Crypto-History, Instalment 2: In the Beginning

News Type: Other — Sat Mar 17, 2007 10:24 PM EDT

history, origins-of-life, extremophiles, catastrophism, uniformitarianism, cold-seep-ecologies, precambrian-fossils, professor-william-schopf

Synthesis

Stromatolites found in Western Australia last year have once again thrown conventional wisdom about the origins of life on earth into question

The Hidden Threads of Crypto-History A Multi-Part Exploration of Alternative Theories of the Human Experience

Instalment 2: In the Beginning (click here for the previous instalment)

One of the arguments against theories of advanced civilizations preceding our own is the belief that the timelines of both human evolution, and those of life in general, have been fixed with a high degree of certainty. Among the general public, if not necessarily in the scientific community, there is a perception that we know approximately when life began on earth, when the first modern humans appeared, when they arrived in Europe and from where, when they crossed the Bering Land Bridge to settle the New World, when agriculture first began, when the first cities were founded and so on.

In reality, nothing is known for sure. While the accepted dogmas are often defended with a zeal that borders on the religious, the truth is that every year discoveries are made which push back the antiquity of civilization, the settlement of North America, the arrival of humanity and the creation of life in general. This reminds us of what a wise man once said, "science is not a body of knowledge, it's a method." When we encounter the vigorousness with which the received wisdom of the scientific community is defended when a challenge to it is laid down, we might also consider the words of Dean Radin, writing in The Conscious Universe: "the same scientific mindset that thrives on high precision and critical thinking is also extremely adept at forming clever rationalizations that get in the way of progress." Radin was talking about psychic phenomena here, but could have been referring equally to any major challenge to orthodoxy, including those represented by evidence of advanced ancient civilizations.

Prior to 1980, it was generally believed that life on Earth began approximately 1.5 billion years ago, and that the earth was formed 4.5 billion years ago. Then, a team from UCLA, led by paleobiology Professor William Schopf, announced their find, three years earlier, of Precambrian microfossils in a layer of chert in Western Australia. The microfossils were found to have dated from 3.5 billion years ago, and were thought to have formed around deep sea vents, in extreme high-heat conditions; a surplus of available energy, which might have provided suitable conditions for the spawning of the earliest life.

Now, it turns out, that even these extreme conditions may not have been necessary. Once again, in Australia, extremely ancient stromatolite fossils have been found, and this time they are thought to have been formed under relatively normal marine conditions. The theory that this might be possible – or at least possible in conditions characterized by less extreme temperatures -- was bolstered further by research conducted last year by a 21-member expedition led by scientists from Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, New Zealand's National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research , the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, and the University of Hawaii at Manoa (UH). The team spent two weeks exploring cold water seeps and other 'chemosynthetic' ecosystems around New Zealand's east coast onboard NIWA's deepwater research vessel Tangaroa.

All this is by way of pointing out that the best scientific knowledge underpinning what is considered to be solid theory (some would say dogma) is capable of undergoing dramatic shifts triggered by relatively small events. The examples discussed in this article are an illuminating case in point. An upheaval in our understanding of the degree of antiquity of life on earth was brought about, one which moved the dates back by literally billions of years. And the cause?

Fossils.

Microfossils, no less.

Surely an example of a tiny trigger moving mountains.

In our next instalment, we will consider other types of cataclysmic shifts – ones that are at odds with the uniformitarian theory of geology propounded by Sir Charles Lyell in his classic text Principles of Geology. If the theories about the catastrophic shifts are true, they have the potential to put paid to yet another piece of received wisdom (albeit one which has been experiencing increasingly critical attention of late), and may form one more layer of evidence for a radically different interpretation on nothing less than our entire body of knowledge of history.

Link to:: The Hidden Threads of Crypto-History, Instalment 3: Catastrophe and Change

30 Votes
Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Published to:

Synthesis's Column, All of Newsvine
Groups: Hall of Mirrors, Historical Vine, Newsvine Science, The Crypt
Regions: none

What's this?

Who's leading the conversation?

This visualization below allows you to see the impact that each user has on the current conversation. The top row contains the group of users who have had the most impact, the 2nd row the group of users who have had the 2nd most impact (et cetera). Users with similar impact are grouped together, and the average score of the group is shown to the left of the group. The author of the article is also shown on the left, in their corresponding group. Each user's score is based on the number of comments the user has made plus the number of votes their comments have received. The scores are calculated relative one another, so while their absolute value is not particularly important, their relative difference does indicate a larger difference in impact on the conversation.

9.2

6.4

{"commentId":591851,"authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

Synthesis

I recognize that in an instant-gratification society characterized by four-second sound bytes and 30-second 'analyses' of international geopolitical issues, there may be some of you out there who are already going: "#*$%$*& it! I've read two articles now, and I still don't know where the heck he's going with this stuff."

To most of you, I say, be patient. The scope I'm biting off with this project is truly ginormous, since it basically covers the time frame from 3.5 billion BC to 2012.

It may take me a few more instalments to get through it all (to be truthful, I'm not counting on it taking less than 30....)

