Quote:
Originally Posted by Turtle
The theft aspect did cross my mind, but there is no mention of gold in the 1909 article. I find it a bit unbelievable the Egyptians wouldn't have it if they were here, and more so that 'Kinkaid' wouldn't mention it.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by EXPLORATIONS IN GRAND CANYON
Among the other finds are vases or urns and cups of copper and gold, made very artistic in design.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turtle
Another curious bit is that in 1909 the Smithsonian was poppin with change. Charles Walcott had just taken over as Secretary, Walcott had made his discovery of the Burgess shale in British Columbia in 1909, and the Smithsonian's new museum building was complete enough to start moving in collections. All good enough reasons for someone to hype a 'new discovery' in an effort to get on the gravy train.  |
I suppose poppin with change would be a good description. A new secretary isn't much to gawk at. A new building is about medium on the Bob Dylan things are a-changin' scale. But, put them together and I suppose you've got some pretty big changes.
But, does this help an argument toward a Smithsonian devised hoax? I don't think so. The board of regents, inspector general, as well as lower level secretaries, directors, and officers were presumably unchanged. A hoax that goes all the way up to secretary Walcott seems incredibly unlikely.
At best we could perhaps say records of any find or anyone involved with the find were lost in the move. But this again seems very unlikely. If there were artifacts of any significance - it would be hard to loose all of them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turtle
How about Egyptians (Phoenicians) mining copper in Michigan? ...  |
If they were smart enough to get over here - they were smart enough to find sources of copper closer to home.
One way to disprove the actual validity of the article's claim would be through population genetics where
The Genographic Project would show a prehistoric influx of Middle-Eastern people. It's probably a safe bet that they would have 'mixed' with the locals.
It really seems to me that the article is a hoax and that it must have been confined to Arizona. If the names of the archaeologists were real that could maybe indicate a wider hoax/conspiracy.
-modest
