What is interesting is this artifact is now in plain sight at the Field Museum. But wait, there is more!
Geoff and I ferreted out one more artifact that again may have an alternate explanation than the one given on the placard.
Here is the picture of a large copper axe head. Picture taken by the author.
The caption explaining the artifact reads thus:
These copper axes or Celts show no sign of wear, leading archeologists to believe they held symbolic meaning. As with the Columbian red stone and greenstone axes, Hopewell leaders may have used copper axes to indicate their power to clear land and build monumental ceremonial centers.
I would point out this is once again the party line, and it becomes clear from yet another inscription that the Field Museum is holding to the accepted paradigm that there was no race of giant men, and these ax heads and spear heads were large because they were used ceremonially to show the prowess of the individual they belonged to.
Again, we will go to the historic record and see that these artifacts were found in conjunction with giant skeletons taken from the mounds. It would seem appropriate that an eight-foot man would use a larger axe and spear than one standing just less than six feet.
Here’s another clipping:
Of the skeletal material, only four or five good specimens were found. One remarkable mummy was 8 1/2 feet in length…across the breast of this mighty warrior were seven large bows, three stone pipes, forty war points, and four eight-inch spears…(10)
This article is a representative of many other articles describing large artifacts found which are proportionate to the skeleton in which they have been entombed. It seems reasonable to me that there has been a deliberate obfuscation of the evidence in order to prop up the status quo, which is the Darwinian evolutionary model.
Here is another axe head. This one is 27 1/2 lbs.
Photos Courtesy of The Creation Evidence Museum in Winnipeg. A 27 1/2 lb. stone axe found near Swan Lake, Manitoba, by a gentleman named Murrey Hiebert. http://www.carewinnipeg.com/Museum/galleries/human-evolution.
Notice in the following photos the difference between the axe head that is 16 inches long and weighs 27 ½ lbs and the normal size axe head to the right. I split wood and chopped down trees when I was in Boy Scouts—I attained a rank of Life!—and I know what it’s like to swing an axe. The 27 ½ lb ax presents a problem, even from a ceremonial point of view, as it would be difficult to hold or carry for any length of time. Yet, when we factor a man standing at nine feet, we see that this axe head would serve him well.
Chapter 5
Ales Hrdlicka - The Smithsonian Cover-up!
In Vine Deloria’s book, Red Earth, White Lies: Native Americans and the Myth of Scientific Fact, he states there was a cover-up by the Smithsonian in regard to the skeletal remains exhumed in the 19th and early 20th centuries. (11)
In Holocaust of Giants: the Great Smithsonian Cover-up, Deloria, writes:
“Some time before archaeology came to subscribe the general public to its view of prehistory—generations prior to Darwin’s troublesome theory—the pioneers thought that some of the earthworks were as ancient as could be concurrent with human habitation in America. Some among the early settlers exercised their pens assured that the earthworks were not built by the direct ancestry of the native people living in the historical period, but rather were constructed in a more remote era encompassing a different social order. They compared the ‘Mound Builders,’ with the ‘Indians,’ clearly discerning the former as belonging to an earlier time—possessing a different fate or destiny from the latter.
“Evidence for the occupation of this region before the appearance of the red man and the white race is to be found in almost every part of the county, as well as through the northwest generally. In removing the gravel bluffs, which are numerous and deep, for the construction and repair of roads, and in excavating cellars, hundreds of human skeletons, some of them of giant form, have been found. A citizen of Marion County estimates that there were about as many human skeletons in the knolls of Marion County as there are white inhabitants at present!” http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/720497/posts
Now this begs the question, why would men trained in the scientific method deliberately squash information that might alter the status quo or change it altogether?
Another point to consider is this: do we find other examples of this kind of hiding of evidence elsewhere? The answer is yes, and I will refer to several of these examples. What I’m trying to establish is that there seems to be a certain segment in academia who have an agenda and will stick to it no matter what. Here are two cogent examples:
Piltdown Man
The history of the discovery of the earliest Englishman (as Piltdown Man was so often called) is fairly common knowledge. A laborer was supposedly digging in a gravel pit near the village of Piltdown in Sussex in southern England in 1910 when he found a piece of bone. He passed it to the local amateur archaeologist of the district, Charles Dawson, who verified its antiquity and pronounced that it was part of a skull which was possibly human. Dawson began to search for the rest of the skull and, in 1912, a jawbone was discovered. Sir Arthur Smith Woodward of the British Museum verified that the skull had human features and the jaw was ape-like. The fossils became known as Piltdown Man and were called Eoanthropus dawsoni, which means “Dawson’s Dawn Man.” In 1915, another Dawn Man was found a couple of miles away from the site of the first find. Fossil remains of animals that lived with Piltdown Man, together with the tools that he used, were also found at the two sites. At last, here was “proof” that apes had evolved into humans in England.(12)
Piltdown Man remained “proof” of evolution until 1953 when it was proven to be a well thought out hoax. Piltdown Man was used in textbooks and was referred to as scientific fact and yet when proven to be a hoax, the scientific community was slow to adjust their thinking. Why would someone deliberately set about to deceive the public? What agenda was/is of such import that truth and honesty is thrown under the bus? Why are some of our schools still promulgating this myth?
