OUT OF EDEN – A New Theory of Human Origins (I)

Listen, Socrates, to a tale which, though strange, is certainly true,

having been attested by Solon, the wisest of the Seven Sages…

I will now tell the story of the ancient world,

which I heard from an old man…

Plato, Timaeus, 20d.

 

Introduction

We have decided to call our novel theory on human origins by the name of “Out-of-Eden” for several reasons that we now expound on. First of all, our theory is a combination of the two extant theories that presently contend for acceptance: the Out-of-Africa theory and Multiregionalism. As usual, the two contending theories embody seeds both of truth and of error being hence partly right and partly wrong.

Man was formed from two essential components, and it is as idle to discuss which of the two was the most important as it is to argue which of the two parents, male or female, plays a more fundamental role in engendering children. In both cases, we wouldn’t be here were it not for both contributions.

Second, the name we chose for our theory, “Out-of-Eden” evokes that of the Out-of-Africa theory, which is also part of the truth. One of the two basic components out of which humanity was formed – the black moiety –in fact, came out of Africa. It went out from there to the now sunken continent of Eden, where it met our other half, the white component that had evolved there. Inevitably, the two factions met and made war, each attempting to wipe out the other. Eventually, the war ceased, and peace came to reign. And then they mated and crossbred. The result was Mankind, both black and white, but embodying the best features of the two kinds of apes from which it was originally formed.

This simple find – so obvious and irrefutable – is the only one that is able to explain the riddles and the paradoxes that plague the anthropological doctrines on Man’s origins and so vex the experts every time a new fossil find is made or a new genetic research discloses new facts on this regards.

What is more, it has the advantage of complying with the ancient traditions on human origins, the echoes that reach us from the distant past in our holy books and in the myths and rites that we preserve in our religions.

 

The Solution of the Riddle

In fact, it was these traditions and these myths that drove us to the solution of the riddle of human origins. All we had to do was to fit the pieces of the puzzle together according to the pattern suggested by these traditions. As if by magic, the many bits of Evidence recovered by both the geneticists and the paleoanthropologists fell into place. And they all helped, each and every one, to compose the majestic pattern of the great drama.

As Einstein once said, it is precisely the riddles and the paradoxes posed by the empirical findings that guide us in formulating new theories and new hypotheses that shed light on the problem. They force us to reflect and ponder, and to come out with new insights. And when we come out with the right answer, the riddles and paradoxes cease being vexatious trouble and become the best confirmation that the new theory is right.

It was thus in the case of Relativity – that shed new light on the true nature of Reality – and of, say, Copernicus’ theory of Heliocentrism and of Kepler’s serendipitous realization that the planetary orbits were elliptical, rather than circular. When these sages discovered these facts, they developed new insights. These they framed into new theories, and the former difficulties magically vanished. In fact, it was these paradoxes that became the pillars of the new structure they founded.

Likewise, it was my discovery of Eden’s reality and of its true whereabouts some fifteen years ago that led me to realize that the ancient legends were founded on actual fact and embodied the seeds of truth. Having found the Lost Continent of Atlantis in the Far East, it was easy to realize that Atlantis was Eden. And it also became evident that the universal traditions on Paradise preserved in our religions were absolutely factual. Next came the realization that the Universal Flood was also real and that Atlantis had been sunken by it. Furthermore, we concluded that all that water could only have come from melting the immense glaciers which covered the sunken continent before the end of the Pleistocene Ice Age.

Moreover, we checked the geological record – dropping for an instant the paradigmatic theories such as Darwin’s Uniformitarian Evolution and found everywhere the unmistakable evidence of the universal cataclysm that caused the world to shift from the Ice Age into the present era. And this era is the Holocene the “Wholly New” age in which we now live, in the naïve expectation that it will last forever.

Theories are, like most things, dual. They enlighten us on the cause of the phenomena and provide a context inside which they can be embodied. But they also blind us to the facts and events that do not fit the theoretical paradigm. And the usual solution is to sweep them away, under the rug. So, my discovery of the reality of Atlantis-Eden and of the Universal flood led me to reexamine the problem of human origins and to attempt to discover what in fact the ancient traditions of Paradise were attempting to tell us. [1]

In my studies, I collected and placed, side-by-side, the traditional accounts and the known facts. I reviewed, open-mindedly, the ample evidence both fossil and genetic, uncovered by the many brilliant scientists that have been researching the problem for over two centuries. I followed Descartes’ wise advice, and dropped, for the moment all extant theories. I collated these facts to the ancient traditions directly and attempted to discover the new paradigms into which the two could be reconciled. And, sure enough, they could.

I concentrated, particularly, on the paradoxes and difficulties of the extant theories, following Einstein’s advice. I also concentrated on the puzzling fact that the different species of apes and man-apes that led to us humans often had hybrid features, combining the main traits of two or more different species, when – by the very definition of the word “species” – this fact could never happen, since crossbreeding between the two is impossible.

Then, I investigated the possible causes that forced these early apes to move far away, from one continent to another, in periods short compared to the time it takes to form a new species under ordinary conditions Next, I verified that the theories that presently contend for hegemony – Creationism, Out-of-Africa, Polycentrism and Rapid Replacement – were all shortsighted and tainted by the attempt of their proponents to foster their own biases and interests.

These interests included racial pride or prejudice, racism, religious bigotry, nationalism, and so on. I have learned, both as a scientist and as a person, never to believe the word of those who have a vested interest in the matter. And in this category, I include priests, politicians, academicians and, of course, the press, for they generally serve ulterior interests.

 

The Answer Is Crystal Clear

Eventually, I had an insight and the answer to the riddle became crystal clear in my mind. Other priorities such as the problem of Atlantis proper, kept me from pursuing that solution further and from investigating the problem in detail. This possibility materialized now. I finally completed my research on the issue of Man’s origins, carefully studied the many problems it entails and I now write down my results and my conclusions. I hope my readers become stimulated by these proposals and start researching the matter on their own, pointing out both my mistakes and the problems they find with my theory. Only will it become perfected and error-free.

Returning to the matter at hand. Our theory on human origins, Out-of-Eden, also embodies features of Polycentrism. It is possible – and in fact quite likely – that the white Asian apes that partook in the engendering of humankind ultimately originated in Africa. If so, they had earlier moved to Asia – or rather into Eden – several million years before the felicitous encounter that led to the origination of humankind. [2]

What drove the big apes and, later, the hominids back and forth across these enormous distances were the Ice Ages, the glacial episodes that periodically occur on earth with an almost clockwork regularity, every 100-200 kiloyears.

During the glacial periods, Africa, the Near East and a substantial part of West Asia became dry and desertic. The rain ceased and the rivers dried out, causing terrible famines and driving the survivors away. Europe and North Asia – not to mention North America and great extensions of South America – become covered by mile-thick glaciers, rendering life impossible or, at least very hard.

Just the opposite happened in Austronesia, the region to the south of southeast of Asia, the true site of Atlantis-Eden. The sea level dropped by as much as 120-150 meters, exposing the bottom of the South China Sea, the so-called Sunda Shelf. The scattered islands of Indonesia become an enormous continent, coterminous with Southeast Asia. Australia too became coterminous with Tasmania and New Guinea, becoming an immense continent separated from the Austronesian one by the narrow maritime channel known to the specialists as Wallace’s Line. [3]

 

The Reality of Wallace’s Line

Wallace’s Line is the divide that passes between the islands of Bali and Lombock in Indonesia continuing north and separating Borneo and the Philippines from Celebes and the other islands to the southeast of it, as shown in Fig. 1.

 

Fig. 1 – The Distribution of the Early Human Races

(Enc. Brit. 81:14:83a)

 

In this figure, Wallace’s Line is the black band at the bottom right in Fig. 1. It continues to the south, separating Australia from Indonesia by means of the Indian Ocean. The Grey region north of the Himalayas was uninhabited until the last stages of the Pleistocene. So were Australia and the Americas, whose colonization by hominids had to await the invention of navigation by humans. In fact, experts have recently determined that this invention occurred as early as 800 kya, far before the times of Homo sapiens. [4]

 

The True Story of Hominids

The vast continent of Asia – of which Europe is merely a peninsula – has traditionally been viewed as the cradle of Mankind ever since antiquity. This view provided the impetus for scholars such as Dubois and others to search for Man’s origins there. And there they made the first discoveries in Java and China of the fossil ape-men that were considered dramatic proof of Darwin’s Evolution Theory.

The difficulties in interpreting the story of human origins recorded in the fossil register stem both from the lack of a suitable theory and from the fact that Man is, in contrast to most animal species, highly variable in size, color and shape. Homo sapiens sapiens – or Anatomically Modern Humans (AMH), as we are also called by the specialists – ranges from less than 4 feet tall among certain Pygmies of Africa and of some islands in the Far East to more than 7 feet among certain populations of Central Africa and certain places in Europe.

Hair ranges from black and frizzly to straight platinum blond or red. Eyes can be black, brown, green, blue, violet, or yellowish. Some races are slender and tall, while others are squat, thickset, short-limbed, stocky and so on. If we look into the matter unbiasedly, it is easy to discern that Man is the result of the serendipitous crossing of the two types of australopithecines that once roved Africa and Asia as well as the now sunken continent of Australasia. These two types were gracious and robust. If we look again, closer, it is not difficult to realize that, there were two distinct components to Man’s origin, one black, and the other white. And this is precisely what is also independently attested by the genetic record and, at least in part, by the fossil evidence. [5]

We shall discuss, further below, the genetic trees (dendrograms) obtained by Cavalli – Sforza and his team in their work for the Human Genome Program. This gigantic research effort studied essentially all different population groups in the world, mapping their genes and determining from these genetic studies the original components that entered in their formation. From mutation rates and other such data, they also established the approximate dates and the probable geographical locales where these splits took place.

The results of Cavalli-Sforza’s group are quite revealing and shed considerable light on the problem of human origins. In fact, it was their date – which I matched both to the fossil record and to the results of the work of other geneticists and paleoanthropologists as well as to the ancient traditions on human origins – that led me to the solution of the vexatious problem of human origins.

 

Races Are No Foolishness, Racism Is

As I have already said, the concept of race is not foolish, racism is. It is only the racists that fear to talk openly of races. Without it, without the two racial components, we wouldn’t be here. We are all both black and white. As a matter of fact, we were quite probably black originally, and only “bleached” when we moved to Eden, to the now sunken continent of Austronesia, in the region of Indonesia. Fortunately, a part of us stayed behind in Africa and remained black evolving into the smart graciles that came to form our better, more human half, the first sapiens ever.

Life in Africa – particularly during the Pleistocene, when desiccation was far larger than now – was very hard. Survival was barest, and required enormous ingenuity from day to day, at all times. And scarcity selects for the smaller, slender individuals that consume less food and that do not attract the beasts of prey as much as their fatter peers. In a short while the African hominids – and probably even their ape ancestral – grew thin, slender, gracile, agile and intelligent. And they also became black. Graciles can also climb trees far better than robusts, and so escape the fiercer beasts of prey that rove the African savannas.

Black skin is far more resistant to the scorching sunshine that castigates Africa, where the open savannas afford little protection against the sun. But the Africans got black not indeed because the sun scorched their skin, as the Chevalier de Lamarck once proposed, but because of natural selection. Even more probably, this also happened because of sexual selection, a crucial factor that is often forgotten by Evolutionists.

 

Women Play a Decisive Role In Evolution

It is possible that the darker individuals could stand the heat better, and hence run better and longer than their white peers. The physical superiority of black athletes is even today patent to all of us who love sports. So, they were better providers and hence favored by the females of the species.

So, the women certainly granted their favors more to those that brought in more games, who were the best athletes, who could stand thirst, hunger and the sun better, and so on. In short, they favored the blacker, superior guys, and certainly, blending practical values with aesthetical ones, they came to find out in practice that “black is beautiful”. And who can argue with women when it is they who decide whom they are going to grant their favors to and who will be left out of the love game and leave no offspring?

