fossils reach a few millions of years of age.  The scientists predicted that fossils a million years old, under ideal circumstances, might still yield some DNA, but calculated 6.8 million years as the age at which DNA would be completely gone under even the best circumstances.  The study was published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B (Biological Sciences), an abstract of which can be seen here.  Here is a more popularly-styled discussion of the study from Wired UK.

This evidence creates a bit of a conundrum, as insects fossilized in amber -- some assumed to be many tens of millions of years old -- have yielded DNA in the past (and even apparently some living bacteria, which is a completely different conundrum).  For example, this scholarly article from 1992 entitled "DNA Sequences from a Fossil Termite in Oligo-Miocene Amber and Their Phylogenetic Implications" discusses what the authors believed to be "the oldest DNA extracted from a fossil (in 25-million-year-old amber)" (see page 1934 of the linked article).  They were able to discover DNA sequences that led to the construction of chains of base-pairs 225 pairs long from fossilized termites preserved in amber.  That should not be possible if the specimens are really 25 million years old, no matter how well amber preserved the termites!

How to solve this dilemma?  As Dr. Walt Brown, originator of the hydroplate theory, explains in his book discussing that theory (which can be read in its entirety online), this and other evidence of DNA preserved in amber fossils is not surprising at all, once scientists realize that their assumptions of great age for the amber may well be incorrect.  Dr. Brown argues that the catastrophic events surrounding a global flood led to the extremely rapid burial of some insects and spiders in masses of amber from violently ripped-apart trees, and that the amber was then rapidly buried, preserving it and its contents (see the discussion on this page of his book, particularly in figure 12). 

Dr. Brown discusses the work of Dr. Poinar -- as well as the arguments of a critic of the possibility of recovered DNA, by another scientist who claims that Dr. Poinar must have accidentally contaminated his specimens with modern DNA -- in footnotes found on this page of his book.  He writes:

Tomas Lindahl is a recognized expert on DNA and its rapid disintegration. He tried to solve this problem of “old” DNA by claiming that all such discoveries resulted from contamination and poor measurement techniques. He wrote, “The apparent observation that fully hydrated plant DNA might be retained in high-molecular mass form for 20 million years is incompatible with the known properties of the chemical structure of DNA.” [See Tomas Lindahl, “Instability and Decay of the Primary Structure of DNA,” Nature, Vol. 362, 22 April 1993, p. 714.] His claims of contamination are effectively rebutted in many of the papers listed above and by:

v George O. Poinar Jr., in “Recovery of Antediluvian DNA,” Nature, Vol. 365, 21 October 1993, p. 700. (The work of George Poinar and others was a major inspiration for the book and film, Jurassic Park.)

v Edward M. Golenberg, “Antediluvian DNA Research,” Nature, Vol. 367, 24 February 1994, p. 692.

The measurement procedures of Poinar and others were far better controlled than Lindahl realized. That is, modern DNA did not contaminate the fossil. However, Lindahl is probably correct in saying that DNA cannot last much longer than 10,000 years. All points of view are consistent when one concludes that these old ages are wrong.

The final sentence is the key.  Dr. Poinar's research and the research demonstrating the disintegration rates of DNA can both be correct, once we realize that the fossils trapped in amber (as well as the vast majority of other fossils found on our planet) are the product of a relatively recent catastrophic flood event.  Other previous posts discussing important aspects of this subject can be found here and here.  

The extremely rapid burial by a large flow of amber necessary to trap and preserve the participants in the life-and-death spider and wasp scene pictured above would certainly seem to point to a catastrophic event rather than the normal gradual processes we see around us in the modern natural world.  The huge number of such amber fossils from around the globe also speak to some ancient catastrophe (this did not happen in just one or two isolated instances).  The fact that scientists have found intact DNA inside many such fossils provides further evidence that seems to support Dr. Brown's theory -- which is supported by a host of other evidence -- for a relatively recent catastrophic flood (for blog posts discussing some of that hydroplate-supporting evidence, see here, here and here for starters).