Global Warming
Another more recent example is the phenomenon of “global warming.” The public was told over and over again that global warming threatened our way of life and unless we drastically changed our output of carbon, due to industry and the automobile, we would risk the chance of perishing as a species. However, just before the world was to vote on passing laws which would have greatly restricted the United States as well as other industrial nations, someone blew the whistle on the scientists who had fudged the data to create the outcome they wished.(13)
A segment on the December 3rd 2009 broadcast of BBC’s “Newsnight” showed the implications of the story behind the so-called “Climategate” scandal are more than just e-mails concealing data, but incompetence in analyzing the data by way of faulty computer code. John Graham-Cumming, a British programmer known for the open source “POPFile email filtering program” explained how the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) had wholesale problems with its computer programming analyzing climate change data, with billions, if not trillions of dollars on the line.(14)
If it wasn’t clear that the global warming theory was in trouble when the Climategate scandal erupted in 2009, showing the corruption in academia willing to “hide the decline” and suppress scientific studies and views that didn’t conform to those of the “warmists,” then it should have been when they largely dropped the term “global warming” and replaced it with “climate change.” Who, after all, could disagree with the notion that the climate is changing? It has been changing since the beginning of time.
One would have to be positively “anti-science” to make such a suggestion -- a term thrown around a lot by the Left to describe the Republicans who ran for president in 2012. (15)
These two incidents show the propensity of humans to rework data and create artifacts to bolster a particular belief or paradigm. Vincent H. Gaddi
s’ American Indian Myths and Mysteries states:
“Concealing evidence that conflicts with accepted theory is common scientific skullduggery. For years the Smithsonian Institution has been accused of hiding in storage vaults things it doesn’t like. In 1968 two Neanderthal-like skulls with low foreheads and large brows were found in Minnesota. As for dating, University of Minnesota scientists said they were reluctant to destroy any of the material, although carbon-14 testing only requires burning one gram of bone. They were sent to the Smithsonian. Later Dr. Lawrence Angel, curator of physical anthropology at the institution, said he had no record of the skulls there, although he was sure they were not lost. We have a right to wonder whether some professional scientists mightn’t find a really early date for the bones distressing.”(16)
In my opinion it becomes clear that those at the helm of the Smithsonian were engaged in the deliberate obfuscation of evidence that would offer another paradigm than the accepted Darwinian one that then and now permeate all of science and academia.
The question is why would men of science deliberately engage in this? And, I believe I have an answer. If these skeletons exist, and by all of the overwhelming evidence both from the written record found in newspapers and accounts from scientists, as well as the oral traditions from Native Americans, they pose a direct threat to the pervading world view, Darwinism.
This story proves that despite being presented with hard evidence that men hunted large bison with weapons in the Pleistocene Era (2.6 million to 11,700 years ago), therefore coexisting with them, Ales Hrdlicka of the United States National Museum (now the Smithsonian Institution), refused to admit that humans were in the Americas at that time. Why would he insist on this position if not to protect the sacred cow of Darwinism?
The rise of the Clovis Orthodoxy goes back to the first decades of this century. Throughout the 1890s, William Henry Holmes of the Bureau of American Ethnology and Thomas Chamberlin of United States Geological Survey challenged many dubious claims for Pleistocene (Ice Age) archaeological finds in the New World, a role continued into the 1920s by physical anthropologist Ales Hrdlicka of the Smithsonian Institution. In 1926 Jesse Figgins of the Colorado Museum of Natural History sent a crew to collect a skeleton of an extinct bison from a fossil bed near Folsom, New Mexico. Figgins’ crew found a stone point at the site but moved it before an archaeologist could verify its association with the bones. Hrdlicka refused to accept the find as evidence of Pleistocene occupation of the New World by humans. Figgins, infuriated, told his crew to contact him immediately if another such find was made and to leave the point undisturbed until he arrived. In August 1927 another point was found. It was left in the ground, examined by outside experts and photographed. The find proved that humans had entered the New World sometime before the end of the Ice Age some 10,000 years ago.(17)
Here yet again is another piece of evidence pointing to Hrdlicka’s refusal to accept evidence which would contradict his position.
This then was actually the first documented Folsom to be found in a positive association with Pleistocene bison, but it was insufficient to quell the doubt that surrounded such a radical and unprecedented finding. In 1927, the excavation continued with Floyd Blair in charge (Folsom 1974:39). Due to a discussion Figgins had with Ales Hrdlicka the previous year, workers were instructed to leave any artifact that they discovered untouched and in situ to be photographed and witnessed by independent observers. On August 29, 1927, Schwachheim wrote in his diary:
“I found an arrow point (Fig. 6 and 5C) this morning, it is a clear colored agate or jasper. It is not exposed the full length, but it is hollow on the sides and looks something like this (inserted drawing). The point was near the rib in the matrix. One barb is broken off … sent a letter to the boss today.”