The opposite thing – the opposite selection – took place in the east, in the vast wooded plains and mountains of Eden and the nearby regions of Southeast Asia and China. There, the tropical forests that covered this region during the Pleistocene – and still do, to a large proportion – provided shelter from the sun and hence, favored a paler skin that radiates less heat and does not have to stand sunshine that is absorbed by the thick foliage. [6]

Moreover, the abundant rains – then as now brought about by the cold winds that blow from the icy Himalayas, also, and by the monsoons – provided the abundant rains that resulted in an abundance of vegetation and, hence, game of all sorts.

 

The Reality of Both Heaven and Hell

In the Far East, life was easy – compared to that of Africa. Small wonder then that the region was considered paradisial – the Terrestrial Paradise, the Garden of Eden – by the happy ape-men who lived there and by their successors who eventually became the mighty Atlanteans, the Sons of God. Not only the rains were abundant, but Fertilization was also automatically insured by the fly ash of the many volcanoes of the bounteous place.

Even more enchanted with the region were the immigrants from Africa and later, from other regions as well. This tradition persisted down to proto-historical times, the times in which these traditions of Paradise became preserved either in writing or in the minds and hearts of humans. Alas, all this happiness and joy was to be short-lived and only lasted for the duration of the glacial episodes.

As soon as the glaciers melted, the sea level rose, and the region became covered by water. Once more Paradise turned into the Land of the Dead, Hades, the Paradise Sunk. The scant survivors of the tragedy once more became the Noahs and the Manus (Manoahs) and had to move out from Eden, searching for a Promised Land elsewhere. This they did first in Africa and later, in the more recent interglacials, in Europe, in Australia and, finally, in the Americas.

How many times, how many glaciations and deglaciations drove the proto-humans back and forth from Eden into Africa and then back again is hard to say precisely. Ten, a hundred, a thousand? I would guess about a hundred. In fact, the geological record has not yet fully disclosed the actual number of glacial episodes that took place during the Pleistocene. [7]

Are we too granted one interglacial only, before all our progress is reset to zero and we have to make a fresh restart from the Stone Age? Who knows? But the scientists who specialize in Climatology and related disciplines are starting to fear that it may well be so. Even governments and international organisms such as UNESCO are starting to get worried, though they attempt to with the truth from the public, as they usually do.

 

Good Theories Are Easy to Understand

The story we just told is as logical as it is easy to understand. The pedantic terminology is only required by those who in fact ignore what indeed happened. As de la Bruyère used to say: “Well conceived is well expressed”. Simple theories, based on easy-to-follow explanations, are indeed good ones to learn and to spouse. The rest is politico-religious buncombe. Noise that means nothing: misinformation, political propaganda, indoctrination.

The true story of human origins we patiently dug out from the ancient traditions, just as the paleoanthropologists dig from the ground the fossils of our ancestors. Too bad they have not yet dug in Eden. There they will certainly find out the fossils of the giants larger than the African robusts and of the midgets smaller than the African graciles, who once met there and ended up engendering the human genus. These humans were our black fathers, the Sons of God, and our white mothers, the Daughters of Man.

We have discovered that the true story was precisely as it says in the Bible and in the many other sacred traditions that have reached us from the far past. This sacred history is preserved just about everywhere in the world. And the fact is that we are all one and we all came precisely from that one place, Eden. Eden was indeed the site where the white Asians met the black Africans. There they met and fought, and finally made peace and love, and ended up mating and engendering us all.

 

The True Message of the Bible

The Book of Genesis is indeed the gospel’s truth. But it never says that the world or Adam was created in 4,004 BC or anything of the sort. This literal interpretation was made by the Bishop of Usher and was fast adopted by the confusionists that love to abuse the good faith of ordinary persons. The “seven days” are a metaphor for “seven eras”. These Seven Eras of Mankind are a traditional concept in India. And India is the place where these traditions came from, in the first place. They were brought to us when the Jews came from there. India was their refuge after Atlantis-Eden, their original homeland sunk down under the seas, and they were forced to move out, along with the other nations of the world who also originated there.

As we just said, and as so many suspected, the Bible is right, after all. It is the corpus of sacred traditions of the ancients preserved in literal form. But the foolish priests who appropriated it as their own feud, use it in order to oppress the nations and exploit the gullible are dead wrong. What they teach is foolishness no better than the Evolutionary buncombe that they attempt to refute by means of their literal interpretation of the Bible. Evolution too is wrong, because it denies Catastrophism and bases its conclusions on Uniformitarianism, a pathetic simplification of what indeed takes place on earth over geological time. Today, the best scientific experts hav long abandoned this erroneous tenet of Darwinian Evolution.

Catastrophism and crossbreeding of different sub-species is what indeed quickens Evolution and causes it to occur in practice. So, let us all do as our parents did in Eden long ago, in the dawn of times. Let us all make peace and learn to blend Science to Religion. Let us celebrate the nuptials of the two incongruous, of the Circle and the Square, of Fire and Water and of other such symbolic incongruals that pervade our religious symbols. These two opposites are indeed no other thing than our black fathers and our white mothers mating in order to engender Mankind.

This union of the two incongruous is the one celebrated in the Yin-Yang. The Yin-Yang is the cosmic Egg the masterful combination of the two seeds, one black the other white. They combined to form the Cosmic Egg from which the Two Principles, the Two Components out of which we are formed, one Black, the other White (Fig. 2). Asking which of the two is more important or “superior” is as idle as asking which of the two parents has a more fundamental role in engendering a child.

 

Fig. 2 – The Yin-Yang also Represents the Union of the Two Races

 

The same idea is also represented by all sorts of dual symbolisms that embody the Two Principles. These are the two souls (Soul and Spirit or animus and anima) out of which humanity was originally formed in Eden, at the dawn of the world. This Cosmogonic Marriage is the one that was celebrated in the Heb Sed ritual of the ancient Egyptians, the Akitu of the ancient Babylonians, the Tantric rituals of the Hindus, the mating of the Irish king with the white mare, and so on. And the mating portrayed in the Yab-Yum of the Hindu-Tibetan mandalas also represents the same sacred tradition.

This symbolism is also commemorated by dual symbols such as the yoni-lingam, the Mogen David, the Kali Yantra, the Cross, the twin Obelisks, and so on. To argue which of the two principles, the two components out of which we were formed was the most important, or arguing who came first, or which ape had the more important role – the black, gracile one or the white, gigantic one – is as idle as attempting to discover which came first, the egg or the chicken. How can you separate the inseparable? How can one truly say which step was indeed crucial in the long rung of steps of the Evolutionary ladder that eventually resulted in Man?

 

Some Proofs that Support Our Theory of Humans Origins

Having presented our theory of Human Origins and a few of the traditional clues that led us to it, we now discuss some scientific facts that prove our points beyond the limits of reasonable doubt. Some of these proofs are so simple and direct that only those blinds who refuse to see light or who fear its brightness can ever ignore our arguments. We challenge them to attempt to refute our evidence and our conclusions in any rational way.

We concentrate on riddles and paradoxes posed by fossil finds and genetic studies that are far from clear in the light of the usual theories, but which find a logical explanation in our theory. Finally, we also present clues that are somewhat subtle and are addressed to the specialist. These will not, we hope, fail to realize their inherent validity. The experts may resent my unorthodox approach or the fact that I am meddling in their feud, without being a recognized specialist on the matter.

I am sure that some dedicated experts will find many a minor flaw in my work. But not being a specialist on the matter gives me the advantage of not having a reputation to preserve. So, I can speak up my mind, without any fear of erring, for I am confident that the experts will naturally tend to forgive my errors and attempt to point them out to all and, hopefully, help me in correcting them all.

What I expect of the experts in the disciplines herein discussed is to attempt to look at the pattern, instead of the details, and to strive to see the forest, rather than the trees. And if they find that this theory of mine indeed makes sense and is, at least, a new contending of merit in the already well-populated arena of paleoanthropology. I ask them to be brave-hearted enough to help me in the task of re-establishing the truth of the matter.

Let us start with a simple, yet clear-cut proof that invalidates the Out-of Africa Theory, at least in its strict form. But if we allow a less than strict form of this theory, we fall right into the arms of Multiregionalism, its arch-rival. The proof we have in mind was first adduced by Colin Powell, the legendary student of human prehistory. In the interview just linked, Renfrew discusses several important topics on human prehistory, including some topics of importance to paleoanthropology.

The great scholar points out, first, that: “some local features that you see in Homo erectus that seem to be carried through into Homo sapiens”. Now, this fact has been forcefully emphasized by Chinese paleoanthropologists, who have concluded that Modern Man – or at least Asian Man, at any rate – has inherited several typical features which are characteristic of H. Erectus rather than of H. sapiens: a prognathous bite, a receding chin, dental structures, and so forth.

But the second issue pointed out by Renfrew is even more important. The researcher notes the little mooted issue that, for eons, African and Near Eastern Men used hand axes made of stone, whereas Far Eastern Men used hand tools made of pebble. And, as Renfrew affirms:

The curious thing is that when Homo Sapiens comes into play there, the pebble tool tradition still continues in Southeast Asia, although hand axes give way to other things in the West. So although the genetic evidence probably will prove conclusive, and Chris Stringer and Paul Mellar’s view may well win out, it has to be said that Wolpoff and his colleagues still point to pieces of evidence that do support their case and are difficult to place in any other framework.

What Renfrew is in fact arguing is that, had African Man fully replaced Asian Man, as usually held, how could the inferior technology have survived after this replacement took place? The only possibility that makes sense is that the replacement posited by the Out-of-Africa Theory did not really take place. What this evidence proves is that integration, rather than replacement was what really took place in Southeast Asia, more o less as Multiregionalism holds. And this conclusion is also supported by the other evidence just argued, the anatomical continuity of H. Erectus in the region, just as the Chinese scientists have consensually concluded.

 

The Asian and the African Big Apes

In Fig. 3 below we present direct visual proof that African apes are black whereas Asian ones are white-skinned and red-haired.

 

Fig. 3 – The Asian and African Big Apes

(Enc. Brit. 1974, 18:511-512

• – Gorila (pg. 512 bottom right)
• – Chimpanzee, (pg. 511, bottom)
  • – Orangutan (pg. 512 top)

• – Gibbon (pg. 511 top)

 

It may seem offensive to some that we start by the apes. But the pongids are our blood brothers who got separated from our nobler lineage only a few million years ago. Our point is that both the gorillas and the chimpanzees – the best-known big apes from Africa – are black of both skin and hair, while their Far Eastern counterparts, the orangutan and the gibbon are red-haired and white-skinned. [8]

It is interesting to note that the big apes of the East retained their arboreal habits, to which the orangutan is heavily adapted, while those of Africa generally did not. This tends to show that our argument, given further above, is justified and Africa has, for a long time, been essentially tree-less, whereas Indonesia has long kept its forests and its arboreal apes.

In other words, the apes who led us probably learned to walk erect in Africa, when the trees vanished at the start of the Pleistocene. It is certainly more than a coincidence that the Far Eastern apes are white-skinned and red-haired, as were the former inhabitants of Indonesia and South China. [9]

 

Black African Apes and White Asian Ones

But the similarities between the local apes and humans are not limited to the fact that the Far Easter big apes are white like the former inhabitants of Eden and the African ones are black, like the original natives of the Black Continent. The extant anthropoid apes approximate far more closely to the hominids than do the monkeys. The apes resemble us in size, the configuration of the brain, details of the skull, dentition, semi-erect posture, and several other items.

Above all of these is the uncanny similarity of their brain with human ones. The brain of the big apes looks like a miniature replica of the human brain. The basic patterns of the convolutions are the same. So is the intrinsic structure of the cerebral cortex. The cranial structure of the gorilla is the perfect counterpart of that of the fossil apes that led to man.

 

The Zoogeographical Evidence of Eden’s Reality

The fact that the orangutan once roamed the whole of East Asia and Indonesia proves that the two regions were coterminous during the Pleistocene, the epoch when this diffusion occurred. In other words, this paleontological find is one more piece of evidence for the reality of the now-sunken continent of Atlantis-Eden in the Pleistocene Ice Age. In the absence of this landbridge, how can one explain the passage of the orangutan from one region to the other?

When one examines the structure of the gorilla’s skull and that of the orangutan two further facts of importance are revealed: the uncanny similarity of the corresponding features of the brains of the two forms of australopithecines, the robust and the gracile. The orangs contrast with the African apes in having a rounded contour of the cranium and an absence of protruding brow ridges.