Perhaps Jurassic Park will one day be found to be possible after all.

The ancient copper mines of Michigan's Upper Peninsula

The area now known as Michigan's Upper Peninsula contains rich copper resources that were mined extensively beginning in the second half of the nineteenth century.  Amazingly, the professional miners who worked the area beginning in the 1850s all describe evidence of extensive ancient mining activity in the area -- evidence that included not only large mines but also massive storage pits and even huge ingots of pure copper, some of it carefully stored away and buried.

Some of the most productive copper regions run along a band that includes Isle Royale and (across a narrow stretch of Lake Superior) the Keweenaw Peninsula to the south (see map below).

Geologically, these interesting terrain features bear all the hallmarks of the parallel swirling ridges that are formed when sedimentary layers were pushed up towards the vertical, as discussed in previous posts such as "Hogbacks of the California Coast."  According to the hydroplate theory of Dr. Walt Brown, such layers were violently and fairly rapidly thrust upwards due to the tremendous forces that surrounded a catastrophic global flood.  According to the prevailing tectonic theory, they were thrust upwards slowly over tens of millions of years of gradual activity.  

Other posts have discussed the extensive evidence from around the world that supports the hydroplate explanation over the gradualist tectonic explanation (see the list in this post, for instance).  

Interestingly enough, the uplifted strata layers on the sides of California's Great Central Valley are home to the veins of gold discovered in 1848, while the uplifted strata layers on either side of Lake Superior at Isle Royale and the Keweenaw Peninsula are home to the veins of copper discussed in this post.

The city of Calumet is on the Keweenaw Peninsula, and the mines in that region (and on Isle Royale) were mined by the famous Calumet & Hecla Mining Company beginning in the 1860s.  The founders of that company were unanimous in testifying to their astonishment at the extensive evidence of previous mining activity that they encountered when they first began to explore and develop the area for copper mining activity.

This edition of the former mining periodical Mining and Engineering World, from June 24, 1916 contains an article entitled "Centennial Celebration of Calumet & Hecla Mining Co.," by Homer Guck, states:

The first newspaper notice of the discovery of the Calumet conglomerate appeared in the Houghton Gazette as of November 11, 1865.  It reads as follows:  "Strange Discovery. -- A party exploring Calumet property, in cleaning out an old Indian pit in the conglomerate, on Sec. 14, found an old wooden shovel, in a very good state of preservation.  It being made of hickory shows that it was brought from some distant region of the country, as none of that species of wood is to be found here.  A birch bark pail has been found in the same pit, also a piece of copper showing distinct marks of being cut with some sharp instrument.  The ancient workings on this property are very extensive and now bid fair to be the most interesting of any yet discovered.  They are the first we have ever heard of being found on any of the conglomerate lodes."  [. . .]

In the Gazette of Jan. 7 [from the context, it appears that the year 1866 is implied] there is quite an elaboration of the opening work done by Edwin J. Hulbert, then in charge for Quincy A. Shaw, at the Huron mine, now part of the Isle Royale and likewise in charge of the Calumet developments.  Much space is given to the story of the remains of a bear found in the workings and to various large pieces of copper, evidently "tooled" out by ancient workers in the metal.  In the Gazette of Feb. 3, 1866, is recorded the meeting of Calumet Co. and the election of directors as follows:  Samuel P. Shaw, E. J. Hulbert, John Leighton, Alexander and Quincy A. Shaw.  The geological theory and plan for development is elaborated in this issue of the Gazette as follows:

"The policy of this company, for this winter, is to conduct only a careful exploration of the conglomerate belt, for the purpose of ascertaining whether or not its unparalleled richness is continuous in length, and also to reopen to its original extent the celebrated 'Ancient Pit Works.'  It is the expressed opinion of Wm. B. Frue and Mr. Hulbert that this pit occupies a position over a rich copper-bearing belt lying about 50 ft. to the westward of the conglomerate lode, since all rock developed from the pit is different in character from the conglomerate and its associate underlying amygdaloid; and that the frequent nuggets of native copper found in these old workings have no representation in any workings on the conglomerate to exemplify the richness of this lode.  The work is now being carried on by means obtained from the rock brought in by sleighs and smelted.  A house 28x35 has been erected over this great pit and it appears does not even, at that size, embrace the entire extent of the ancient work.  We hope to be able within 3 weeks to give to our readers an idea of the object for which the old miners worked so extensively.

