“Once a science calls a challenge an attack you know it is in trouble.”
“Upright apes,” “limited tools,” not-quite-human creatures often described as “It.”
We have all heard these types of things from the science community having had them repeatedly pounded into our heads from childhood as though they were facts.
They are not facts.And being claimed as facts while conflicting evidence is blocked from the public (Figs. 1-5) you can rest assured that they are not science either.
Fig. 1. Removing the radial variable (inset) and equalizing the lengths of the four 3-part composite line groups or sets (see magnification at right) of Bilzingsleben Artifact 2 (a 370,000-year old engraved rib bone of a large unidentified mammal). The artifact was possibly a multipurpose mathematical tool as sophisticated as a slide rule with potential uses including not only simple counting or its proposed use as a straight edge (see Part 1, Proof of straight edge use by Homo erectus) but also for uses involving trigonometry, ratio, logarithms, exponents, and fractals (see Fig. 2); and equally-demonstrable non-mathematical uses. Note that all four line groups were already set by the engraver to the same x-axis (bottom edge of artifact). Mainstream science has aggressively promoted the evolutionary idea that Homo erectus was an ape-man while blocking geometric proof of modern-level intelligence. In, Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media, we learn how power elites control public knowledge. In the case of demeaning Homo erectus the elite are not corporations but evolutionary scientists who, unable to counter empirical data, resort to suppression—one reason the late Carl Sagan emphasized that true science must not respect authority. Suppression of conflicting evidence is how the masses are duped when it comes to the topic of human origins.
No true science encourages the promotion of non-facts as facts; and the sooner the world’s thinking people remember this and learn to distinguish between real sciences (e.g., chemistry, physics, astronomy, geology, paleontology, biology, psychology, mathematics) and corrupted variants (e.g., evolutionary biology, evolutionary psychology) the sooner we will be able to snap out of the quality of being so easily duped.
Fig. 2. The four 3-part composite line sets of Bilzingsleben Artifact 2 abstracted and equalized demonstrating that Homo erectus people were exploring at high precision the nature of lines and understood at the very least the concepts of collinear line segments (two segments as parts of a single line) and sets. The visible gaps in each set (like Cantor’s ternary set) were clearly intended as emphasized by the identical diagonal lines serving as dividers in each set. Four set duplications in a row with deliberate variation should convince any mathematician as to the capabilities of the engravers. These equalized sets can be added, subtracted, multiplied, cross-multiplied, divided, or used as a matrix w/12 elements, etc; and in their original radial form (see Figs. 1, 3, & 5 and prior papers) can be used in matters related to time, change, motion, subsets, equations and functions. Evolutionary scientists tell you these people were part of a stagnant society. Do you believe them?
It is the opposite of logic to attach an ideological qualifier to the name of a scientific field for if the ideology is discredited the entire field goes with it. Proof of advanced mathematics in Homo erectus must of necessity be blocked in corrupted sciences because their evolutionary qualifiers require non-objectivity from their adherents. It is why devotees such as Richard Dawkins resort to tactics like name-calling, censorship, or attempts to force legislation preventing alternatives from being discussed in the science classroom; they resort to such behaviors in order to defend corrupted fields against what they call “attacks” from challengers. Once a science calls a challenge an attack you know it is in trouble.
Dawkins is well-exposed in the fact that he has more invested in evolution than science as his preoccupation with attacking religion attests. In fact, Dawkins may feel he doesn’t have much
early human mathematics is blocked from publication for the simple
reason that the evolutionary paradigm requires an ape-man phase.”|
choice but to fight in this way (i.e. kicking opponents in the groin rather than responding intelligently) because by admitting contrary evidence into normal scientific discourse the devotee of a corrupted field must anticipate its potential demise.