They also have a prominent sagittal crest surmounting the cranium along the midline. This crest is missing in the young apes, showing a tendency for its loss. It served for the attachment of the large temporal muscles that supported the head. When the apes that led to humans began to walk erect, the head became balanced and these muscles shrunk, eliminating the need for the sagittal crest.

The orangutan is relatively high-browed, as can be seen in Fig. 3. The gorilla, in contrast, preserves many features of the robust australopithecines. First of all, it presents the prominent sagittal crest. The brow ridges are large, recalling those of the Neandertals. This big ape has a low vaulted cranium like that of these early humans. But this feature is disguised by the large size of the sagittal crest, which gives, the false impression of a high vaulted skull. Males are huge when adults, and weigh up to 600 pounds and even more. Female gorillas do not have the sagittal crest, as their heads are far lighter.

It is interesting to note that baby gorillas have, in contrast to adult ones, a rather high brow, as can be seen in Fig. 4 below.

 

Fig. 4 – A Gorilla Mother and Her Baby

 

In this photo, one can also observe that the mother gorilla and her baby in fact have no sagittal crest at all, in contrast to adult males. Besides, both have black skin and hair typical of the African big apes. The high brow of the baby gorillas and their absence of sagittal crests suggest that the similar ones of humans may well be the result of our retaining these infantile traits of early hominids down to adulthood.

In any case, it seems that these human features were also the result of humans having assumed an erect posture. With this posture the head became balanced, and the brain started to press the back of the skull, forcing it to increase in the rearward direction. The opposite happens in the horizontal posture characteristic of apes. The brain pushes towards the front favoring thick, protruding eyebrows and long muzzles, such as the ones observed in erectoids.

The difficulty that specialists have in classifying gorillas of the dwarf variety and the robust one into either different species or a single one also obviously occurs for the fossil forms. These are much more difficult to assess for such extinct species of apes. The two “species” of gorillas, one robust, and the other gracile closely recall the corresponding ones of the Australopithecus. And it is quite likely that these two apes are in fact able to crossbreed.

The only way to know for sure is to make the two varieties match and see what happens. I am not sure if this experiment was ever attempted. But it would certainly be enlightening. I am ready to bet that these two apes can actually interbreed successfully, as is so often the case with many animals of different species. [10]

 

Species Should Not Be Postulated Idly

This evidence strongly suggests that there is seldom a good reason to classify closely related fossil hominids in different species or even genera except for the fact that they are found in different geographical locations (Asia and Africa, for instance) or are separated by long intervals of time (say, 1 Myear). But these reasons alone will not do and are clearly insufficient. Man is certainly one of the most mobile mammals. So, he could, even in the apish state, easily pass from Africa into Asia and vice-versa, particularly when pressed by the onset and end of the Ice Ages.

This fact is shown directly by the finding that most fossil species of hominids show up almost simultaneously on both sides of the world. Second, separation in time means essentially nothing, at least insofar as different species are considered. Time barriers are not genetic barriers, though they too are absolutely inviolable. But do we, for instance, differ in species from, say, the Pilgrim Fathers just because we are separated from them by an impassable time barrier?

Nothing guarantees that the several different species of australopithecines of the robust and the gracile types could not interbreed whenever they met, either in Africa or in Eden or elsewhere. The same is apparently true for Cro Magnons and Neandertals, whom some paleoanthropologists affirm to belong to a single species (Homo sapiens), while others, instead, place them in different ones, ranging Neandertal with H. Erectus or other such species of not yet really human hominids.

So, as the present evidence apparently indicates, the two colors of Man – black and white and, hence, some intermediate ones as well who were engendered by interbreeding – are in all probability extremely ancient. The two colors probably date from the times when we still were apes in Eden and Africa, the two original homelands of Man. The white, red-haired, robust, low-browed australopithecines apparently originated in Austronesia from earlier African apes that had moved there in former epochs. In turn, the black-skinned, black-haired gracile counterparts originated in Africa and later developed the large brains that would eventually lead to us humans.

 

Crossbreeding the Rule Rather Than the Exception

The fact that we find these different attributes intermixed in the big apes – high brows in white orangs, black skins in robust gorillas and gracile chimps – suggests that the crossbreeding we postulated as leading to Man was in fact widespread among the fossil apes and ape-men of the former eras. In fact, in the absence of geographical or other barriers, enter – species cross matings seem to be the rule rather than the exception in Nature.

Paleoanthropologists keep changing, almost daily, the genus and species of the hominid fossils they find. And as soon as one of them classifies a particular fossil, another one reaches a different conclusion and proposes a radical change. So, to say the least, their classifications of the hominid species do not inspire too much confidence in laypersons. Even less does their confidence in the fact that their classification makes it theoretically impossible for them to different species thus obtained were unable to match successfully.

How do they reach that conclusion if the differences they point out are so tiny, so far lesser than those that presently prevail in humankind? Interestingly enough, humans, are ready to point out that not even racial differences in fact exist despite the huge differences anyone can observe. How do they reconcile these double standards? Are they willing to fool us, or just cheating a little bit in order to foster their pet theories and beliefs? [11]

Moreover, how do these specialists explain the frequent appearance of intermediate individuals in so many fossil specimens? How else but through cross-breeding? Is there an alternative explanation for this observation? Isn’t this the same that happens with humans when individuals of different races marry each other? Isn’t this also the way with all domestic animals? Why not with the early hominids? What barriers prevented their crossbreeding?

 

The Prevalent Confusion

To give the reader an example of the confusion that prevails on the matter, we now quote from the reliable Encyclopedia Britannica (1980 ed., sv. Homo erectus). The text is discussing whether the fossils found in Vertesszöllos (Hungary) would be classified as H. Erectus or H. sapiens, given the fact that they combine characteristic features of both species:

 

The remains of the [fossil] child… show affinities with the Chinese H. Erectus of Chou-Kou-Tien. The adult… while showing the same features reminiscent of H. Erectus… also suggests an affinity with an early branch of H. sapiens. In fact, it appears to be related to [other] skulls from Europe which are accepted as H. sapiens. Since such twofold affinities are exhibited by the Vertesszölos group of [fossil] remains, authorities differ as to whether call the population they represent H. Erectus or H. sapiens. The same uncertainly applies to the same fossils found in North Africa… the remains are regarded by some experts as late surviving members of H. Erectus, and by others as forms transitional between H. Erectus and H. Sapiens.

 

The author then goes on to explain that the Vertesszölos fossils though closely resembling H. sapiens, were classified as H. Erectus due to their dates (200 kya). These range from those of H. Erectus elsewhere. Moreover, the culture they belonged to also resembles those of H. Erectus, rather than that of H. sapiens. And the erudite author concludes that:

Even if these two inferences were accepted as facts, however, the approach taken by the investigators would represent a departure in which paleontologists usually decide whether two groups of specimens belong to the same or to separate species.

 

In other words, the investigators in question cheated. What they did was adjust facts to their theories rather than the other way around. This is what they should have done, were they more intellectually honest? What is sad, is that this is by no means an oddity, but unfortunately a common event both in paleontology and paleoanthropology. How are we to discover the truths about Man’s origins with the experts acting this way? Honesty should be a basic requirement for Science, at all times.

 

The Hungarian Fossil Are Crossbreeds

But one fact at least becomes crystal clear in the above melée. The Hungarian fossils are apparently intermediaries between H. Erectus and H. sapiens. They combine the features of the two species in a way that suffices to confuse the experts and leaves them unable to decide conclusively. Whether the fossils in question are to be classed as H. Sapiens or H. Erectus.

So, this proves my point that the two species, H. Erectus and H. Sapiens were able to crossbreed and, hence, produce intermediate elements. The only alternative would be for a gradual passage, a continuous evolution in time due to random mutations and those forced by the environment. But this takes a million years or more, according to Cavalli -Sforza, the greatest specialist on the issue. The Hungarian fossils were, however, contemporaneous with H. Erectus as the investigators pointed out. In brief, there was not enough time for the evolution to have occurred under natural conditions. So, the conclusion can only be that the two species, H. Erectus and H. sapiens were, at least for some of its sub-species, able to intermate and breed hybrid children such as the fossils in question and several others besides.

 

Homo Erectus Coexisted With Homo Sapiens in Eden

The Solo Man – whose fossils were recently redated by radioactive methods by the Berkeley group – provides direct proof that paleoanthropologists often base their classifications of specimens on circumstantial evidence rather than on intrinsic evidence provided by the features of the fossils themselves. A. Berkeley team of specialists recently found that the group, of fossils of Homo erectus, found in Java several years ago near the Solo River together with rather modern animals – indeed date from between 27 and 60 kya, as some earlier researchers had proposed earlier, based on this circumstance.

The Solo fossils had been classified as H. Erectus despite the fact that some of the skulls presented features intermediate between those of H. Erectus and H.Sapiens. Other researchers thought differently. Von Koenigswald – the famous German paleoanthropologist who participated in the dig – thought that the skulls constituted a typical case of what he dubbed “a tropical Neandertal”. In other words, this specialist thought that these Javanese fossils belonged to the H. Sapiens species rather than to the H. Erectus one.

Others such as Milton Wolpoff – the likewise famous champion of Polycentrism – affirmed that the Solo Man belonged to neither of the above two species, but was an early form of Homo sapiens. Wolpoff could not conclude otherwise, for the fossils would, if classified as Erectus, spell the doom of Polycentrism. This theory bases itself on the impossibility of two different species coexisting in both time and space in any one location.

 

Solo Man Poses a Problem For Paleoanthropologists

But the Solo Man fossils created yet a further problem for paleoanthropologists. Their date is later than the one on which the Australians left for Australia. This date has been determined to lie between 40 and 60 kya, if not earlier. [12]

So, if the different researchers just named are all of them right, we have, in Indonesia – at the same time and at the same geographical location – four different species or subspecies of Homo: Erectus, Neandertalensis, Archaic Sapiens and Modern Sapiens. No doubt, Eden (Indonesia) was truly the “melting pot” where humans originated, with four different taxons of humans coexisting there in both time and space.

The only way out of this vexatious situation is to admit that these different “species” were not indeed different species, but could date mate fruitfully, engendering intermediate, fertile offspring. The Solo Man fossils – found in the Ngandong beds of Java – are recognized as legitimate instances of H. Erectus by essentially all paleoanthropologists. The sole exception seems to be Milton Wolpoff who, as we have said, does have a vested interest in ranging them as H. sapiens. So do, by the way, the Creationists such as Marvin Lubenow, who holds the same view for an entirely different reason. [13]

 

Creationists and Evolutionists Both In Trouble

But the fact is that the dates recently established for the Solo fossils by the Berkeley teams create insuperable difficulties for both Polycentrists and Creationists. [14]

Even worse is the situation for the Africanists and for the Rapid Replacement theories. These theories hold that man (Homo sapiens) originated in Africa in all its forms and thence rapidly spread to all other regions of the world. Once there he eliminated and replaced the earlier forms of hominids he found in the new habitats. However, it is now apparent that Modern Homo sapiens originated at least 200 kya, the date at which he is first attested in the Far East.

In Africa, the evidence for MHS (Modern Homo sapiens) is far later and dates from 117 kya, when the first footprints of clearly modern humans are attested in some African sites. Of course, the appearance of MHS in the Far East earlier than in Africa creates considerable difficulty for the Out-of-Africa theory and provides strong evidence in favor of our Out-of-Eden theory. Our theory holds that MHS in fact arose first in Eden, from the cross mating of the archaic forms of H. sapiens which had originated one in Africa (black graciles) and the other in the Far East (white robusts).

The dates obtained by the Berkeley researchers are extremely hard to contest. They are obtained for many samples of the Solo beds and by two independent dating methods (EPIZ and Mass Spectrometry), both of which are considered highly reliable by all specialists.

 

Some Unanswered Difficulties

Ever since their discovery, the Javanese fossils from Ngandong and Sambungmukan have created considerable difficulty for paleoanthropologists. They have, over the years, raised a lot of questions that remain unanswered. The main problem stems from the fact that they undeniably belong to the H. Erectus species. But they also embody several features of the H. sapiens one. Moreover, their date is irremediably late for all practical purposes.

