images

When he heard I was planning to plunge into the forbidden
forests of the Amazon, my friend Andrew rocked with
laughter.

“I’ll give you three precious tips,” he smirked.  “Never
put out a fire with your face.  Never sit down with a
bucket of ants.  And finally, don’t ever go skinny
dipping in a pool full of piranhas!”

Then he just rolled over and roared hysterically.

I was glad he was not coming with me.  I was dead serious
to fulfil a boyhood dream.

At the age of ten, I had been captivated by the story of
Percy Fawcett, the British explorer.download

Fawcett had gone deep into the trackless Amazon jungles
and come upon the ruins of a dead stone city.  Its massive
walls and deserted houses were choked with trailing vines.

Trees grew out of the windows.  Except for the chatter of
monkeys and choruses of birds, all was ghostly silent.

Its guardians were savages who wielded blowpipes with
poison darts.

On a return voyage, Fawcett vanished.

A similar fate has befallen many others.  Once an entire
patrol of 1,400 vanished in the jungle without trace.amazon

Why did I want to go in?  Because it was there.  At the
age of 34, I organised my first expedition, for the
mystery, adventure and excitement of the unknown.

This was to be the first of 25 expeditions into remote,
ancient corners of the earth. During some of these, I
lived with primitive people – and I mean about as
primitive as you can get.

The interesting thing was that these tribes – wherever one
might go – have no memory of having come up from something
more primitive.

Rather they have racial memories that their ancestors were
more sophisticated than they are today – that they lived
in shining cities, could read books, and so on.

And – surprise? – that all mankind came from some central
spot in the Middle East.

And so, with their help, plus that of archaeology and
other sciences, it has become possible to reconstruct what
really happened. But don’t try to bring in a preconceived
hypothesis like evolution. It cannot be made to fit the
evidence.

OFFSHOOTS OF MAINSTREAM CULTURE

You want the bare truth? Here’s what happened. In the
ongoing forced migration from this central point in the
Middle East, some family groups were pushed out further
by those following.

There were bands of scattering families who lost touch
with civilised communities.

The further they wandered, the more barbaric and debased
they became.

And that brings us to an important issue that we need to
resolve before going further.

DID MAN BEGIN IN DIFFERENT
LOCATIONS OR JUST ONE?

A fascinating report appeared some years ago in Time
magazine. (I think the article was called “Adam’s
Genes”.) Anyway, it reported that scientists had dealt a
blow to the idea that modern humans simultaneously arose
in different parts of the world.

Analysing a gene on the Y chromosome of 38 men from all
over the globe, they found no variation – and thus
concluded that humanity’s ancestors formed one small,
concentrated population.

Earlier studies had reached the same conclusion by
looking at a different sort of genetic material in women.

The genetic evidence proved that mankind did NOT evolve
in different parts of the world.
DID MAN BEGIN IN AFRICA?

Also, you’ve probably heard the theory… “Man began in
Africa. That’s where the oldest remains of man emerging
from his ape-like ancestors have been found.”

It’s all cut and dried, we’re told. Africa…

Not quite, I’m afraid. For long years, other
evolutionists have been just as strongly disputing that
idea. And with good reason.download

CRADLE OF MANKIND NOT IN AFRICA,
THE AMERICAS, EUROPE or EAST ASIA

As far back as 1932, Henry Field wrote:

“It does not seem probable to me that any of these
localities could have been the original point from which
the earliest men migrated.

“The distances, combined with many geographical barriers,
would tend to make a theory of this nature untenable.

“I suggest that an area more or less equidistant from
the outer edges of Europe, Asia and Africa, may indeed be
the centre in which development took place.” (“The Cradle
of Homo Sapiens,” American Journal of Archaeology, Oct-Dec.,
1932, p.427)

It is true that Field’s assessment was written before the
bone finds of Leakey and others in Africa. But fossil
discoveries in Africa over recent years have not changed
this.download

FROM THE MIDDLE EAST

So here is the position. Human beings must have migrated
from one common point.

And it is hopeless to assume that this point of origin
was at the extremities of man’s geographical range. It is
much more likely that man came from some point midway…
which is western Asia.

In an earlier newsletter we examined some compelling
evidence of our origins in the Middle East, and in
particular, Turkey.

But now we see the same story from global migration
patterns!

All lines of migration that are in any way still
traceable are found to radiate from the Middle East.