Advanced early human mathematics is blocked from publication for the simple reason that the evolutionary paradigm requires an ape-man phase. Anonymous peer reviewers who censor geometric evidence to protect this paradigm need to be smoked out of their nest. What they do is not science.Evolutionary psychology, a newcomer on the evolutionary bandwagon, will be the first to go. Since they didn’t anticipate an “attack” from empirical evidence they had no “scientific” [continued on page 14]
Fig. 3. Steps toward the infinite radial motif of Fig. 5. a.) Radial pattern. Proof of association between a complex graphic (or set) and an invisible abstract point. This is The Graphics of Bilzingsleben Slide #43—one of the “straight edge” proofs supporting the author’s claim of high intelligence in Homo erectus people. PROOF OF COMPLEXITY: The primary engravings of Artifact 2 consist of four repeating logarithmically-varying 3-part composite and collinear line sets (Figs. 1, 2, and 3b). These already-complex sets represent the ‘visible’ components of a large radial motif and double-serve as vectors ending at the upper edge of the artifact and as a pencil of rays extending from zero (origin or vertex of rays) toward infinity (Figs. 3a, 3c and 5). The motifs perform these two roles by way of self-similar fractal angles between 3° and 6.5° (Fig. 3c) with the angles in the motifs (e.g., 3b) duplicated in their orientations to the x-axis (bottom horizontal of the artifact). The composite groups and two more line segments (the first radial plus the parallel to its left) are arranged in a ratio series discovered by Dietrich and Ursula Mania (1988; Deliberate engravings on bone artifacts of Homo erectus. Rock Art Research 5: 91-107) spaced at the ratio 32213 (see Part 1, Proof of straight edge use by Homo erectus). These and other details are what make Artifact 2 a complex graphic or set. REGARDING PROOF OF ASSOCIATION: Finally, this complex radial set projects outward from an invisible abstract point, vertex, or zero (3a-c and 5). The myriad qualities of this and the other artifacts from Bilzingsleben (e.g., Fig. 4) show that the infrastructure necessary for modern language was present during the time of Homo erectus 400,000 years ago with these proofs providing the first empirical evidence supporting Chomsky’s 50-year theory that human language was fully-developed at whatever point in time it first appeared (see Part 2, Censoring the world’s oldest human language). b.) Subsets. Level 2 fractal angles each consisting of two sets of collinear line segments with breaking divider lines (Level 1 is the radial pattern or superset of the subsets). Noteworthy is the engraved 3° angle which is remarkable by any standards of non-mechanized precision especially seeing it was engraved with a flint knife. c.) Fractal angle symmetry. Level 1 and Level 2 fractal angles. These self-similar angles include more sophistication than detailed here such as diminution and augmentation (Feliks 2008, Phi in the Acheulian). The paper was blocked from publication for five years by three overseeing authorities: 1.) the XV UISPP Congress under the direction of Luiz Oosterbeek (Polytechnic Institute of Tomar) who called the paper a polemic treating the author as a troublemaker, 2.) Chair of the Pleistocene Palaeoart of the World session (associate of the director) who after referring to the paper as “absolutely outstanding and stunning... breathtaking... a landmark contribution,” cc’d to researchers that it had “no scientific merit,” and 3.) Elsevier’s Journal of Human Evolution (predictably defending the evolutionary paradigm with an anonymous censorship board blocking the paper from publication). This is how the science community—committed to the ape-man paradigm—responded to rigorous geometric data. In the process, the author’s work was circulated to competitive peer reviewers worldwide who absorbed the confidence of the paper into their own work without citation; this new confidence showed up in quick publications with sudden changes in direction or conviction disproportionate to the material being offered as evidence; these changes included uncharacteristically exaggerated claims of early human intelligence and graphics ability, though with little more evidence than what the authors had five, ten, or even 20 years prior. This was all done while the original author’s work was being relegated to an obscure miscellanea volume by Dr. Oosterbeek. I was prepared for behaviors such as this from the science community having already much experience of both censorship and plagiarism; it is why I put additional work into producing a detailed handout of all slides for The Graphics of Bilzingsleben presentation and registered the work. Conclusion: If researchers who are requested to present their latest unpublished and rigorous work in a mainstream forum cannot trust their work to the science community by granting privileged access for peer review then no one can trust this community.
Fig. 4. Five constants from an Acheulian compound line. Aplimat 2012. Study of a different motif included here as a reminder that the claims for mathematics at Bilzingsleben are not limited to those discussed in this article. The artifacts are also expressible in trigonometric and projective terms not at all suggesting the work of apes.
“We don’t need fossils in order to demonstrate that evolution is a fact. ... it would be an obviously true fact even if not a single fossil had ever been formed.”
defense. Their only defense was, and still is, censorship.|
This censorship is supported by evolutionary biologists because they are aware that if one front is lost more devastating “attacks” may be on the horizon and they would be correct to imagine it. I know this because the greater part of my life was spent with paleontology for the most part unhindered by an ideologically-vectored science education so I am familiar with the evidence from fossils in a more objective way than had I been programmed. Fossils have never been anything but trouble for evolution fanatics (see Richard Dawkins’ solution in the sidebar. If you are impressed, I strongly recommend going after your alma mater, perhaps in a class-action suit as you are clearly not the only victim).