The present theories – all of them based on the Theory of Evolution – cannot tolerate the simultaneous existence of several different species or subspecies of humans or of animals. This coexistence would deny the basic tenet of the Theory of Evolution, the survival of the fittest. One population would inevitably replace the other, a less advanced one, just as has happened in the Americas and in Australia with the coming of the white man.

The former groups are either assimilated or, more often, plain exterminated, when not simply cannibalized. Our Out of Eden theory accounts for the difficulties of the other theories quite well. In it, the more evolved forms developed in different, isolated locations, either in Asia or Africa. When the climatic changes occurred – with cataclysms outsets and endings of the glacial episodes – these more advanced groups were driven away from their homelands into the new ones.

There they met the local groups, warred with them, and finally made peace and love. So, they became mingled and, as the result of selective breeding, even more advanced. When the flip-flop of the earth’s climate reversed, it was the turn of this more advanced group to return to their former homeland, where the process was repeated, this time in reverse.

 

The Eternal Drama of Creation

What we actually observe in Java, in the Ngandong fossils, is just the last stage of this ever-repeating drama. These Javanese fossils present clear evidence of having been cannibalized by their more advanced neighbors, Homo sapiens. Their heads were severed from their bodies, and their skulls were broken open in order to reach and devour their brains, the source of their mana.[15]

And these fossil remains were thrown alongside a pile of other animal carcasses found on the site, which also present evidence of having served as food. Head-hunting and cannibalism are widely attested practices in the region. There, this custom probably dates from this early epoch, if not from far earlier ones. So, the Solo fossils are indeed the so-called “smoking gun” evidence of the hypothesis on which we based our theory on human origins. Here you have the two human groups – Erectus and sapiens coexisting side-by-side and even fighting and devouring each other. Mating is also evidenced by the attempt to gain the enemy’s mana.

Furthermore, you also have direct evidence that the more advanced, probably better-armed group of humans H. sapiens not only defeated their lowlier brothers but also cannibalized their remains. This is, as we just said, an obvious effort to assimilate their mana, their psychic energy. Finally, in the intermediate nature of the fossils – in the perplexing combination of H. sapiens features in the H. Erectus substrate – one also has direct proof that the two contending groups also mingled sexually and did, in fact, breed offspring.

 

Cannibalism, a Sad Facet of Evolution

It is not impossible – and in fact quite likely – that the ancient Javanese even behaved the way some Amerindian tribes did until recently. In fact, the primitives of Melanesia, Polynesia, Southeast Asia, and Indonesia also behaved likewise, a fact that is widely attested both in their ancient traditions and in the historical record.

The prisoners captured in combat were kept for some time and, for a time, treated as royalty. They were given wives and encouraged to breed children with them. Eventually, the day came when the prisoner was killed and cannibalized in a sort of communion. This ritual was intended for the absorption of his mana, his genesic and spiritual force. The children of these prisoners were called marabá (“mixed, caste”) and were treated according to their physical type, some being sacrificed, some spared, according to certain criteria having to do with the racial selection.

The same thing happened with the women and children captured in such forays. Some were being kept as slaves and bedmates, some were eliminated. As we see, we have here a relic of the ancient customs, a rather direct proof that crossbreeding and selection in fact took place when the different groups met and mated. Evolution is, unfortunately, usually as brutal as it is effective in selecting the fittest. And this is particularly the case when it is fostered by racial biases and preconceptions.

Actually, the find of the Ngandong fossils of recent H. Erectus is far from unique. A similar discovery was made in Sambungmakan, some 40 km away from Ngandong. But an even more interesting strike was made in Australia. In an early cemetery, in the Kow Swamp area, several fossils of what are clearly exemplars of H. Erectus were also found and dated at relatively recent epochs (about 10 kya or so). We comment on this spectacular find further below in detail, showing the arguments of both sides. One group claims that these recent fossils are sapiens, whereas another contends that they are Erectus or, at least hybrid forms. We opt for the latter alternative for the reasons that will be given next.

 

The Kow Swamp Fossils, Humans or Erectoids?

The fact is that paleoanthropologists generally attempt to evade the problem caused by these non-conformal fossils by claiming that they are not Erectus for the simple reason that they must not be so, according to their pet theories. But this is circular reasoning, to say the least, if not sheer cheating. Had these fossils been found in a more acceptable context, they would doubtless be classified as H. Erectus. After all, they show all the characteristic features of this species, though somewhat more evolved and apparently blended with the ones of H. Sapiens.

Calling the Kow Swamp Homo sapiens and pointing out their resemblance with modern Australian is just a sophism. It is merely an idle attempt to evade the problem rather than to try to solve it. The Kow Swamp fossils also prove the fact that the latest exemplars of H. Erectus were far more advanced than is currently admitted for these primitive forms of Man. They already buried their dead, sowing the presence of some sort of religious devotion. They obviously refused to cannibalize their own dead. And religiosity is proved by the fact that their dead were buried with the head facing north towards the direction from which they come originally, the one of Indonesia, that of Eden itself.

 

Homo Erectus Capable of Navigation

What is even more sobering is the undeniable fact that the latter forms of H. Erectus such as those attested in Kow Swamp were capable of deeds that are only allowed H. sapiens. For, Australia has always been separated from Southeast Asia, even during the Ice Ages, by the so-called Wallace’s Line.

Hence, these early Australian H. Erectus were able to cross this rather wide gap of the open sea, and obviously already mastered navigation. In fact, they had acquired this ability far earlier. Recent research has disclosed the fact that Erectus had already reached isolated Indonesian islands such as Flores by least as early as 800 kya. Now, this is an enormous span of time, a sum of fully 8,000 centuries.

In fact, some paleontologists held that the impossibility of H. Erectus crossing the seas was itself proof that the Australians of Kow Swamp could not possibly belong to that species of early humans. But by 800 kya no H. sapiens did already exist, proving the fact that the tools and campfires found in Flores and elsewhere in Indonesia could only be attributed to these early humans.

This find and others also prove that H. Erectus was, despite their low brows, capable of intellectual feats that were, up to now, attributed exclusively to H. sapiens: they mastered fire and tool-making; they had religious beliefs and buried their dead, and they had invented the art of open sea navigation. Of course, these early achievements, like their genes, were to be supplemented by the ones they would obtain from the more evolved H. sapiens from Africa, with whom they later crossbreed, engendering “the mighty men who were of old”, the Nephelim of Atlantis.

 

The Ngandong Fossils Reopen the Question of Human Origins

So, the discovery that the Ngandong fossils are indeed recent as earlier surmised and were in fact compatible, in time, with the ones of Kow Swamp reopens the question of the identification of these fossils as H. Erectus, as claimed by several paleoanthropologists. And, what is even more important is the fact that the rich find of Kow Swamp involves many fossils transitional from one form to the other. Nowhere else is this serendipitous evolution so well documented as in the Kow Swamp site.

Hence, their study – or, rather, that of the casts of their fossils, now that the originals have been restituted to their legitimate owners, the Aboriginals – can shed considerable light on the obscure passage from the H. Erectus stage to the H. sapiens one. Evading the issue will not do anymore, and will only demonstrate the fact that paleoanthropologists are far more interested in defending their petty theories than in establishing the truth of the matter.

 

A Review of the Ngandong Fossils

The Ngandong fossils were discovered some 70 years ago, between 1931 and 1933 in a sand pit near the Solo river. A team of Dutch paleontologists found the remains of the skulls of 12 individuals within a 2 feet thick layer of sandstone together with a rich variety of fossils of other animals. These animal fossils – totaling over 25,000 – were used to date the deposits by paleontological methods.

These fossils yield a date estimated at about the late Pleistocene. Other fossils, both human and animal, were later found in nearby sites and in that of Sambungmakan, already mentioned. The skulls were incompleted and showed unmistakable signs of having been cannibalized. They consisted of calvaria and calottes only showing that they had been opened in order to access the brains, in the age-old process of cannibalization used even today in the region.

The tools found with the fossils included Mesolithic implements that – were it not for the association with H. Erectus – would readily be dated at about 12 kya or so, just before the start of the Neolithic period. In fact, they were so classified at the time, creating a vexing problem that the paleoanthropologists readily swept under the rug.

 

Solo Fossils Are Transitional Forms of Homo

As the Solo fossils were transitional forms between H. Erectus and H. Sapiens and this transition is said to have occurred at about 200 kya or earlier, fossils dated at the far later ones just mentioned simply cannot be admitted by the professionals. They would, otherwise, lose face and be obliged to admit their ignorance on the issue of the true relationship between H. Sapiens and H. Erectus.

So, they claimed that the beds had been disturbed by early floods of the Solo river. But the researchers objected that not only were the fossil beds perfectly layered, but the fossils themselves showed no traces of rolling or of the wear and tear that would necessarily occur in that case. Von Koenigswald, – the reputed paleoanthropologist who partook in the research and actually dug and described some of the fossils himself – attested to the perfect layering and good conditions of the fossils, voiding these a posteriori charges. [16]  Beals and Hoijer also write [17]:

The skulls were all found lying base upward, without signs of wear or movements.

Carleton Coon affirms the same thing in his book. [18] Swisher, the leader of the team that dated the fossils points out that several of the vertebral and the mandibles found on site were still articulated, an impossibility if they had been disturbed and mixed by floods, as objected by some. [19]

Besides, Coon also notes that fragile structures such as the pterygoid plates are perfectly preserved in the fossils. Moreover, Ann Gibbons writes, in the same issue of Science, that Swisher’s team also pointed out the fact that “it is hard to imagine how 12 crania and other human remains could have moved to the same level at the two sites” (Ngandong and Sambungmakan), and accumulated nowhere else. [20]

 

Milford Wolpoff and the Ngandong Fossils

In brief, the hypothesis of mixing up of the fossils simply will not do, and a better excuse will have to be found. It is not a coincidence that Milford Wolpoff did not even mention this possibility in his rebuttal of the problem created by the Solo fossils. Instead, Wolpoff evades the difficulty by claiming that the fossils are not H. Erectus at all but in fact early instances of H. sapiens. [21]

We are ready to agree with Wolfpoff’s contention that the two types of Homo do not form two different species and hence that the Solo fossils are indeed transitional instances of early H. sapiens. But if so, the issue is indeed begging, and the question loses sense. In other words, these two types of humans cannot be distinguished and could indeed produce the intermediate offspring actually observed in that region of the world.

We are hence willing to concede that Wolpoff is right, and his opponents wrong, at least insofar as concerns the arbitrary separation of H. Sapiens and H. Erectus in two different species. But we disagree with the conclusions that he takes from this fact, for the implication are altogether different. Modern H. sapiens did not evolve independently in both Asia and Africa or, even less, in Europe and elsewhere, as the Polycentrists will.

Instead, MHS evolved in Eden first as attested by the Solo fossils and others, and diffused from there to people from other regions of the world. In fact, H. sapiens resulted from the serendipitous crossbreeding of the earlier sub-species of H. Erectus, the gracile, black one from Africa and the robust, white one from Eden, as we argued further above. Polycentrists fail to realize the crucial role that crossbreeding and subsequent sexual selection had in the development of species, a factor sorely downplayed or ignored by the current theories on human origins.

These may also have occurred in Africa, Europe, the Americas and elsewhere in Asia, where some instances of the phenomenon are well-attested. But it is in the region of Austronesia that crossbreeding and unnatural selection by means of cannibalistic rituals are by far best attested. Indeed, these customs were still at work when the coming of the whites put an end to the process by even more ferocious means: simple genocide.

 

Man’s Evolution Speeded By Ice Ages

What is more, the transition from earlier stages to subsequent ones in the shaping of Man seems to have occurred the same way by means of the process we postulated: the periodic crossings from Africa to Indonesia and vice-versa, forced by the Cataclysmic onsets and terminations of the glaciations. This process takes about 20 or 30 kiloyears to complete itself and is modulated by even larger periods of about 100 ky or so in duration.