"In addition to the specimens found and described in the Gazette, we have been shown by Mr. Hulbert a section of a drill hole in a piece of conglomerate, the diameter of which is about 1 1/4 ins. and presenting about the same appearance that the drill hole of today would.  On reaching the bottom of this work tools may be found that will shed additional light on this interesting subject.  [. . .]  Great care is being taken by those exhuming this pit, to preserve all the indications of the work of those who preceded us, and we sincerely hope that an entire chain of evidence may be thus made out that will be of service determining at what time and by whom these excavations were made."  pages 1179 - 1180.

In his 1879 text entitled Ancient Copper Mines of Lake Superior, John Jacob Houghton relates, beginning on page 141:

On the south shore of Lake Superior the works of the ancient miners extend over a district of country comprising what is known as the Trap Range, having a length of one hundred and fifty miles through Keweenaw, Houghton and Ontonagon Counties, Michigan, with a varying width from four to seven miles.  They also wrought the copper deposits of the Trap Range on Isle Royale, covering an area of about forty miles in length by an average of five miles in width.  Their mining operations were crude and primitive.  The process was to heat the embedding rock by building fires on the outcrops of the veins or belts, to partially disintegrate the rocks by contraction produced by the sudden throwing on of water, and to complete the removal of the pieces of native copper mauling off the adhering particles of rock with stone hammers.  This is attested by the presence, in all of the pits, of large quantities of charcoal, and of numberless hammers, the latter showing marks of long usage.

[. . .]

When considering the extent of the country over which this mining work extended, the crude and slow process of the labor and the enormous amount of work performed, it becomes evident that the work extended through centuries of time, and was carried on by a vast number of people.  The largest aggregation of pits yet discovered is on what is known as the Minong belt on Isle Royale.  Here, for a distance of one and three-fourths miles, and for an average width of four hundred feet, the successive pits indicate the mining out of the belt (solid rock) to an average depth of not less than twenty feet.  Scattered over this ground are battered stone hammers, numberless but running into millions.

In her book the Mystic Symbol: Mark of the Michigan Mound Builders, published posthumously in 1986, crytpologist and historian Henriette Mertz (1898 - 1985) states that a metallurgical engineer on the faculty of the Michigan College of Mining and Technology carbon dated some of the organic material from the Isle Royale pits in 1954 and obtained two carbon-14 ages: the first 3800 years old plus or minus 300 years, and the other 3000 years old plus or minus 300 years -- "dating this pit at 1800 B.C. to 1000 B.C. with a possible variation of 300 years earlier or later" (39).

She also provides quotations from eyewitnesses from the 1800s and early 1900s describing enormous storage pits in the vicinity of Portage Lake and Torch Lake on the Keweenaw Peninsula (see map below) containing large quantities of mined copper from ancient times.

She quotes from J. H. Lathrop, writing in 1901, who relates:

That pits along Portage Lake were used for storage of copper there can be no doubt.  By far the most interesting of these storage pits was that discovered by Edwin J. Hulbert in 1858 and opened by him in February 1865.  The pit was situated on the crest of the hill midway between the head of Torch Lake and Lake Superior.  The position on the hillis now a part of the Calumet and Hecla location and No. 1 shaft of the Calumet mine was sunk through the ancient pit. [. . .]  This pit was 50 feet in diameter, nearly circular in shape.  The burrow formed of earth taken out extended for a distance of twenty feet all around and on this burrow was an enormous hemlock tree and an equally huge black birch.  This birch on being cut showed wood rings to the number of nearly 200.  The pit was evidently filled and emptied on successive occasions with copper obtained from sources other than the conglomerate lode. [. . .]  It is absolutely certain that this pit was used for storage of copper from some foreign source most probably the workings on Isle Royale.