Along each migratory route, settlements have been found,
each slightly different from the one that preceded it or
followed it.

Generally, the direction of movement tends to be shown by
a gradual loss of cultural artefacts.

As several lines radiate from a single centre, there can
be traced more or less a series of ever increasing
circles of settlement, each sharing fewer and fewer of
the original cultural artefacts which are seen at the
centre.

MORE PRIMITIVE ON THE FRINGES

As we have seen, the cradle of mankind was in Asia Minor
(modern Turkey).

Any evidence of primitive types elsewhere in the world,
whether living or fossil, is evidence, not that man began
there, but that man became degraded as he departed from
the centre.

In marginal areas where individuals or families were
pushed by those who followed them, circumstances often
combined to degrade them physically and culturally.

A series of zones is found globally, in which the most
primitive are found furthest from Asia, and most advanced
nearest to Asia.

Professor Griffith Taylor of the University of Toronto,
put it this way:

“A series of zones is shown to exist in the East Indies
and in Australasia which is so arranged that the most
primitive are found farthest from Asia, and the most
advanced nearest to Asia. This distribution about Asia is
shown to be true in the other ‘peninsulas’ (i.e. Africa
and Europe, ACC)….

“Which ever region we consider, Africa, Europe,
Australia, or America, we find that the major migrations
have always been from Asia.” (Environment, Race and
Migration, University of Toronto, p.8)

He says further:

“The first point of interest in studying the distribution
of the African peoples is that the same rule holds good
which we have observed in the Australasian peoples.

“The most primitive groups are found in the regions most
distant from Asia, or what comes to the same thing, in
the most inaccessible regions….

“Given these conditions, it seems logical to assume that
the racial zones can only have resulted from similar
peoples spreading out like waves from a common origin.

”This cradleland should be approximately between the two
‘peninsulas,’ and all indications (including the racial
distribution of India) point to a region of maximum
evolution not far from Turkestan.

”It is not unlikely that the time factor was similar in
the spread of all these peoples.” (Ibid., pp.120,121)

FROM SKYSCRAPER
TO “STONE AGE”

So how can one most logically explain the geographical
distribution of “primitive” human fossil remains?

These were the marginal representatives of a widespread
dispersion of people from a single population established
at a point central to them all.

As the central population multiplied, it sent forth
successive waves of migrants. Each wave drove the
previous one further toward the outer edge.

Those who were driven into the least hospitable areas,
suffered physical degeneration under the conditions they
were forced to live.

We find these today as the most degraded fossil
specimens, or as the most primitive societies still alive
today.

And there are extraordinary physical differences among
them. Doubtless because they were members of small,
isolated, strongly inbred bands.

Yet the cultural similarities which link together even
the most widely dispersed of them indicate a common
origin for them all.

TIME TAKEN TO MIGRATE

So how long did it take for these folk from the one
starting point to disperse to the ends of the earth?

From the Middle East “Cradle of Man”, the most distant
settlement by land is the very southern tip of South
America, 15,000 miles approximately.

How long would such a journey take? It has been estimated
that men might have covered the 4,000 miles from Harbin,
Manchuria, to Vancouver Island, Canada, in as little as
20 years. (Kenneth Macgowen, Early Man in the New World,
p.3 and map on p. 4)

And the rest of the journey southward?

Says Alfred Kidder: “A hunting pattern based primarily on
big game could have carried man to southern South America
without the necessity at that time of great localized
adaptation.

“It could have been effected with relative rapidity, so
long as camel, horse, sloth, and elephant were available.
All the indications point to the fact that they were.”
(Alfred Kidder, Appraisal of Anthropology Today, p. 46)

So, as with everything else, migrations did not require
vast aeons of time.
SOME SOCIETIES BECAME PRIMITIVE,
OTHERS RETAINED CIVILISATION

Among the family groups which dispersed over the earth,
some developed into nations.

In a remarkably short time the Hamitic branch of mankind
(the coloured races) had pioneered beachheads of
settlement in every part of the world.

Some who penetrated wilderness areas did not maintain
their civilisation in the new isolated environment, but
over generations became more and more savage and
depraved.

Many of the dispersing groups were plunged into an “instant
stone age” through loss of metal technology (or
loss of its easy availability).

With little or no technology when they arrived (but with
knowledge they had brought), they used stone or whatever
was handy.  Top priority was survival.

But as time passed and survival was secured, and they had
time to sit down and work again with metals, they did so.