These intervals are, more or less, the periods in which we observe great changes in the evolution of Man, showing the great influence these climatic changes have on Evolution. The evidence of cannibalism in the Solo Man fossils was first mooted out by Von Koenigswald in his book already referenced above. The great paleoanthropologist writes:

A vast number of different bones of all sorts of animal types were unearthed [at Ngandong].

But of human remains only a very particular selection whose incidence was certainly not natural.

 

Evidence of Early Cannibalism

All the human skulls (12) of Ngandong had their faces smashed and all but two of them had their back broken open. Von Koeniswald calls them “skull-trophies”, that is, hunted heads. The practice is even recently attested for most of the tribes of the region, including the Kyaks that Von Koenigswald studied, and who used to eat out the brains of their enemies in order to absorb their mana, their psychic forces.

The earlier efforts of paleoanthropologists to dismiss the Solo fossils and those of the Kow Swamp as evidence of the contemporaneity and coexistence of H. Erectus and H. Sapiens have been reasonably successful up to the present. But now Swisher’s find has unequivocally demonstrated the reality of the fact beyond a reasonable doubt.

So, paleoanthropologists have better attempt to amend their theories and their former hypotheses on Man’s development if they indeed want to be taken seriously. Wolpoff has already done that, as we discuss elsewhere in detail. But his Neo-Polycentrism is as inadequate and as full of holes as its former version. But, at least, his present arguments somewhat according to the Ngandong finds and others, having been changed ad hoc precisely in order to account for the sort of evidence presented by them. But scientific theories cannot be amended and refurbished every time a fact is found that contradicts them. As Wolpoff himself has written in his book that predates Swisher’s find:

Disproof [of earlier australopithecines developing into H. erectus] could be accomplished… by showing that Homo erectus could be found earlier than the first appearance of the proposed ancestral species”.

Such is precisely the case here, with H. sapiens appearing far earlier than the disappearance of his predecessor, H. Erectus. There is an evolutionary principle that requires that a proposed sequence is falsified when a specific form is found outside the predicted time frame. [22]

 

Black Adams and White Eves

Though I intended this chapter to be mainly science-based than tradition-based, I cannot fail to give here the essentials of the vast mythical material that deals with the question of the hybrid “marriage” of blacks and whites that took place in Eden and which resulted in the engendering of the human in their diversified colors and shapes. The reader interested in more details is directed to our more specialized works on this fascinating theme. As i have argued exhaustively, the ancient myths, rather than foolishness are highly sophisticated coded accounts of the actual facts that resulted in Man’s origins.

Everywhere we look, we find mythical references to the hybrid marriage of the black Sons of God and the White Daughters of the Goddess. Sometimes, the roles are reversed, and it is the Goddess that is or turns black. In this case it is the God or his human counterpart, the Founding Hero that is white. But the message is always the same: the hybrid marriage of the actual founders of Mankind, in Eden.

 

The Bible Too Tells of Two Creations

The Bible is no different from other mythologies and actually speaks of two Creations (Gen. 1 and Gen. 2) and two Founding Fathers. One is the dark (Adam) and the other white (Ish) created, respectively, by Elohim and Jahveh. In Egypt, the same motif was traditionally represented by painting the Pharaoh in brown or black, and the Queen in White.

 

Fig. 4 – Black Geb Marries White Nut

(Dict. Anc. Egypt, pg. 108, bottom)

 

The same idea is also there represented by black Geb mating with the white Nut; by the red (or black) crown of Lower Egypt being penetrated by the white, phallic one of Upper Egypt; by black Osiris married to White Isis, and so on (Fig. 4). In India, the theme is commemorated as black Kali mating with white Shiva or as the white Linga penetrating the red Yoni and by a myriad other such symbolic allegories.

There and elsewhere, we have representations such as the Cosmogonic Marriage of Fire (red) and Water (white) of the Solars (dark) and the Lunars (pale) of Black Jahveh mated to his white counterpart, and so on (See Fig. 5 to 7 further below).

Even the Amerinds have traditions of white Heroes such as Quetzalcoatl and Kukulkan and black ones such as Huitzilopochtli and Tezcatlipoca. And so do the Polynesians, the Melanesians, the Australians, the Chinese, the Japanese, and so on. Moreover, fairytales such as those of black Cinderella turning bright and marrying Prince charming ultimately stem from the Hindu traditions of black Kali marrying white Shiva. We treat elsewhere in detail, and the interested reader is directed to these works of ours.

 

The Sons of God and The Daughters of Man

Gen. 6 tells of the hybrid marriage of the Sons of God and the Daughters of Man that took place before the Flood, that is, during the Pleistocene Ice Age: “And they saw that they were fair and made them their wives”.

By “fair” here one must understand “blonde”, the true etym of the Hebrew word used in the original. The obvious inference is the usual one that the “Sons of God” were dark, like Adam. And the text of Gen. 6 goes on to say that “there were giants on the earth, in these days” and that the hybrid children of the Sons of God and the Daughters of Man became the Nephilim or Titans, that is, the Heroes, the mighty Atlanteans. The text of Gen. 6 in fact cites this event as a preamble to the Flood, which was caused by the increasing decay of the pristine race that resulted from this hybrid marriage of semi-divine humans and baser mortals.

 

Plato and the Original Sin

Interestingly enough, Plato also cites precisely the same event, the same gradual decay of the pristine Atlantean Sons of God by “too great an admixture of mortal blood” as the cause of the great cataclysm (the Flood) that foundered and destroyed the Sunken Continent.

Did Plato perchance read and loosely interpreted the Bible, embroidering the story of Genesis in his Atlantean story? By no means! These traditions were sacred ones, holy hierogamies that composed the matter of the Sacred Mysteries that no one dared to profane and divulge to the public. Plato also refers to the same tradition when he tells that the founders of Atlantis were Poseidon and Cleito. Cleito, the Mother of Atlas and Hercules is the daughter of Leucippe, the “White Mare”. She is Eve, the “whore” who is the traditional charmer and seducer of the virtuous god (or Son of God). This story is a variant of the seduction of virtuous Shiva by the irresistible whore of many names.

Poseidon is the alias of Varuna and the whole story of Atlantis is taken from Hindu myths that we comment on elsewhere in detail. Varuna, the Fallen Sun and the Lord of the Ocean, represents the Solar Race, the dark guys from sunny Africa, scorched by its fierce sunshine. The White Mare that seduces the Sun God is a traditional Hindu theme that dates from the Rig Veda, the Holy Scriptures of the Vedic Aryans, the co-founders of the Atlantean races. [23]

The Sons of God are, hence, the Solar Adamites, the black Africans. They are the dark half of humankind here represented by the gracile australopithecines of the Black Continent. And the Daughters of Man – also called Daughters of the Giants and other such names that suggest a tall, robust, blond race of titanic proportions – represented the low-browed, thick-skulled, white-skinned, robust australopithecines that are typical of Indonesia, China, and other parts of the Far East.

 

The Four Types of Humans

It is clear – genetically speaking – that the intermating of the intelligent, dark graciles with the giant, fair robusts, engendered four basic types of offspring.

The four main types of offspring would be: 1) black, small, and intelligent like the father; 2) white, tall and dumber, like the mothers; 3) black, large and intelligent and, finally, 4) white, large and intelligent, embodying the best features of both parents.

Any breeder of horses, dogs, or other species of plants and animals will tell you that what I claim here is true. And Nature and strife would do the rest, selecting the fittest. But all the intermediate types would also result, constituting the wonderful variety that characterizes the human species in the present day.

Australians as well as the dark tribes of South India and Burma. Notable among these are the two tribes of the Nilgiri Hills. One, the Todas, are magnificent dark giants having thick beards and high intelligence. The others are the Mulu -Kurumba, black pygmies of evil temper and mean expression. The Kurumbas (or “Dwarfs”) are much feared in the whole region by all but the Todas, whom they consider their masters, the Sons of God.

As we already said, the white Aryans – formerly far blonder or red-headed than now that they have, to a large extent, crossbred with darker nations – also originated in the region of Eden. They later diffused to North India, Central Asia (Mongolia), West Asia (Caucasus), the Near East and, finally, Europe. In the Far East, we also have midget-sized, pale races such as some wild tribes of Southeast Asia, etc..

The Mongoloid features and the pale yellow or bronzy color of the Chinese, the Japanese, the Koreans and other nations of the region would come later, pushing out the bellicose Aryo-Semites. Eventually – probably four many times over the geological record, but certainly when Atlantis-Eden went under, forcing all and everyone to leave – part of the blacks moved out, some went back to Africa, some further east to Melanesia, some south into Australia, some north, into India and Burma and Sri Lanka.

 

The Four Corners of the Earth

Legends and sacred traditions preserved in the holy books of all nations – the Bible inclusive – tell of how these early humans divided the world into four quarters (or “corners”), the four continents, which they allocated to the Four Castes. The Reds went east to America; the Blacks west, into Africa; the White north into North Asia; the Near East and West Asia and the Yellows into Southeast Asia of South China, and what remained of the sunken Austronesian continent (Indonesia). [24]

This original division persisted throughout time with only relatively minor infringements until the whites decided to break the ancient compact and conquer the Americas, Australia, India (aborted), and so on. In Africa, as elsewhere, the returning Sons of God continued their enlightenment of the apish australopithecines, these they not only civilized but also imparted their superior intelligence along with the white erected features they had acquired in the Far East from the Daughters of Man.

They thus bred the wonderful variety of the human species whose diversity is precisely the key to the development of new sub-species and, eventually, of the new one that will in time replace ours. It seems that some of that diversity became lost in subsequent cataclysms such as the one caused by Toba’s explosion of 70 kya and that of the end of the Pleistocene, some 11,6 kya. This loss is attested both by the geological record and by just about all ancient mythologies as well.

 

The Indian Traditions

The hybrid marriage of the black Sons of God with the fair Daughters of the Goddess is also widely attested in the Far East. But it is in Indian traditions that the story is best told in its several forms. Quite often, it is the White Goddess that assumes the black shape (Kali) when she mates with white Shiva, whom she later kills (Fig. 5). The allegory of Fig. 5 should be compared to the Egyptian one of Fig. 4. The reader will see for himself that, except for the reversal of the respective colors, both allegories clearly illustrate the same event, the mating of black and white early forms in order to engender the modern humans.

 

Fig. 5 – Shiva Nataraja Trampling the Dwarf

(A. Van Lysebeth, Tantra, pg. 197)

 

More usually, Shiva is portrayed as black, as Kala, the all-devouring Time. In other, more difficult allegories, Shiva is the white giant who teaches the black dwarfs to dance. The dance of Shiva Nataraja, the “Dance Lord”, is the creative act itself. Tantra (“Dance”) is Evolution in action, the ending of an era and the foundation of the next out of the remains of the former one.

At other times, the event is represented by Shiva Nataraja crushing the dwarf that personifies the former humanities, in order to create the next, far larger one (Fig. 5). Shiva is usually represented as a White man, usually of gigantic size, mating with Kali, portrayed as a Black Woman (Fig. 6)

 

Fig. 6 – Black Kali Mating With Shiva’s White Corpse

(P. Rawson, Tantra, pg. 121, bottom)

 

In other representations, not shown, the Nataraja is shown teaching the Dakini to dance, that is, civilizing the ferocious cannibals. And in still others, he is represented by mating with her, in the traditional Yab-Yum (or Father-Mother) pose (Fig. 7).

 

Fig. 7 – Shiva Mating with the Midget Dakini

 

(P. Rawson, Tantra, pg. 135, bottom)

 

“In Pain You Shall Bear Children”…

Here, the Dakini is shown as a midget, not at all intimidated by the gigantic figure of the god. In seeing this image of a primordial couple, one is remembered the words of Gen. 3:16:

And into the woman, God said: “I will greatly multiply the sorrow of your pregnancy. In pain, you shall bear children…

And that pain resulted not only because the children of the giant fathers were bigger, but also because they had bigger brains and, consequently, bigger heads. Adam is often described as of giant size, particularly in Eastern traditions. These traditions perhaps recollect the gigantic size of the Eastern H. Erectus, the robust type, particularly in the perspective of the diminutive pygmies that came into their domains. So do probably the ones recorded in Gen. 3:22 about the fear of the gods – or, rather, the black Sons of God – when they noted that the new species they had engendered had become as smart and knowledgeable as themselves.