When the pit was opened it showed a covering of earth nearly four feet thick, well laid, and free of stones and rock.  Under this was a vast deposit of green carbonate of copper nearly twenty tons of which was taken out and sent to the smelting works at Hancock 14 miles away.

Everything found in the pit tended to show that it had been partially filled with pieces of native copper for storage purposes.  There was not found a single tool or implement of any kind. [. . .] Centuries of time must have elapsed to have changed the native copper which the miners placed in the pit, into the carbonate form.  No better proof can be offered of the great antiquity of the workings of these ancient mines than that presented by the opening of this ancient storage pit showing the changing of theis great deposit from native copper to the green carbonate.  In the history of the copper country this pit stands unique.  Nothing like it has been discovered before and nothing since.  Mertz 45-46.

Ms Mertz points out that the pit is located along the inland waterway (visible in the map above) that cuts across the Keweenaw Peninsula and allows copper to be transported by water from Isle Royale for storage there as necessary (44).

It is of course possible that the Native Americans of the region or their remote ancestors were responsible for these extensive mining activities.  It would be wrong to simply disallow such a possibility.  However, it would be equally wrong to disallow the possibility that these extensive copper mines could have been the product of visitors from other shores, particularly in light of the possible evidence of great age, as well as the other evidence in the Americas pointing to ancient trans-oceanic activity.

While conventional academics brazenly state that there is no such evidence of ancient trans-oceanic contact, there is so much evidence that it is really impossible to dismiss (some of it is listed and linked in this previous post).  Further, the book by Henriette Mertz cited above provides additional archaeological evidence of ancient trans-oceanic contact in the very region discussed, as well as reasons to believe that some of the copper found in the relics of the ancient Mediterranean civilizations may have come from the Americas.

Any possibility of such ancient trans-oceanic activity associated with these Upper Peninsula copper mines, however, is ferociously dismissed by modern academics.  These dismissals are often accompanied by accusations of racism, as well as scornful language and ridicule.

Typical of such scornful dismissals is the following article (the text of a spoken address) by an archaeologist who dismisses as "silly chatter" and "frivolous story" any possibility of ancient trans-oceanic contact, particularly regarding the ancient miners of the copper in the region discussed above.  He begins by pummeling a few "straw men" (such as when he accuses those proposing non-Native American miners of believing the mines might be the work of "Martians following Dr. Spock and the crew of the starship Enterprise," revealing an appalling ignorance of Mr. Spock's non-Martian heritage and correct title -- "Please, Captain, I'm a Vulcan, not a doctor").

In disdain of his opponents, the author of the above-linked argument declares: "Mistakes are made when pet conclusions are upheld despite the power of contradictory data.  This is the sort of error that is being perpetuated by archaeo-illogical books."  However, given the massive amount of evidence for trans-oceanic contact, it is perhaps his side that upholds "pet conclusions" despite contrary data.

 The massive copper ingot shown below is known as the Ontonagon Boulder.  It is 100% pure copper, and was taken from the Ojibwe people in the 1800s by the US government, and eventually given over to the Smithsonian Institute.  In spite of the insistence of scholars that the copper mining of the Upper Peninsula was all the work of the native tribes, a 1991 request for the return of this amazing object filed by the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community was turned down by the government.

That seems suspicious, as does the fact that the Wikipedia article about this artifact states that, while it is currently at the National Museum of Natural History in Washington DC, the boulder is not on display to the public.  It was going to be part of a display in 2011, according to the article, but at the last minute it was cut from the display "for engineering reasons" (apparently the ancients were more capable of handling large copper boulders than our modern engineers).

