Page Content (OCR)
Are the symbols on this stone from Mexico just ornamentation or are these motifs from a forgotten technological age? Supposing that in both this case and that of the ‘explosion’ in the Siberian Taiga on the morning of 30 June, 1908, what had really taken place was an atomic explosion? Whenever and wherever—including Hiroshima, and all the nuclear weapon tests on Bikini atoll, in the Soviet Union, the Sahara and China—radioactive substances are released, the balance of the radioactive isotope C-I4 must be disturbed. So plants, animals and men had and have more C-I4 in their cells than the amount of C-14 in the atmosphere constantly accepted as a reference figure. This theory cannot be disputed. If it is accepted, then the so-called exact scientific datings would be called in question. In our theory of visits by unknown astronauts we are dealing with such vast periods of time that 'small' miscalculations can easily creep in and such a ‘small’ error can very quickly amount That is one reason which makes me sceptical about datings that go very far back. Let us take the case of Tiahuanaco. If cosmonauts did leave our planet from there after completing their mission, they certainly did not leave any fossil heirlooms behind for the anthropologists and archaeologists. They had modern equipment and did not use charcoal fires for heating, and they took their bones away with them. In other words, they left absolutely no datable traces behind them. Bones and charcoal remains that are found on the presumed landing places of the astronauts and then analysed and dated come from men who settled among the ruins of the gods' fortress thousands of years later. I think it is a mistake to assume that the bones that have been excavated came from the builders of Tiahuanaco. I to 20,000 years or more. ask new questions because the old answers do not satisfy me. Archaeology has only existed as a scientific discipline for 200 years. Its representatives scrupulously