The passage on driving Man out of Eden has to do with the Flood and the sinking of the Austronesian continent that forced them out, as their homeland disappeared beneath the waves. Cain and Abel represent the two former species, Cain, the Chams (“Blacks”) and Abel the White Aryo-Semites. [25]

 

Myths Are Not To Be Interpreted Literally

As we already said, the Bible – and, in fact, myths in general – are atemporal allegories. Hence, they should not be interpreted either literally or in sequential order. The Creationists who thus interpret the Holy Book are making as terrible a mistake as the Evolutionists who take Darwin’s postulates for the gospels’ truth. The Book of Exodus really tells of the Israelites’ arrival in Eden, the Promised Land after having crossed the Red Sea. Most experts recognize the fact that the Red Sea of the Bible (Yom Sûf or “Sea of Reeds”, in Hebrew) is not the one now so named.

Egyptian traditions frequently refer to the paradisial “Mash of Reeds” or “Field of Reeds”, which they place in the Far East and identified to Paradise. So do the Hindu traditions, which tell of the Nalanala, the “Sea of Sargassos (or Reeds)”. This legendary sea was the actual source of the name given by Columbus to the one he mistook for that of the Hindu traditions just mentioned. Most people think that Palestine is the Promised Land. But, on closer reading, this land is visibly Paradise itself, Eden, Palestine is only the second home of these Sons of God fleeing their Paradise Destroyed to which we will all eventually return.

Such is indeed the reason why nothing in Palestine fits the sacred geography of the Promised Land of Exodus. This is also the reason why the archaeologists have found exactly nothing there that confirms the Biblical relations, despite the several centuries of research in Palestine. The story of Exodus can only be understood as the saga of the Sons of God when they were forced out of Africa (“Egypt”) and into the Far East. This they reached after crossing the “Red Sea” the mashy bottoms of the Arabian Sea and the South China Sea, miraculously withdrawn by God himself during the Ice Ages. Can anyone think of a more logical alternative to bring together Tradition and Science?

The plagues that devastated Egypt were probably caused by the terrible draught that drove the Sons of God out of desiccated Africa, at the start of the last glaciation of the Pleistocene some 30 kya. The story of Exodus continues in the Book of Joshua and Numbers tells of the conquest of Canaan, the Land of the Giants (Nephelim). And these “Giants” (or Titans) were actually no other than the huge Asian erectoids. [26]

 

The Conquest of Canaan

The story of the conquest of primordial Canaan – which is no other than Eden itself – is indeed a description of how the black Sons of God who came out of Africa (“Egypt”) and, after crossing the dried floor of the “Red Sea” (the Erythraen or Indian Ocean) invaded and conquered the immense plains of the former Land of the Giants. In fact, the magical “opening up” of the Red Sea was its partial drying out during the Ice Ages.

And the vast plains of Edom (Eden or Canaan) the true “Land of Purple” – were those of the former Austronesian continent. These plains were later sunken when the Ice Age ended and the waters returned to cover the exposed bottoms of the seas of the region. They now became the South China Sea, the true “Sea of the Atlanteans”. The “giants” of Canaan – the sons of Anak (or Anakim) – were indeed the Nagas, the legendary white giant that pervades the legends of the Far East. [27]

In the Far East the nagas are also called rakshasas, yakshas, danavas, asuras, daityas, dasyu, khalin, etc.. These epithets generally mean “savage”, “wild”, “cannibal”, and “giants”. The Far Eastern legends – very much alive even today – were the source of the legends of giants that we encounter everywhere. The Hebrew traditions we are commenting have their counterpart in Greece (the War of the Gods and the Giants), in Germany (the combats of Thor against the giants) and even in the Americas (the Chimus (or “giants”) of Peru, etc.).

It is interesting to note that just about everywhere, the Gods (or Sons of God) kill the Giants and marry their daughters engendering the Heroes. The Israelites of Exodus were no exceptions, despite the ferocious prohibition against this mating. In the long run, Evolution takes its course and overrules all biases and taboos, including racial ones.

 

The Giants In the Bible

In the Bible, the Giants are often mentioned by names such as Raphaim, Anakim, Zuzim, Zunzumin, Emim, Gibborim, etc… The Nephilim are the hybrid children of the Sons of God and the Daughters of the Giants, as told in Gen. 6 and commented further above. This passage also tells of the destruction of their land (Eden) in the Flood: “there were giants (gibborim) in the earth, in these days”…

The Ecclesiasticus (16:6) tells of the revolt of the Giants and their destruction by fire and water (the Flood):

 

In the middle of the assembly of the impious

A fire is lit. Against the rebels Vengeance flares.

God has not spared the giants of former times,

Who had rebelled, proud of their great force…

He did not spare their doomed race,

Which he exterminated for their sin.

 

The Real Nature of the Original Sin

To judge from the Biblical text, the sin in question, the Original Sin, was cannibalism and not really the hybrid marriage with the Daughters of the Giants. But this terrible vice of the original inhabitants of Canaan-Eden was also shared by the black Sons of God themselves, as this passage of Numbers suggests:

Do not fear the people of this land, for they are food for us, bread. Their guardian spirit has deserted them, and the Lord is with us.

“Vengeance” here is indeed a reference to the fierce “Eye of God”, the same one as the Udjat (or “Eye of Ra”) of Egyptian traditions. The land in question is Canaan, and its inhabitants are the giants, the Anakim. Their “guardian spirit”, their “shadow” is indeed their “soul” or “spirit” (nephesh), the one the ancient Egyptians called ka.

In the absence of their souls, the giants became mere animals and could be consumed like any other animal. It is clear from its description in the Bible that this Canaan is Eden, the Paradise, and not all semi-desertic Palestine, its attempted replica. There, the decayed Sons of God even today pursue their fight against their eternal enemies, the descendants of the Giants, the fallen Nephelim.

 

Canaan-Edom Is Indeed Atlantis-Eden

First of all, Canaan is the legendary “Land of the Giants” that devoured its own children (Num. 13:32), despite the fact that, in contrast to Palestine, it “flowed with honey and milk” (Num. 14:8). Canaan was full of volcanoes, foremost among them being Mt. Sinai (or Horeb). [28]

The Bible also tells how the Land of the Giants, the archetypal Canaan-Edom, sunk down under the seas after being destroyed by fire,. It then became Hades or Sheol, that is, Hell, the Abode of the Dead (Isa 14:9). In other words, the paradisiacal Canaan was not Palestine, but indeed Eden or, better yet, Atlantis.

The names given in the Bible to the Giants and their offspring, the Nephelim, is telltale of their true identity. Literally, the Nephelim destroyed by the Flood are “the Fallen Ones” or, according to some authorities, “the Abortions”. The term “Fallen Ones” refers to the Fall of Atlantis, that is, it’s sinking. And “abortion” is a reference to their hybrid nature and, possibly to the fact that, as such, the Nephelim were often sterile, and these hybrid pregnancies led to abortions until the new species “caught” and became a new race of humans.

Anak means, as we already argued, Nag (or Naga), the “Serpent People” or “Dragons” of Atlantis. Their killing by the “Heroes” – the hybrid offspring of the Sons of God by the

Daughters of the Giants – allegorizes a real event: the superseding of the former races of Erectus by their wonderful hybrid children, Homo sapiens. Raphaim means “ancestors”, precisely the idea we just argued. In India, the “ancestors” are also the giants destroyed by fire at the dawn of the present era. They are called Agnishvattas, that is “those destroyed by fire”.

However, the text of Number (14:12, 14:37, etc.), further suggests what was probably the real cause of the easy victory of the minuscule Sons of God against the mighty Giants in whose view they “looked like grasshoppers”. (Num. 13:33). This defeat was probably due to the Plague, more or less as happened in the Americas. The Plague seems to have been leprosy or smallpox, to judge from its description in the Bible. But it could have been a number of diseases, including the common cold.

That the Israelites carried it but were relatively immune to the disease is obvious from the text of Genesis and that of Numbers as well. That they carried the Plague into Canaan, transmitting it to the Giants in hence indubitable. The Plague (or Pestilence) is called Deher in Hebrew, a word meaning “destruction”, “ruin”, and “disaster”.

Hence, once more, we see the crucial role that catastrophes of all sorts had – in contrast to what the Evolutionist claim – in shaping the world and effecting the selection of species”. Acts of God” or “survival of the luckiest? Who knows for sure?…

 

The Story of Gen. 5 Decoded

The story of Creation – and particularly the one reported in the first few chapters of the Book of Genesis – is not at all a linear history. Myths are atemporal and full of flashbacks and repetitions which work at several different levels. One story repeats and enlarges the others until the adepts get the full picture and learn to decode the cryptic narrative of the secret history of humankind told there.

Only the initiates – the ones instructed by the masters or the few lucky ones who are able to crack the code on their own – can master the subject and access the treasures of information contained in the ancient myths. And he will feel like Ali Baba when he entered the Cave of Treasures and saw all the wealth accumulated there from the dawn of time. He will discover a new reality. Attempts to derive actual chronologies from the dates and ages cited in myths can only result in absurdities such as that of the Bishop of Usher and his date of 4,004 BC for Creation.

The Book of Genesis tells of two different Creations of Man, as the attentive student has no doubt noticed. One takes place in the Garden of Eden, in the Terrestrial Paradise. The other takes place in an unspecified place. The first Creation is told in Gen. 1, and is performed by Elohim. The other, the second one, is told in Gen.2, and takes place in Eden, being performed by Jahveh.

We note that in Gen. 1, Elohim (plural) creates Man (also plural) “in his own image and likeness”. Since Elohim is the Solar God (El = Helios = the Sun), this means that the first Man (or Men, rather) were Solars, that is,sun-scorched Blacks. And this is confirmed by his name, Adam, which means “dark”, “red”, “ruddy” and, more exactly, “the one from the Land of the Blacks”. [29]

 

Is God a Black Person?

The fact that Adam, the Black One, is made “in the image and likeness of God” has an obvious meaning that may shock the white supremacists, but is irrefutable. God is Black! Or, at least, Elohim is. Perhaps Elohim is black and Jahveh is white, just as affirmed in the most secret arcane of the Jewish Cabalistsswuch as the one illustrated in Fig. 8 below.

 

Fig. 8 – The Mystic Union of God and His Twin

(E. Levi, Dogma e Ritual, pg. 69)

 

In fact, the above Twins correspond to the two Persons of the Holy Trinity, with the third one being the Son. The Son represents the Androgyne, the combination of the two essences. The Son is both Black and White, the hybrid child of the mating that came to form Mankind in the Mystic Union illustrated in Fig. 8. I realize that the racists, the suprematists who have usurped the Blacks for so long will froth in the mouth with this my “heresy”.

But all I am doing is disclosing the secret embodied in allegories such as the Star of David, the Christian Cross, the Swastika, the Yoni-Lingam, etc. This is also the message I just discussed, the account of Creation given in the Book of Genesis. The rest is misinformation, confusion intended to perplex the public and to keep on exploiting the dark moiety oppressed by the evil-intended another half.

 

A Brief Exegesis of Genesis 1 and 2

In what follows we summarize what we have found, for the reader’s benefit. We have shown that Adam’s name means “The Black One” or, rather, “the Black Earth”. This is the traditional name of Africa and its black people, the Chamites (or Khemites). In turn Eve – written Hawa or Chawa in Hebrew – is really the name of Java, the Great Mother, the homeland of the whites. Eve’s name means that she was the White Goddess, the legendary White Mare, the Yavana (“blonde whore”) for whom Adam relinquished Lilith, his black wife.

We note in the story of Genesis that Adam, the Black, is created in a dry, desertic region where it does not rain and which can only be Africa. From there Adam moves to the Garden of Eden, which Jahveh had created in the East (Gen. 2: 4-15). It is thee, in Paradise, that the strange union of Adam, the Black with Eve, the White, takes place. [30]

This is not the place to exegete this complex story in full. Besides, this task was undertaken elsewhere, and the interested reader is urged to read it there. The name of Eve (Hawa or Chawa, in Hebrew) is in fact a corruption of the name of Java, the Island-Paradise where Creation actually took place. [31]

 

The Meaning of Adam’s Rib

The story of Adam’s rib is again a play on words, in the Hebrew original, with a Dravidian word meaning both “whore” and “rib”. The ancients loved this kind of wordplay. [32]

The myth of Adam and Eve is hence connected with the one of Lilith that we find in Cabalistic traditions. Adam, the Black, relinquished his true wife for charming Eve, the eternal blonde and moved to Java, the luscious Paradise in the East. There he engendered children, the wonderful hybrid children that later became the Heroes. The Heroes were “the famous men of old”, the halfbreeds of the gods and mortal women.

