When Was Anthropology First Studied

Ancient Inventions and Anthropology
By Robert Baird

ANCIENT INVENTIONS: - In Alexandria and in the Cave of Hathor there appear to be reasons to believe we had electricity. There is no doubt that fraudulent traders were using electrum plating techniques to make gold plate on other metals to sell as pure gold. Some think the cave drawings show electrical wiring conduits, and I think it might be phosphorous slush in hoses to make the light by which the cave was painted by artists. There are professors who would have us believe the reason there is no carbon deposits from oil or wax burning lamps has to do with blind artisans. Thales had a small steam engine, the lighthouse at Alexandria and their tri-level sea-going ships, slot machines and other things lead the authors of Ancient Inventions to say they could build anything we could build until the mid-20th century. They detail the skill of port construction and many other things. There is much more than they talk about for us to re-learn or know, and many whole disciplines or things we've not yet re-discovered.

ANTHROPOLOGY: - There are so many examples of forced 'direct inference' theorization rather than 'observation and conclusion' to fit all facts in every area of science. Anthropologists in Polynesia kept telling the native people that they came from S. E. Asia despite the native assertions that they came from South America or even the Nootka/Haida nation of the Pacific Northwest. Thor Heyerdahl proved the natives were correct. The lack of willingness to accept that humans were inventive and ingenious enough to create rafts is nearly funny. There is botanical proof that Hawaii's vegetation is not all indigenous and came from the Caroline Islands of 1500 miles away. A cable TV documentary showed how the rites of the Caroline Islanders involve a bailing kind of movement and they established that as long ago as 150,000 BC these islanders traveled to Hawaii on huge rafts with outriggers. The jungles' vines and logs would make a raft in even the earliest times of hominid development.

The anthropologists as a whole are more open-minded despite having made many judgement errors that conventional thinking and the funding process have contributed to in a big way. We are constantly finding the facts and opinions of what academia calls mavericks are able to enlighten the past in all disciplines of anthropology and archaeology. Gimbutas and Campbell have followed a long line of independent thought from Humboldt and Hawkes through Petrie and Marshack. In the end they have brought mythology to the foreground through the use of techniques like the space photos and now we have solid state chemistry and genetics to blaze new trails. There is still a lot of small-minded provincial 'pissing-contests' between the differing disciplines but there are a lot of exciting things being achieved. The cases of researchers spending up to twenty years working and living with natives, who tell them what they want to hear because they are gracious and kind, are numerous. (6) The value systems of our researchers who want to position themselves and the Euro-Centric financial backers as more civilized are rife in the annals of what some say is far from a science.

<< Previous    [1]  2    Next >>