Birthday of John Lennon

October 9th is the birthday of John Lennon, born this day in 1940.

The biography on the official website describes his work as suggesting "not merely a profound musical and literary sensibility -- a genius, in short -- but a vision of life that was simultaneously reflective, utopian and poignantly realistic."

There is no doubt that John Lennon was a central and pivotal figure in the tumultuous wrestling with civilizational issues and legacies that took place during the 1960s and 1970s -- legacies that stretch all the way back to the events that separated what became the "west" from what became the "east," events that took place during the Roman Empire and that shaped the world for centuries to come, and resulting assumptions handed down through the centuries.  Those issues and legacies and questions are still of course with us today, as are the perspectives John Lennon brought to those questions and legacies and issues as he encountered them.

And of course, so is his music, which is as moving and as important today as it ever was.

Rest in peace.

.

Straw man arguments against Proposition 37, and a trip to the grocery store reveals the extent of the GMO food issue

As election day draws nearer in the United States, the advertisements criticizing Proposition 37 (California's ballot initiative to require the labeling of foods containing genetically-modified ingredients, with some exceptions) are heating up.

We've already seen in the previous post about this ballot measure how many more dollars have been donated from opponents of GMO labeling compared to the dollars contributed by its supporters.  Back in August, when the previous post on the subject was published, the contribution tally was $25.1 million against, compared to $3.3 million for the labeling requirement (with big agricultural companies, genetically-modified seed companies, processed food companies, and chemical companies supplying most of the contributions against the requirement).  As of publication of this post on October 6, the donations reported on this website now stand at $32.5 million against versus $3.7 million for the labeling requirement.

With that kind of monetary superiority (almost ten-to-one), the opponents of the measure have been able to flood the airwaves and the internet with advertisements persuading people to reject the labeling requirement.

Here are a couple examples.  The first one notes that trial lawyers may have had a hand in crafting the ballot initiative:

I am not a trial lawyer, I don't know this trial lawyer, nor am I happy to discover that some people are allegedly salivating at the opportunity to make lots of money from "Prop 37 Labeling Lawsuits," whatever those are.  However, even if that allegation is true, that does not necessarily mean that there are not good and valid reasons to support Proposition 37 anyway.  I know plenty of people who might want to know whether the food they are feeding to their family contains genetically-modified ingredients for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with the above trial lawyer and his nefarious lawsuits.  

Ads like the one above do not address the real and valid reasons that some citizens might desire greater clarity regarding the ingredients of the bread they send to school in their children's lunch, for example.  They pull out a trial lawyer and kick him around a little bit, and act as though they have just defeated any reason that anyone would support Prop 37!  

That's called a "straw man" argument by some logisticians: instead of engaging the teeth of the opponent's argument, the purveyor of the "straw man" argument pulls out a weak or unappealing substitute argument and beats it up instead.  It's as if two kung fu fighters are squaring off to fight, and one of them doesn't want to really go up against the training and the moves that the other one has, and so that fearful opponent pulls out a scarecrow dressed up to look like his opponent, punches it around a little bit, and then throws his arms up in the air and declares himself the winner of the fight!

Also, since the opponents of Prop 37 allege that genetically-modified foods are perfectly safe, and that anyone who is concerned about eating them is just being silly, it's hard to imagine what they really have to fear from trial lawyers in the first place.  Nobody is really going to get sick eating GMO foods, according to the opponents of the labeling bill -- and if they do get sick after the labeling goes into effect, then trial lawyers won't have much to sue about, since those people were warned by the label.  It seems like trial lawyers would really be against labeling, if GMO foods are really dangerous, so that they could sue on behalf of clients who unkowningly ingested GMO ingredients.  

Here's another one, this time attacking the idea of labeling on the grounds that the bill draws the line on meat and does not require it to be labeled (the complete text of Proposition 37 can be found here, which explains what must and what must not be labeled):

Again, this ad does not address the teeth of the arguments for labeling.  It may have a valid point -- consumers may want to know if their steak contains GMO ingredients, but presumably the steak in the picture does not actually contain corn or soybeans (if it did, it would certainly have to at least tell the buyer that it contained such fillers).  