This myth, obscurely told in Genesis, as we just saw, is far better explained in the Cabbala and in books such as the Zohar and others. But it is also told, in sundry forms, in the other mythologies of both the Old and the New Worlds. However, it is in Indian myths that it is, as usual, disclosed in the most complete form. Such is the case, for instance of the Puranas or of holy books such as the Ramayana and the Mahabharata.

But this exegesis does not fit here, as it is far too complex and too obscure to treat in a few lines. There, as here, however, the fateful love of Black Adam for Blonde Eve is doomed and ends up leading to the Flood and to the destruction of the world. And, as we already said, this story is also the one of the love of Poseidon for Cleito, which resulted in the foundation of Atlantis and, eventually, the Flood and the destruction of their world. The Celts too have an identical tradition in the legend of us and its virtuous King, Gradlon, and his whorish daughter.

This tragedy was also caused by the Original Sin. And this sin was not indeed the cross mating of blacks and whites – foreordained by God himself – but the terrible war and the crimes committed therein, which included even cannibalism and rape. However, that is another story that I have to save for later on as I now abandon this theme forthwith.

 

Genetics and the Origins of Mankind

The science of Genetics has recently caused a tremendous impact on both Anthropology and Paleoanthropology. The study of genes allows the determination of paternity and maternity with essentially null chances of error. Nowadays, it is possible to determine with certainty who is the father of a given child or, even, who raped a woman and so on.

Less well known is the fact that the science of Genetics can also be utilized to determine the relationship of races and the approximate date on which two different races say, blacks and whites, actually became separated. Genetics can often reveal the actual way in which this separation occurred. Even more thrilling is the possibility of extracting DNA from fossil samples or from mummies, and studying their relationship with other humans or other fossils.

For instance, recently mt DNA (mitochondrial DNA) was extracted from a Neandertal fossil and used to determine that they in fact have no direct relationship with modern humans, their species (or sub-species) having become extinct, rather than partaking in our ascent. We discuss this subject in detail elsewhere in the present book. [33]

 

Atlantis and the Origin of the Cro Magnons

1)Atlantis and Cro-Magnon  Man [Map       of       Cro       Magnon]:

http://www.atlantisquest.com/Anthropology.html

2)  Map  of   Cro   Magnon   Man  [Modern]:

Maps of  Locations of  Cro-Magnon Sites

People generally believe that the Neandertals became extinct everywhere, being supplanted by the superior Cro Magnons. Moreover, they also believe that the Cro Magnons are our direct ancestors, being the same as Modern Humans. In fact, this is the current theory affirmed by paleoanthropologists in general, with only a few notable exceptions. But both the above assertions are false, as is fast becoming apparent. First of all, there is now considerable evidence – which is mounting all the time – that, at least in the Near East, and in Israel in particular, Neandertals (Homo sapiens neanderthalensis) and Modern Humans (Homo sapiens sapiens) mingled into a considerable proportion.

They co-existed there, side by side, for a very long time. In fact, so they did in Europe, as is now becoming clear. And this was particularly the case in the Iberian Peninsula, where it is now known that the Neandertals survived down to about 24,000 years ago, several millennia later than the date of entry of the Cro Magnons in Europe. Interestingly enough, the Iberian Peninsula was the main reduct of Cro Magnon men as we shall see next.

And it is also apparent, as João Zilhão, Erick Trinkhaus and Cidália Duarte – the discoverers of the remarkable hybrid fossil human of Portugal – argue in detail here, that the Neandertals crossbred with the Cro Magnons there to a remarkable proportion. And, as some people argue with actual models, the Neandertals are we ourselves. Others disagree, basing themselves on the genetic evidence so far obtained for the Neandertals. The result is that the controversy rages, among the specialists and the confusion is general. In fact, both views seem to an oversimplification of a complex matter which cannot be solved by a simple yes or no.

In other words, I believe that the Cro Magnons and the Neandertals were both human subspecies, rather than different species. As such they could mate, at least to some degree. But as different races and subspecies often behave, they did not mate to a considerable proportion and preferred to make war, rather than love. So, they essentially vanished from the record or had their genes swamped to a large extent, more or less as happened to the American Indians, the Gypsy, the Australians and Tasmaniana, the Akhas of Thailand, the Ainus of Japan, the Canarian Guanches, and so on.

These races simply vanish from the fossil record, and will certainly pose an enigma for future paleontologists. Much the same is also apparently the case for early hominids, as is now becoming clear. Recent finds in Africa and in the Far East are showing that several different species or subspecies of hominids co-existed side-by-side perhaps all the time, in clear contrast with the tenets of Evolution Theory which holds that only a single species – the one they call “fittest” can co-exist at a single time and location.

Moreover, we are also learning that Man himself, not to mention several other animal species, has evolved not as a single species as up to now thought but as several parallel species or subspecies living simultaneously both side-by-side and in different geographical regions. They have also verified that, if anything, Man has appreciably decayed from a former grandeur attested by both the Cro Magnons and the Neandertals, whose brains and brawn [brain size] were up to 30% larger than at present. As a result of findings such as this one, Evolution Theory is fast being recognized as unscientific as it is in frontal disagreement with known facts by several members of the academic community. [34]

Some academics still attempt to save the outdated Victorian theory by modifications such as those proposed by Neo-Darwinists such as the encompassing of Catastrophism itself. But this attempt is useless. Epistemology – the Science of Science – requires, as its basic premise, that scientific theories should be falsifiable by practical tests. As such, they may not be changed or adapted every time an objection, refusal or contradiction arises. And Darwinian evolution was founded precisely on the Uniformity Principle, that is, the very denial that global catastrophes of an unusual nature may actually occur over the geological eras, a fact no specialist is stupid enough to deny anymore nowadays, at least openly.

Whence the Cro Magnons actually came from is an insoluble mystery which only the hypothesis of Atlantis may eventually clarify, as we argue in detail in the present book.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

• 1. In fact, the word “theory” derives from the Greek theos (“god”) and orein (“to see”). Hence, a theory is a divine insight, a vision of God, a theophany. It is precisely the grandiose events called “theophany” or “epiphany” by the ancients that led to Religion as a novel way of understanding Reality. In other words, theophanies often force us to new insights and to new paradigms and new theories.
• 2. This issue will be discussed in detail in Appendix I. It seems that the very first apes that would eventually result in Man originated in Asia (Eden?) about 7 Mya ago, as the Ramapithecus. Next, they moved to Africa at about 5 Mya, where they later evolved into the Australopithecus. Some of these apes then moved back to the Far East by about 4 Mya. The African apes eventually evolved into the gracile forms of australopithecines, becoming (or staying) black, in order to cope with Africa’s scorching sunshine. They also decreased in size due to the semi-desertic conditions of Africa’s savannas, unable to provide sufficient food. In turn, the Asiatic ape-men grew big, thriving in the far moister climate of the region. There they also acquired white skin, since they lived in a shady, forested region.
• 3. Wallaces Line was discovered by the great naturalist Alfred R. Wallace. Wallace noted that the rid fauna and flora last century of Indonesia were widely different from those of Australia and New Guinea. So, he postulated as the cause, the fact that the two regions were separated from the other since the remotest epochs by a deep maritime channel that prevented the intercommunication of the two local populations. The existence of Wallace’s Line was later empirically verified by further geological research as well as oceanographic soundings in the region.
• 4. This proves that our predecessor, Homo erectus – who first accomplished that feat – was far more intelligent than is usually allowed. This fact was determined by the observation that certain Indonesian islands, such as Flores, which were isolated by water at all epochs, were actually settled by these early humans. North Asia and North America north of the Great Lakes were also uninhabited because of the Pleistocene glaciers that covered these regions. Australia was not colonized by humans until about 65 kya, possibly because its separation from Indonesia was substantially larger than that of the islands just mentioned. The Americas were isolated by the Pleistocene glaciers during the Ice Ages and by the Bering Strait during the interglacial periods. Recent evidence suggests that Australia may have been settled as early as 120 -150 kya and the Americas by about 30-35 kya or earlier. Such discoveries keep pushing dates such as these ever more to earlier epochs in time than usually allowed.

• 5. Fossils do not, unfortunately, preserve skin color. But some ancient mummies and some “fossil” populations exist that preserve some of the pristine features of the two components from which we were formed. Again, fossil bones do preserve the skeletal details that characterize racial types. Moreover, diseases such as rickets – which cause skeletal deformations and which occur preferentially in black individuals exposed to insufficient sunshine – do suggest that sub-species such as the Neandertals were originally black.
• 6. As we argued above, Australia and nearby lands – New Guinea, Tasmania, Melanesia, and Polynesia – as well as the Americas took no place in the drama because they were isolated by water channels or by glaciers. So with North Asia and Europe, also were blocked by glaciers, and were left out until considerably later. Australia and the Americas too had to wait even further, until Man developed far enough to be able to cross the considerable maritime stretches or the continental-size glaciers that isolated these continentals from Asia and Austronesia.

• 7. This data is presently being determined from ice cores obtained in Antarctica, the Himalayas, the Alps, the Andes and Greenland. But the record is often scrambled, and several individual peaks sometimes get garbled into a broad one. At the rate of about 20 to 30 kya each, we get, for the 2,5 My that the Pleistocene lasted, a value of about 100 glacial episodes.
• 8. Africa also has a smaller arboreal gorilla, a sub-species of Gorilla gorilla which is often classified into different species ( beringei). Africa also has a smaller type of chimpanzee called bonobo (or pigmy chimpanzee). It is called Pan paniscus, and belongs to a different genus than the chimpanzee (P. troglodytes). The orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus) inhabits the forests of Java and Borneo. But it once roved as far as North China, where it became extinct at the end of the Pleistocene. The gibbons comprise two genera, Hylobater and Symhalangus. Both inhabit Southeast Asia and Indonesia. The gibbons are not true pongids, but hylobatinids. However, all the above big apes belong with Man, to the Hominidae superfamily. There is reason to believe that the fossil apes and man-apes of Africa were black, whereas those of Asia were white-skinned and red-furred.
• 9. Certain ancient traditions retained in Pliny’s Natural History and in Solinus tell of the white, red-headed Seres, later confused with the Chinese. And this relation was later confirmed by several red-haired, tall mummies in Takla-Makan and elsewhere in China. It seems that the Far East was indeed the original homeland of the Aryans. They later moved farther north, into North Asia, the Levant and Europe, being pushed out by the Mongoloid Chinese. The absence of trees in Africa would expose the local apes to the sun and tend to select the black-skinned individuals, who stand better in the fierce sunshine of the Black Continent. The opposite would happen in Indonesia (Eden). The trees would stop the sun and the white-skinned individuals – who absorb sunlight more effectively – would be favored by natural selection.