Fig. 5. Proof of association between an abstract point and infinity (via a complex set). This figure is also described as “an infinite radial motif echoed at a ‘crossing point’ in two-dimensional space.” This is Slide #44 from The Graphics of Bilzingsleben program presented at the XV UISPP Congress, Lisbon, 2006. It is the radial quality of this motif—as opposed to its popular interpretation as a set of parallel lines—that makes the association between zero and infinity possible. Without this radial quality the line segments comprising the motif would only suggest at most four infinite lines broken into collinear ray pairs or opposite rays with nothing but the gap measurable and suggesting no association except similarity between the sets. The abstract point or origin here represents “zero.” Three other Bilzingsleben artifacts feature the very same convention of radial lines referenced to an invisible abstract point so the idea of deliberate zero representation is not mere conjecture. The four artifacts have all been plotted to precision on a curvilinear grid showing not only their spatial relationship to each other but also to zero and infinity (Feliks, J. 2010. Base grids of a suppressed Homo erectus knowledge system. Pleistocene Coalition News 3 : 12-14). Engraved at a high level of precision, Artifact 2 itself breaks the infinite radial motif into three parts as labeled in the figure: 1.) measurable finite distances on the side of the singularity dimension or zero, 2.) The physical artifact’s exact location in space-time (i.e. wherever and whenever it may be) where its engravings represent a visible manifestation of the invisible infinite radial motif crossing the 4-dimensional world (three of space and one of time—string theories aside for now but for good reason not discarded), and 3.) Radial motif or set extending to infinity. The full radial set—characterized by measurable angles—is compared by analogy with its four 3-part subsets (each consisting of two collinear line segments deliberately gapped like in Cantor’s no-middle-third set) with breaks confirmed by insertion of likewise measurable angled line segments (as seen in Figs. 1, 2, and 3b). In the infinite radial motif, the artifact itself (as shown in the section labeled ‘2’ of the figure above) represents the gapped space. The Graphics of Bilzingsleben thesis paper—which apart from transparent proofs of early language and mathematics also included a rigorous critical reassessment of the evolutionary view of early peoples as “hominids” capable of little more than surviving—was finally dumped into a miscellanea volume of little use to anyone. After many similar experiences it was the final proof I needed that anthropology is not true science because it manipulates evidence and what the public knows or believes about human prehistory.
You typically hear that thoughts do not fossilize but the engraved artifacts from Bilzingsleben are mathematical ‘cognitive fossils’ as impeccable as “trace fossils” in paleontology only instead of showing the tracks and burrows of where ancient animals went with their bodies the Bilzingsleben artifacts show where Homo erectus people went with their minds.
Of course, I am exposed to the ubiquitous rhetoric of “Homo erectus the ape-man” just like everyone else but staying out of the system during a crucial educational time was enough to let a small spark of objectivity remain. We all need to protect our own sparks from childhood and not allow ourselves to be duped by evolutionary rhetoric.
Evolutionary biology is a harder fortress to take down than evolutionary psychology for only “one” reason—a hundred years of flooding the public and academia with so much convoluted rhetoric that normally intelligent people can’t even see it.
Invisible rhetoric, cognitive trickery, scientific dishonesty works like this: Begin by forcing absorption of an ideology during childhood in a captive audience setting (i.e. as ‘science’ in the classroom). By the time of high school, students will naturally mistake the rhetoric they use to “think with” as being their own mind which in reality has become the medium of the rhetoric and so draws no attention to itself. Finally, by the time of university adults have lost all critical thinking ability and are naively convinced there is nothing but tons and tons of physical evidence supporting evolutionary theory even though they have “NEVER” seen it. That’s how powerful long-term brainwashing can be.
John Feliks has specialized in the study of early human cognition for nearly twenty years using an approach based on geometry and techniques of drafting. Feliks is not a mathematician; however, he uses the mathematics of ancient artifacts to show that human cognition does not evolve. One aspect of Feliks’ experience that has helped to understand artifacts is a background in music; he is a long-time composer in a Bach-like tradition as well as an acoustic-rock songwriter and taught computer music including MIDI, digital audio editing, and music notation in a college music lab for 11 years.