NOT DEVELOPMENT, BUT
EXPRESSION, OF CULTURE

To a modern archaeologist this might appear as
development of culture, whereas it was really just an
expression of culture, now that the question of survival
had been settled.

So, on the evidence, it is not necessary to assume that
men developed over long periods of time.

Around the world, men could be at different levels of
technology at the same time – just as they are today.

And the evidence for that is overwhelming.

It is almost amusing to watch how industriously and
seriously evolutionists try to discover ape-like features
in the remains of such people.

I tell you, there are men alive TODAY whose skulls would
qualify as “connecting links between man and his alleged
ape-like ancestors”.

A theory can certainly have a strong influence upon a
man’s judgment.

CIVILISATIONS BECOME
ISOLATED BY DISASTER

It appears that even after many migrating tribes became
trapped in their new surroundings, knowledge of world
geography was never completely lost.

The great maritime powers around 2000 BC were the Minoans
(Cretans), Mycenaeans (Greeks), Chinese and Egyptians.

There is evidence also of possible cross-world travel by
the Indus Valley civilisation and the Mesopotamians
(from the Middle East).

Oh, yes. And something else.

People all over the world have retained separate memories
of a period when aviation was a well-known concept, and
flight was a frequent occurrence. (See my book Dead Men’s
Secrets, pp.278-304)

At first a number of highly civilised nations flourished.
But their descendants became embroiled in destructive
wars.  Large cities were reduced to ruins.  Commerce on
the air and sea lanes fell into disuse.

Although a great part of the evidence is unsatisfactory
and mixed with vague tradition, yet for some of it there
seems to be substantial and independent proof – even to
solid artefacts. (Ibid., pp. 10,11)

THE LANES REOPENED

Many centuries would elapse before Phoenicia, the new
great naval power, would reopen the long ocean lanes.

While a few nations retained some memory of their past
heritage, it was the Phoenicians who most aggressively
used it to their advantage.

In the time of Solomon of Israel (10th century BC), the
Phoenicians reopened the lines of commerce that had
existed a thousand years before.

TESTIMONY OF THE MAYA

Votan, the first historian of the Maya civilisation,
wrote a book on the origin of the race.  This ancient
volume, written in the Quiche Language, was found by the
Spaniards after their conquest of Mexico.

Votan founded a settlement at Palenque about 1000 BC.
Later he made four or more visits to his former home of
Chivim (Tripoli of Syria, a town in the kingdom of Tyre,
in the eastern Mediterranean).

During these trips he visited a great city wherein a
magnificent temple was in course of erection.

He next visited an edifice which had been originally
intended to reach heaven, an object defeated, says Votan,
when “to every people a different  language was given.”

Upon returning to Palenque, he found that several more of
his nation had arrived.  Legend and pictorial evidence
suggests that they were akin to Carthaginians.

From this time onward, spreading at a more leisurely
rate, the Indo-European races and the Semites settled
slowly into the areas already opened up by the above-
mentioned pioneers.

NORTH AMERICAN INDIANS

Concerning the New World, there is good evidence that the
colossal buildings now found there were constructed no
later than about 1200 BC.

Little is known of the ancestors of the Red Indians who
spread over North America. They dwelt in enormous cities,
with temples and fortresses.  They were expert
agriculturalists, they domesticated animals and worked
mines.

Western experts are very ignorant on American pre-
Columbian history.  Red Indian history is only explained
to white men whom the Indians grow to trust. To others,
they will deny all knowledge of their history, including
that of the Mounds.

THE POLYNESIANS

Mistaken concepts also prevail among “experts” concerning
Pacific history.

Scholars say that the long-ago voyages from Hawaii to
French Polynesia, from Samoa to Raratonga, and from the
historical but unauthenticated Hawaiki to Raratonga and
then on to New Zealand, were either legend or haphazard
voyaging.

The Polynesian people do not agree and claim they were
deliberate and skilful.

We should not place too much reliance on academic
historical theory. Native genealogy and history, backed
with archaeology, work much better.

If you would like to know more about our unknown history
over the past few thousand years, you might visit
http://www.beforeus.com/third.php

International explorer, archaeologist and author
Jonathan Gray has traveled the world to gather data on
ancient mysteries. He has penetrated some largely
unexplored areas, including parts of the Amazon
headwaters. The author has also led expeditions to the
bottom of the sea and to remote mountain and desert
regions of the world. He lectures internationally.