Thanks, all, for your patience as I try and see whether I can get this project off the ground or not....!

{"commentId":591851,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

7 votes

#1 - Sat Mar 17, 2007 10:34 PM EDT

{"commentId":592557,"authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

Synthesis

For those who are interested, here's an article that offers a good overview of bacteriology, including the status of prokaryotes as the closest relatives of earth's earliest life forms.

{"commentId":592557,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

5 votes

#2 - Sun Mar 18, 2007 2:54 PM EDT

{"commentId":594278,"authorDomain":"rochester92"}

rochester92

Fantastic! Great job Synthesis. You're tackling a massive subject head-on and that is no small task. I'm looking forward to reading the future installments!

{"commentId":594278,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"rochester92"}

6 votes

#3 - Mon Mar 19, 2007 2:43 PM EDT

{"commentId":595353,"authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

Synthesis

Thanks, Rochester92. Given the massive effor this is going to take, I can use the support.

The scope is a bit ridiculous, frankly, but it's a project I've been working on for a while, and I've finally thought I should get it out there into the ether rather than just on my woefully vulnerable hard drive.

And anyway, I'm kind of excited about all the ways in which using hotlinks this kind of information can be sliced and diced once it's out onto the internet anyway....

{"commentId":595353,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

4 votes

#3.1 - Tue Mar 20, 2007 12:09 AM EDT

{"commentId":10133615,"authorDomain":"hugo-gnzlz"}

HCG76

In reality, nothing is known for sure. While the accepted dogmas are often defended with a zeal that borders on the religious, the truth is that every year discoveries are made which push back the antiquity of civilization,

Most of history, specially early history could be completely thrown out of sink with one simple discovery, now is that piece of evidence still out there or has it been lost forever?

{"commentId":10133615,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"hugo-gnzlz"}

1 vote

#3.2 - Sat Oct 17, 2009 1:22 AM EDT

{"commentId":10139712,"authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

Synthesis

I guess that depends on the assumption about what the 'one piece' of evidence is.

I think there are many intellectual time-bombs buried in our history.

{"commentId":10139712,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

3 votes

#3.3 - Sat Oct 17, 2009 3:59 PM EDT

{"commentId":10141179,"authorDomain":"hugo-gnzlz"}

HCG76

I think there are many intellectual time-bombs buried in our history.

Agreed, but when found will they be viable or even enough evidence to create a guess or to investigate further!

{"commentId":10141179,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"hugo-gnzlz"}

2 votes

#3.4 - Sat Oct 17, 2009 6:30 PM EDT

{"commentId":10141265,"authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

Synthesis

Oh, very often they do seem viable, especially given the ever-increasing sophistication of our tools (I am thinking, for example of the fossilized dung found an a cave not long ago that came close to sinking Clovis First once and for all, largely because our dating technology is getting so powerful).

The real question to me, is when science does turn up one of these paradigm shattering events, and it's proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, will the general public believe it, or if they do, even give a @!$%#.

For example, many of the things that are so shocking in The Da Vinci Code have been pretty much ho-hum to bible scholars for years....it's only the lay public that is unaware of them, and thinks they are shocking today.

{"commentId":10141265,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

3 votes

#3.5 - Sat Oct 17, 2009 6:39 PM EDT

{"commentId":10143511,"authorDomain":"hugo-gnzlz"}

HCG76

Although the Code has many good examples of history forgetting or omitting many things, we can't truly believe it all, but the many parts of it which are true really brings up the though of what might be under the Vatican, in their archives.

Example: the finding of the book of Judas, I have some friends that would not even accept the validity of the finding telling us that it was thework of the devil. It is true what you say, it is one thijng to discover something, it is all different wheter the masses will believe it or even strike you down because of the find.

{"commentId":10143511,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"hugo-gnzlz"}

3 votes

#3.6 - Sat Oct 17, 2009 10:28 PM EDT

{"commentId":10143520,"authorDomain":"hugo-gnzlz"}

HCG76Deleted

{"commentId":10146718,"authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

Synthesis

Hugo, this double-posted, so I deleted the second one for you.

we can't truly believe it all,

Very true, especially since it's so committed to being pop fiction. If you got to the sources that influenced Brown, though - in particular, Baigent and Leigh's The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, as well as the many sources they cite, there are many more very interesting pieces of information.

telling us that it was thework of the devil

To me, the folks that use this excuse are clearly not interested in the expansion of knowledge. Other than making sure they don't 'strike me down', I have very little interest in orienting any work or effort towards them. I am certainly not going to waste energy trying to 'convert' them to anything.

{"commentId":10146718,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

2 votes

#3.8 - Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:07 AM EDT

{"commentId":10155689,"authorDomain":"hugo-gnzlz"}

HCG76

When they said that I stopped very quickly, talking to them about new discoveries, they don't want to learn or contemplate even the possibility of there beign a different explanation for certain aspects of their dogma!

{"commentId":10155689,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"hugo-gnzlz"}

2 votes

#3.9 - Mon Oct 19, 2009 1:24 AM EDT

{"commentId":10173361,"authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

Synthesis

Well, it doesn't sound like a conversation in which anyone is destined to 'get smarter'...