However, the point that the ad above is trying to make is based upon the fact that Proposition 37 specifically says that the requirement for a "contains GMO" label shall NOT be applied to "Food consisting entirely of, or derived entirely from, an animal that has not itself been genetically engineered, regardless of whether such animal has been fed or injected with any genetically engineered food or any drug that has been produced through means of genetic engineering."  Presumably, the man in the ad is holding up a steak from an animal that is not itself genetically-engineered, but that did receive drugs or food that could have contained genetically-engineered traits.

But, just because some people would like such meat to carry a label stating those facts is not a valid reason to reject the labeling of the huge array of other foods which actually do contain corn, soy, cottonseed, canola, and other ingredients that were genetically engineered.  Attacking the "lines" that the proposed labeling requirement draws (around what needs a label and what does not -- a necessary reality of any such legislation) does not do anything to address the real and valid concerns of those who might not want to consume genetically-modified food or give such food to their children (or even their dogs, which the man in the above ad seems to think is a silly concern).

The reasons why voters in California might want foods containing actual GMO ingredients to identify those genetically-modified ingredients is very simple: some consumers might wish to avoid purchasing foods with such ingredients.

Some consumers might have some questions regarding the safety of such ingredients, while others might wish to abstain from such foods as a matter of conscience, religion, or any other reason.  Arguing that the safety issue has been completely and utterly settled and that genetically-modified foods pose no safety risk whatsoever (as opponents of Prop 37 have also argued, which at least is not a "straw man" argument but attempts to address the primary arguments of those who want labeling laws) is really beside the point -- if some consumers believe that there might be a safety risk (in spite of what the experts say), they should have the ability to avoid such foods if they so desire.

As a matter of fact, there are some significant reasons to conclude that the safety issue is not completely settled, as discussed in previous posts on this subject (see previous posts "Genetically-modified food," "Genetically-modified cooking oil," and "Genetically-modified sugar beets, food labeling, and other issues").

Since those posts were written, a peer-reviewed article appeared on September 19 of this year alleging serious new evidence of dangers from the consumption of genetically-modified food over long periods of time (discussed in this article and associated set of videos from Dr. Joseph Mercola, who is the largest donor in support of Proposition 37 according to the website linked above).  The French study at issue was (perhaps unsurprisingly) immediately attacked by other scientists who called it "inadequate," but this only shows that the debate is quite heated on this subject and consumers can be forgiven for deciding that perhaps "the jury is still out" on the question of safety.

Are opponents of GMO labeling trying to say that consumers who still have questions on this subject should not be allowed to look at the food they buy to determine if it contains genetically-modified ingredients?  Are they saying that consumers are not allowed to have any doubts about the safety of consuming genetically-modified food?

Further, as stated before, some consumers may wish to avoid GMO ingredients for reasons entirely other than questions of safety.  Genetically-modified plants typically contain "traits" that are engineered through the introduction into their cells of bacterial and viral DNA: perhaps strict vegetarians might object as a matter of conscience to consuming plants that have been altered to contain the genetic material of bacteria and viruses.  Or, perhaps consumers might have religious objections to consuming such altered organisms.  Perhaps they are OK with the idea that other people have the right to consume such things, but they themselves have religious objections to consuming genetically-modified organisms.  Are opponents of labeling telling them that they have no right to look on the label and see if the food they are buying contains GMOs or not, so that they can choose for themselves?

Opponents of Prop 37 or other GMO-labeling requirements might argue that those who are still afraid of GMOs, or who have reasons to avoid them due to conscience or religious objections, can simply avoid foods made with the ingredients from any of the eight plants currently cleared for genetic modification for human consumption in the US.  Those eight are:

• corn
• soy
• cottonseed (consumed by humans as cottonseed oil)
• canola
• sugarbeets (and therefore most sugar and most foods containing sugar as an ingredient, unless it specifically says "cane sugar")
• more than half of Hawaiian papaya (some sources now say 80% of it)
• a small percentage of zucchini
• a small percentage of yellow crookneck squash.