When Figgins received word of the find, he sent telegrams to Barnum Brown, to major museums, and to a group of archaeologists who were conveniently assembled at a conference in Pecos, New Mexico. As soon as was possible, Barnum Brown, A.V. Kidder, and Frank H.H. Roberts, Jr., arrived to examine the find and all concluded that there was no doubt about the association between the bison bones and the projectile point. Interestingly, the most prominent man in the field of physical anthropology in the 1920s, Ales Hrdlicka of the United States National Museum (now the Smithsonian Institution), steadfastly refused to accept that man was in North America during the late Pleistocene. In regard to the artifacts recovered with the bison bones at the Folsom site, he stated they “… cannot be linked with Paleolithic culture or with geological antiquity.” To challenge Hrdlicka at any time for any reason was not a wise career move. To do so without absolute and positive corroborative evidence was professional suicide. To most archaeologists, however, this discovery opened the door to new and exciting discoveries on the Plains and elsewhere in the New World. (18)
We see the same obstinate trait being displayed by Hrdlicka. Remember, he was the head of the Smithsonian, the supreme gate keeper if you will, and all information passed under his scrutiny. I believe the evidence points to an intentional bias that deliberately obfuscated real information that, as I will try to prove in this book, supports the biblical view of creation and diffusionism with the Nephilim being central to the issue.
If there had been a race of giants that inhabited America before Native Americans arrived, which I believe there were, then where did they originate? Did they migrate here from Africa, the Middle East, or Asia? Is there a possibility they came from what is referred to as the Levant, or as most know it by, Israel, the Promised Land? Were these giants actually a race described in the Bible known as the Nephilim?
Think about it: if the Nephilim fled the Promised Land, or the Levant, where did they go? Is it possible they fled north into Europe and then found a way to migrate into North America? Could they have made ships and sailed to South America?
We know the timeline of the so-called Adena/Hopewell Indians was about 2500 to 3000 years ago, which fits the conquest of Canaan by Joshua perfectly. (19) Is it possible that the Nephilim tribes fled the land because Joshua and the Israelites were hunting all of them, including women and children? Are the remains of the giants in North and South America the remains of these Nephilim tribes?
Did Ales Hrdlicka during his tenure as director of the Smithsonian Institute deliberately steer the course of anthropology away from the overwhelming evidence that a race of giant men and women once inhabited the Americas? Ross Hamilton, in his book A Tradition of Giants, says this about Hrdlicka:
“During his tenure at the Smithsonian, Hrdlicka seized the opportunity to mold the path of anthropology as he saw fit. No one today knows how or why he was motivated to act the way he did, although national political skullduggery is suspect. The geologist Kirk Bryan once advised his students that during the ‘reign’ of Hrdlicka, ‘if you ever find evidence of human life in a context which is ancient, bury it carefully, but do not forget about it.’ … Hrdlicka stood in the way of all fieldwork speculating an older timeline for people in North America.” (20)
So here we have a contemporary of Hrdlicka, Kirk Bryan, who is supposedly telling his students to be wary of Hrdlicka. Why would he do this unless he knew Hrdlicka had an agenda, a paradigm that he sought to promulgate and keep the status quo at all costs?
If Hrdlicka didn’t know about the evidence, then we could give him the benefit of the doubt and declare, no harm no foul. However, this doesn’t seem to be the case as we see from the evidence above. We also have the clippings from newspapers in which the Smithsonian is listed as the recipient of the bones of the giants and yet they somehow vanish!
Ales Hrdlicka, dubbed the “Skull Doctor” by Native Americans, immigrated to America as a boy with his family from Bohemia. In Europe, his family was cabinetmakers, but Ales and his father took jobs in a cigar factory to feed the rest of the family in America. When Hrdlicka was a teenager, he contracted typhoid fever, and it was during this experience that he became interested in medicine. After he recovered, h
e studied in New York and earned his medical degree.
As an intern he began his studies in physical anthropology. He became very interested in the study of anthropometry, the systematic collection and correlation of measurements of the human body. During his search for data, Hrdlicka literally put his hands on and measured thousands of skulls— both of living subjects from all walks of life, and skeletal remains. He knew human skulls very well.
In 1910 Hrdlicka was promoted to curator in the Division of Physical Anthropology, and in 1918 founded the American Journal of Physical Anthropology, which he edited until his retirement in 1942. So, he controlled both the institution and the primary journal of physical anthropology in the United States for 32 years.
Human evolution and the land bridge are the two theories for which he is most known. He believed that human beings evolved in the Old World, Europe, and migrated throughout the globe. These people groups adapted to the environments but were of one source (competing theories of the day believed that various “races” evolved from different species of animals). In 1927, Hrdlicka published his article The Neanderthal Phase of Man, where he elaborated on this thesis. It was also in this year that he won the Huxley Memorial Medal, named after Thomas Henry Huxley (1825–1895), British biologist, supporter of Charles Darwin and inventor of the term “agnosticism.” Huxley was nicknamed, “Darwin’s bulldog.”
On the Trail of the Nephilim, Volume One Page 6