• 10. I will not mention here the case of the horse and the donkey engendering mules, which are sterile hybrids. Despite this fact, these creatures will certainly leave fossils that would enormously puzzle future paleontologists. Sheep and goats (different species) can breed fertile offspring. So can many canids such as the dog and the wolf, and so on. Many felids are also able to do likewise. Animals like dogs and, for that matter Man and the fossil hominids present such a large structural difference as to easily confuse future naturalists. The only possible conclusion is that the paleoanthropologists that classify the early hominids in different species must certainly have erred many times. This fact is attested by the constant placement of most newly discovered fossils into new species even when present only minor differences in relation to previous specimens. These new “species” soon fade out, when the situation calms down, and become integrated as sub-species of the former species of hominids.
• 11. The main argument used by these paleoanthropologists is the fact that some features of their “species” are stable and unique. But this uniqueness and this stability is also a feature of different races and subspecies, not only of humans, b ut also of animals. Only when the different races mingle do intermediate specimens originate. And, at the same time, they also cease to breed true.
• 12. Some recent datations of Australian tools done by thermoluminescence have established takes between 120 and 150 kya. These early dates are hotly denied by the specialist, for they rise insuperable difficulties with the Indonesian erectus for the Australians would then have left Indonesia as fully Modern Homo Sapiens before his predecessors had time to evolve likewise in that region of the world.
• 13. See C. C. Swisher III et al., “Latest Homo erectus of Java: potential contemporaneity with Homo sapiens in Southeast Asia, “Science 274 (13 Dec. 1996), 1871. See also A. Gibbons”, Homo erectus in Java: a 250,000 year anachronism”, Science 274, (13 Dec. 1996), 1841.
• 14. The dates established by Swisher and his time range between 27 kya and 60 kya. They are considerably older than the one allowed by Creationists (about 6 kya). But they are also considerably later than that postulated for the extinction of Erectus and the rise of H. sapiens, in his modern forms (200 kya). The Creationists hold that all fossils – both animal and human – are of recent date, and were produced at the Flood, as the result of the outwash that covered them all at the occasion. The Creationists also maintain that all men descend from Adam and Eve and were all created in 4,004 BC or so. This is the date spoused by those who interpret the Bible literally. Lubenow’s views, brilliantly defended, can be seen in the Institute for Creation Research Homepage, at the URL address: http://www.icr.or/pubs . The reader is advised to study and meditate all theories that presently contend for hegemony – ours included – and only then take his own conclusion. It is perhaps fair to say that the laypersons tend in the great majority to believe the Biblical account or the other ones established in their own religious traditions. Are they justified in that belief despite the fact that the scientists keep telling them that these views are sheer buncombe? We think so. We believe that scientists are wrong in most things they claim concerning Man’s origins. In fact, we also believe that the mythical accounts are all strictly true, once interpreted as coded messages coined in allegorical language by a highly developed human civilization that of the Atlanteans.
• 15. Mana, is an Austronesian term meaning something like: “magical power”, “spiritual force”, and “supernatural event”. It was adopted in the 19^th century by anthropologists studying the origins of religion which they rightfully suspected to lie in the Far Orient. The word mana ultimately derives from the Dravida mana meaning “union”, and “possession”. But it also relates to the Sanskrit manas, meaning “mind”, “spirit”, and “soul”. More exactly, manas corresponds to the vital force called ruach in Hebrew and pneuma in Greek. In other words, by eating the brains of the enemy, the primitives are believed to absorb their mental powers.

• ¹⁶ G. H. R. von Koenigswald, Meeting Prehistoric Man, translated from the German original by M. Bulloc, N. Y, 1956.
• 17. L. Beals, H. Hoijer, An Introduction to Anthropology, 3^dr. ed, New York, 1965.
• 18. S. Coon, The Origin of the Races, N. York, 1962.
• 19. Swisher et al., as referenced further above.
• 20. Gibbons, Homo erectus in Java: a 250,000-year anachronism, Science 274 (13 Dec. 1996), pg. 1841.
• 21. M. Wolpoff,
• 22. Wolpoff, Paleoanthropology, N. York, 1980.
• 23. The white races usually ascribe their foundation to a giant, fair goddess. Thus, the Celts called themselves Tuatha Dé Danaan (“Peoples of the Goddess Dana”). Dana (or Danu) is precisely the same Dana (or Danu) of Hindu traditions, the mother of the Danavas. The Danavas were of giant stature and fair skin. they are no other than the Titans, that is, the early Aryans. Similar traditions also hold for other white nations, both Aryan and Semitic. The Hittites and the Mitannians (Aryan) worshipped Arinna, the White Goddess. The Semites worshipped Ishtar as their founding mother, and so on. Dana is also called Anna or Inanna, etc., names that mean “Mother” or “Great Mother” in Sanskrit and Dravida. According to Plato, the two founders of Atlantis were the twin Sons of Poseidon and Cleito. Plato identifies these twins as Atlas and Gadeiros. Gadeiros, the “Cow-Herder”, is no other than Hercules. Atlas personifies the dark Dravidian races, whereas Hercules embodies the paideuma of the white Aryan races of Atlantean times. The Twins figure in essentially all mythologies.
• 24. The “four corners of the world” are often called “Islands of the Nations” in the bible and other mythologies. Actually, the word “continent” is a misnomer. This term was reserved to the Americas, said to “contain” or “surround” the ocean. The “islands” derive their name from the fact that the Four Races were “isolated” (insula) in them from each other. In Plato and others, the word “island” (nesos) is used to designate the continent of Atlantis as isolated from all others. The Sunken Continent is also called Chersonesos, meaning “Scorched Land”.
• ²⁵ This passage (Gen. 4:1-5) is highly obscure and has been interpolated. Read closely it means, as I explain elsewhere, that Eve was impregnated twice, once by Adam and the other time by Jahveh (“I have gotten a man from the Lord”. Abel, the white, was a shepherd, the characteristic activity of the ancient Aryo-Semites, whereas Cain the black, was agriculture, the great invention of the darker Dravidian races of the Far East, the direct descendants of the Africans. Cain’s name is usually interpreted as meaning “gift” or “possession”. And he is held to have been engendered by the Devil (ek tou ponerou, I Jo. 3:12), whereas Abel is loved by Jahveh, the god of the whites. In fact, Cain’s name means “ironsmith”. It is a variant of the name of Cham (“Black”), the invention of the iron is traditionally ascribed to the Blacks.
• 26. The story of the conquest of Palestine proper is told in the Book of Judges. In fact, the two stories – the conquest of Palestine and the far earlier one of Canaan, the Land of Purple, the primordial Phoenicia – is told in parallel in the five books of the Pentateuch. This confusing device is often used in myths, to the despair of the exegetes, for it is highly obscure. Palestine is the replica, the counterpart of the primordial Canaan. Canaan was the land of the giants, the Anakim, where milk and honey flowed from the trees (sugarcane and incense). The word Canaan relates to Cham (“Black”, “Reds”), the father of Canaan ( 10:6). But the name also alludes to the primordial Phoenicia the “Land of Purple” or, yet, “the Land of the Palm-Trees”.
• 27. Anakim or Bne Anak (“Sons of Anak”) in Hebrew. The word is not originally Hebrew, and its true meaning is unknown. The first a (ayin) is almost mute so that the word sounds as nak. Nak (or Anak) is indeed the Dravidian equivalent of the Sanskrit Naga. The Nagas are the white giants of Hindu traditions. They were the ancestors of the Aryan races, in Eden, who would later become the Atlanteans. We encounter the radix ank (anak) in words such as Angkor (Nag-kor = “the city of the Nagas) as well as in the Latin anguis (“serpent”) and the Skt. anch (idem). The word Naga means both “serpent” and “elephant” in Skt. Actually, the word nag (or nat) of the Eastern traditions became tan (“dragon”, “serpent”, naga) in Hebrew. It is obvious that tan – unexplained in Semitic – originated from an inversion of nat, meaning the same in the Far East (Burma).
• 28. The Palestinian Mt. Sinai is a replica – actually only recently so named – of the archetypal Mt. Sinai where Jahveh made his terrible theophany. In fact, Mt. Sinai is the fearful volcano that destroyed Atlantis- Eden. In other words, Mt. Sinai, Mt. Atlas itself. Palestine, as well-known, never had any volcanoes or, even less, was sunken under the seas. The name of Sinai (or Sina) actually means “destruction” in Greek and related tongues.
• 29. We see here a wordplay with the name of Egypt (Khemis) that formerly designated the whole of the continent of Africa. Khemis means “the Black Earth”, “the Charred Earth”, “the Land of the Blacks”. The blacks of Africa have always been called Chams (or Chamites), a name that directly relates to that of Khemis (Egypt, Africa). The name of Adam (Hebrew adhama) literally means “the black earth”, “the sun-scorched land”, “the land of the blacks”, exactly as in the name of Khemis, (or Egypt). It is clear that the wordplay with “black earth” or “black land” is intentional, as it is rendered even more explicit in Gen. 2: 7 and 3:9. Africa was also called, of old, Ethiopia, “the Land of the Blacks”. But this word also means “the black ones”, “the sun-scorched faces”, that is, the same as Khemis or Egypt.
• 30. Eve was originally “white as a dove”, but later turned black as the result of the Fall. This tradition is a clear reference to her union with the blacks, engendering black children (later “Eves”). This tradition is told, for example, in the Diptychion of Prudentius: Eva columba fuit tunc candida, nigra deinde facta, per anguineym malesuada fraude venenum… tinxit sordentibus Adam [“Eve was formerly white as a dove. But she became black later, because of the poison of the evil serpent… soiling the innocent Adam”.] Note that it was not the mating with Adam that soiled the two spouses, but the Dragon’s interference and probable seduction of Eve.

• 31. Suffice it to say that Eve (Hawa or rather Chawa) is the White Mare. Her name is not Hebrew originally. Nor does it mean “life” or “desire”, as usually claimed. In fact, the word means “mare”, and more exactly “white mare” in Sanskrit, where it is also spelt yava or java (“fleet mare”). “White Mare” was the name of the Great Mother, as we already explained. The word embodies a pun with the Dravida ava (“mother”, “grandmother”). In fact, Hawa (or Chawa) is a wordplay with the name of the island of Java, the very site of Eden. This name is Sanskrit originally and means “White”, “Caucasian” “Aryan” (Yavana). Yavana girls were highly esteemed in ancient India as courtesans. We also find the name of Java (Hawa, etc.) in Hawaii. Hawaii (or Hawaiki) means “Sunken Java”, the name of the legendary lost Paradise of the Polynesians.

• 32. The story of the “rib” also figures, in several variants, in Mesopotamian myths. “Rib” is said cela in Hebrew and cilu in Akkadian, another Semitic tongue. The Mesopotamian myth alludes to ti. “the Lady of the Rib”, who is created to “warm up” the bed of Enki. The idea is that Eve was Adam’s lover, rather than his true wife, who was Lilith, black like himself. This interpretation accords with the name of Hawa (or Eve), which we explained in the previous note as also implying the idea of a lover, a whore, a courtesan like the Yavana (white) girls so appreciated in ancient India. The name of Cleito, the founder of Atlantis also plays on the same idea, as we explain elsewhere.
• 33. Mitochondria are small globules contained in the liquid contents of cells located outside the Anucleus. Its genes are simpler in structure and easier to trace back, as they are only transmitted by the mother, but not by the father.
• 34. References for this topic can be obtained by the readers themselves by searching the Internet for the keywords of their interest. Some of these are listed here:

• • • Neandertals’ diet put meat in their bones: Science News Online, June 17, 2000
    • Salvaged DNA adds to Neandertals’ mystique: Science News Online, Apr. 1, 2000
    • Science News Online (7/25/98): References for Giving Neandertals Their Due
    • Science News Online (5/8/99): Fossil may expose humanity’s hybrid roots
    • Science News Online (4/3/99): Human Growth Displays Ancient Roots

• • • Neandertals show  staying  power  in  Europe  –  References  and  Sources,  Science  News  Online (10/30/99)

• • • Neandertals show ancient signs of caring: Science News Online, Sept. 15, 2001

• • • Neandertals, humans may have grown apart: Science News Online, Aug. 4, 2001 Science News Online 10) (2/6/99): DNA’s Evolutionary Dilemma DNA Diaspora: Humanity may share tangled genetic roots

• • • New Evidence on the Origin of the Human Species

• • • Scientific American: Reviews and Commentaries: Reading The Minds Of Fossils: March 1998

• • • Scientific American: Explore!: The Modern Human Origins Morass: January 29, 2001
    •  Scientific American: News In Brief: DNA From Ancient Australians : January 9, 2001

• • • Scientific American Exploration: Rambling Road to Humanity: 6/16/97
    •  Reasons To Believe – Response to “Up from the Apes.” – Time, Aug.

• • • Bone Sizes Trace the Decline of Man (and Woman)

• • • Paleoanthropology: Bone Sizes Trace the Decline of Man (and Woman) 19) The Ups and Downs of Hominid Height
    • What’s Wrong With The Theory of Evolution?
    • Paul Feyerabend’s Critique of Karl Popper