Opponents might add that if those who want to avoid genetically-modified food want to eat something containing any of the above ingredients, they can look to brands which voluntarily choose not to use genetically-modified versions of the above ingredients, and label their products as "GMO free" (such as the excellent soy sauce from San-J pictured below, which I was delighted to see appear on my grocery-store shelves very recently for the first time).

That's a decent argument, and it is what people who really wish to avoid GMOs for any of the above reasons have to do right now in the United States.  However, what makes it difficult to do is the staggering array of foods on grocery-store shelves that now use ingredients from one of the above eight GMO-approved plants.  In fact, as noted in the previous post on this issue, as much as 70% of the food on the shelves of grocery stores in the US now contains genetically-modified ingredients -- that's according to a study cited in the material on the website of the opponents of Prop 37 and the requirement to label such food!

If so much genetically-modified material has crept into the products lining supermarket shelves in the US, then it seems that the argument outlined above that says, "just avoid it if you don't like it" is a bit disingenuous.  It might be more honest of such opponents of labeling to say, "just try to avoid it, if you don't like it (and see how far you get with that fantasy)."

With so much of the food being offered to consumers harboring genetically-modified ingredients, it seems possible that one of the real reasons so many food companies are so anxious to prevent Prop 37 from passing is the fear that consumers will be absolutely shocked when they find out how much of what they have been buying, eating, and feeding to their families contains genetically-modified ingredients.

It's not just "junk food" that contains ingredients from the above list of eight GMO-approved plants, as anyone can ascertain with a simple trip to their local grocery store.  For example, the sourdough bread shown below lists "soy flour" as an ingredient.

Does that mean it has genetically-modified soy as an ingredient?  Who knows -- it is currently not required for the company to tell us on the label, and this company has not chosen to state on the label that its product is "verified non-GMO," the way the makers of the San-J tamari sauce shown above have chosen to do.  However, since over 90% of the soy grown in the US for human consumption is in fact genetically-modified, it is probably a safe guess that this bread might contain genetically-modified soy (why sourdough bread would contain soy flour is a completely different question).

This brings up another important point: anyone trying to avoid the consumption of GMO foods would have to avoid this bread on the suspicion that it probably contains genetically-modified soy.  In this case, it is probably a well-founded suspicion, based on the huge percentage of soy in the US that is indeed transgenic.  However, the lack of a label means that some consumers might avoid purchase of some items on the suspicion that they might contain GMOs, when in fact those items do not.  If labels were required, sales of some items might go up, because consumers would then know what had genetically-modified ingredients and what did not, while today they have to assume the worst if they want to avoid consuming GMOs.

Below is another example.  Oyster sauce is an ingredient used in all kinds of delicious dishes, such as oyster sauce stir fry and egg fu yung.

Good luck finding a bottle on a typical supermarket shelf in the US that declares it is GMO free or that does not contain soy or corn syrup.  No doubt such brands do exist, but many supermarkets don't bother to carry them, probably because most shoppers don't bother to check.  If they knew how many food items contained GMO ingredients, some of them might start to bother checking.

If opponents of Prop 37 don't think anyone will care, then adding the fact that these foods contain GMOs on the labels shouldn't cause any problems with sales.  The fact is, the big food companies that oppose Prop 37 and who have donated millions of dollars to try to defeat it probably realize that such labels will have an impact in what people buy. 

Again, the above sauce may contain GMO because over 90% of soy and over 80% of corn (and probably higher than that -- 80% is a conservative number) grown in the US for human consumption is now genetically-modified.  However, we can't be sure -- because the label doesn't tell us one way or the other.

