Читаем Forbidden Archeology: The Hidden History of the Human Race полностью

We are now left with several alternative explanations, which we shall now summarize, for the age of Reck’s skeleton. First we have the original determination by Reck that it was deposited naturally during the formation of Bed II. Reck carefully searched for signs of intrusive burial (especially chips of limestone and other materials from the overlying beds) and found none “despite the most attentive inspection” (Hopwood 1932, pp. 193–194). This gives a date of over 1.15 million years for the skeleton, which is fully human. Second, we have Leakey’s view that the skeleton was deliberately buried during the deposition of upper Bed II, which also gives a date of over 1.15 million years. Third, we have the revised position, taken by Reck, Leakey, and others, that the skeleton was buried into Bed II during the time Bed V was being deposited. In adopting their revised position, Reck and Leakey in effect reversed their previous statements that they had observed no mixture of materials from overlying beds in the matrix of the skeleton. It is significant that Leakey recanted his position on Reck’s skeleton just before a commission of scientists, including the critics of his prior views on Reck’s skeleton, was to pass judgement on his own discoveries at Kanam and Kanjera. The new position adopted by Reck, Leakey, and others yields a date range of from 400,000 to perhaps 10,000 years for the skeleton. Primarily on the basis of its modern morphology, the skeleton was assigned a very recent date within this range. During the Second World War, much of the skeleton was lost. Finally, in 1974, in an attempt to confirm an uppermost Bed V date, Protsch published a radiocarbon test result of about 17,000 years for a bone sample that may not have been from the original Reck skeleton. Even if the sample was from Reck’s skeleton, the dating techniques that were used are now considered unreliable.


In our discussion of China, we introduced the concept of a probable date range (Section 9.2.1) as the fairest age indicator for controversial discoveries. The available evidence suggests that Reck’s skeleton (OH 1) should be assigned a probable date range extending from the late Early Pleistocene (1.15 million years) to the late Upper Pleistocene (10,000 years). There is much evidence that argues in favor of the original Bed II date proposed by Reck. Particularly strong is Reck’s observation that the thin layers of Bed II sediment directly around the skeleton were undisturbed. Also arguing against later burial is the rocklike hardness of Bed II. Reports favoring a Bed V date seem to be founded upon purely theoretical objections, dubious testimony, inconclusive test results, and highly speculative geological reasoning. But even these reports yield dates of up to


400,000 years for the skeleton.


A skeleton of Homo sapiens sapiens type with an age of 1.15 million years, or even .4 million years, does not fit the current evolutionary scenario. But Reck’s skeleton does not seem out of place when seen in the context of the evidence documented in this book. This evidence demonstrates the presence of anatomically modern humans throughout the Early Pleistocene, Pliocene, Miocene, and even earlier. Only the radiocarbon date reported by Protsch suggests Reck’s skeleton might be fairly recent, but as we have seen, this date has its problems.


It would undoubtedly take a time-traveling detective with supersensory powers to give us the real story of Reck’s skeleton and its age. And Reck’s skeleton is not exceptional. Most of the discoveries scientists have used to build up their picture of human evolution are similarly ambiguous, their significance obscured by professional rivalries and imperfect investigative methods.

11.2 The Kanjera Skulls and Kanam Jaw

In 1932, Louis Leakey announced discoveries at Kanam and Kanjera, near Lake Victoria in western Kenya. The Kanam jaw and Kanjera skulls, he believed, provided good evidence of Homo sapiens in the Early and Middle Pleistocene.

11.2.1 Discovery of the kanjera skulls

Kanjera lies on the south shore of Lake Victoria’s Kavirondo Gulf. When Leakey visited Kanjera in 1932 with Donald MacInnes, they found stone hand axes and fragments of five human skulls, designated Kanjera 1–5. Leakey (1960d, p. 204) said: “I found part of No. 3 specimen in situ myself, and I have no doubt about its genuineness.” The expedition also found a human femur.


Перейти на страницу:

Похожие книги

Иная жизнь
Иная жизнь

Эта книга — откровения известного исследователя, академика, отдавшего себя разгадке самой большой тайны современности — НЛО, известной в простонародье как «летающие тарелки». Пройдя через годы поисков, заблуждений, озарений, пробившись через частокол унижений и карательных мер, переболев наивными представлениями о прилетах гипотетических инопланетян, автор приходит к неожиданному результату: человечество издавна существует, контролируется и эксплуатируется многоликой надгуманоидной формой жизни.В повествовании детективный сюжет (похищение людей, абсурдные встречи с пришельцами и т. п.) перемежается с репортерскими зарисовками, научно-популярными рассуждениями и даже стихами автора.

Владимир Ажажа , Владимир Георгиевич Ажажа

Альтернативные науки и научные теории / Прочая научная литература / Образование и наука