Here's another example.  Out of all the people who buy these tortillas, how many do you think are aware of the GMO issue?  How many have had the opportunity to examine both sides of the safety question and make up their own mind?  How many are aware of which eight crops are allowed to be genetically-modified and sold for human consumption?  How many are aware that three of those GMO-approved plants are present in these tortillas?  Is there any moral obligation to tell them?

It's too bad it's so difficult to find out what tortillas contain GMO ingredients.  As stated previously, I eat a lot of tortillas. 

Below is another example, this time of the common American hamburger bun.  Note that the label already contains mandatory "nutrition information" with facts such as number of calories per serving, calories from fat, total grams of fat, total grams of saturated fat, total milligrams of cholesterol, total milligrams of sodium, and even tells us that these buns were made in a facility that processes "tree nuts."  Why are the people who are up in arms against labeling GMO ingredients not also up in arms about all these label requirements?  Why is it OK to force companies to tell consumers how many milligrams of cholesterol are in their products, but not OK to require them to say if an ingredient contains cells that have been injected with the DNA of other organisms?

Some people might argue that cholesterol is not actually unsafe, just as some people argue that genetically-modified foods are not unsafe.  There are even studies and serious medical doctors who argue that cholesterol is actually good for you, and that the analysis that links consumption of cholesterol in food to heart disease and atherosclerosis is shoddy analysis.  But nobody seems to be upset that food labels have to tell us how much cholesterol is in a serving.  Nobody is screaming that telling consumers cholesterol data on the label -- or tree nut data on the label, which can be a life-saver for consumers who are allergic to tree nuts -- is "too expensive" or "makes food cost more for all of us," the way they are now arguing regarding the labeling of genetically-modified ingredients.

Below is yet another innocuous-looking common supermarket item -- a box of crackers.  Its ingredients reveal that these are made with cottonseed oil, soybean oil, and high-fructose corn syrup.

Are you still upset that Prop 37 won't label meat from cows that eat genetically-modified corn?  Upset enough to vote against it and prevent all the above products from telling you whether or not they also contain genetically-modified corn, soy, cottonseed, etc.?  In this case, you will be eating it, not the cows.

Similar story for the bottle of ranch dressing shown below:

These are just a few common grocery items found on grocery-store shelves.  It would be possible to show hundreds more.  The point of the exercise is to show how pervasive genetically-modified foods already are, and to show that the opponents of Prop 37 -- who are very well-funded and have the ability to hire very good advertising agencies that put out some very persuasive and hard-hitting ads -- are not addressing the real issue.  They are not addressing the real concerns that led to the creation of Prop 37.  They are not addressing the "meat" of the pro-labeling arguments -- not at all.

Most of those who support labeling of genetically-modified ingredients in food sold to humans are not also calling for the absolute abolition of genetically-modified foods.  Prop 37 calls for labeling; it does not call for outlawing GMOs altogether.

However, if opponents of labeling wanted to really address the GMO issue, then they should address some of the most problematic concerns that some opponents of GMOs have brought up.  Those include the fact that because plants reproduce by pollination, the existence of any genetically-modified crops anywhere (let alone in the huge quantities now being grown in the US) can cross-pollinate and alter crops that were not supposed to be genetically-modified, as well as the possibility that genetic modifications created using the genetic material of bacteria introduced into corn, soy, cottonseed, and other crops could somehow transfer to the genetic material of the bacteria which live in our guts if we eat too much of such GMO food.  These two possibilities, combined, could (in a nightmare scenario) lead to horrible consequences that have civilization-wide ramifications.

One of the hallmarks of a civilization is the division of labor, which means that we all end up relying upon one another for various things, instead of trying to make everything ourselves.  For a civilization to exist and for some people to live in cities where they can concentrate on making things other than food (in California, many of them work on technology that enables computer networks or other forms of new technology), and thus many people have to rely on others to grow the food so that those who don't grow the food can work on other things of value to the society.  Therefore, questions such as the one discussed in this post have enormous implications for everyone.

This issue is too important to be dismissed because of a "straw man" argument.