{"commentId":10173361,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

2 votes

#3.10 - Mon Oct 19, 2009 7:40 PM EDT

{"commentId":10175488,"authorDomain":"hugo-gnzlz"}

HCG76

right!! now of to read 4 and maybe 5, thanks!

{"commentId":10175488,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"hugo-gnzlz"}

1 vote

#3.11 - Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:42 PM EDT

{"commentId":1341515,"authorDomain":"inghar2004"}

gladbutterfly

You've got my interest, Syn. Keep up the good work.

{"commentId":1341515,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"inghar2004"}

4 votes

#4 - Tue Jan 8, 2008 11:46 AM EST

{"commentId":2199700,"authorDomain":"MightyMait"}

MightyMait

In reality, nothing is known for sure. While the accepted dogmas are often defended with a zeal that borders on the religious, the truth is that every year discoveries are made which push back the antiquity of civilization, the settlement of North America, the arrival of humanity and the creation of life in general.

and

"the same scientific mindset that thrives on high precision and critical thinking is also extremely adept at forming clever rationalizations that get in the way of progress."

Oh, yeah!!

I'm often saying things like this (though not as eloquently) here on Newsvine when discussing science/religion with science fanatics.

{"commentId":2199700,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"MightyMait"}

4 votes

#5 - Tue Jul 15, 2008 5:59 PM EDT

{"commentId":2209099,"authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

Synthesis

when discussing science/religion with science fanatics.

Heh....fanatics of any sort are usually extreme by their very nature. And my experience with statistical distribution tells me to be very wary of data that's on the outliers...which holds true for fanatics, as well...

{"commentId":2209099,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

5 votes

#5.1 - Wed Jul 16, 2008 7:32 PM EDT

{"commentId":2249052,"authorDomain":"stevenp"}

Steven P.

Very interesting subject matter. Will be sure to read all yr articles. Thanks for the profusion of links.

{"commentId":2249052,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"stevenp"}

4 votes

#6 - Mon Jul 21, 2008 10:54 PM EDT

{"commentId":2255581,"authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

Synthesis

My pleasure, Steven. Some folks hate all the links, others like them there.

Personally, I prefer to have them. It's one thing to take issue with the sources, and those who want to are free to do so. But I think it's important to provide that level of backup, just as you would footnote in an essay.

I mean, it's the least we can do if we hope for Web 2.0 to become taken more seriously as a medium.

Welcome to my column, and I hope you enjoy what you read.

{"commentId":2255581,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

3 votes

#6.1 - Tue Jul 22, 2008 5:28 PM EDT

{"commentId":8548883,"authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

Synthesis

Some further news about Australian stromatolites is emerging here.

{"commentId":8548883,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

2 votes

#7 - Fri Jul 31, 2009 9:21 AM EDT

{"commentId":8556635,"authorDomain":"jsbach"}

jsbach

I have read your first installment, Syn, and I have read this article a number of times. I'll have to get help comprehending all of this.

But, I am enjoying it and I look forward to your future pieces because whatever it is I'm reading and whatever point this is attempting to make, it intrigues me.

Thank you. Great work!

Susan

{"commentId":8556635,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"jsbach"}

5 votes

#8 - Fri Jul 31, 2009 2:38 PM EDT

{"commentId":8557160,"authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

Synthesis

Thanks, Susan. The Crypto-History series is my first love here on Newsvine, and suffers all the more from that as I get my little distractions. I will be back to it soon.

Appreciate the kind words!

{"commentId":8557160,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

5 votes

#8.1 - Fri Jul 31, 2009 2:59 PM EDT

{"commentId":8566931,"authorDomain":"darreth"}

Darreth01

Being a "Mythology Freak" most of my life, this is a subject I have always found REALLY interesting! Even if I DO find myself <Unconsciously> rolling my eyes at some of the theories put forth by some of the more extreme theorists. I try and keep an open mind no matter WHAT is being discussed... but like you said... it is VERY hard to DISCUSS something with someone that has already made up his/her/it's mind! Thanks for the interesting article and I look forward to checking out the others you put here!

{"commentId":8566931,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"darreth"}

2 votes

#9 - Sat Aug 1, 2009 7:14 AM EDT

{"commentId":8568474,"authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

Synthesis

Thanks, Darreth01. I've got something like 20 or so instalments done so far. Links to the next in the series are at the bottom of the article. I hope you enjoy them.

The thing about mythology is that in the last three or four hundred years, it has been increasingly dismissed as a source of much reality and relegated to the category of fairy stories. I have been very strongly influenced by writers such as Graves, who suggest that there is vastly more to mythology than we currrently believe, and am pleased that the tide seems to be turning in favour of giving mythology its place as a valuable tool within the suite of techniques available to modern research. As my Newsvine handle suggests, I am convinced that the more cross-disciplinary we become, the closer we will get to the truth.

As to the more extravagant theories, I have been trained to coordinate the efforts of individuals possessing a broad and disparate range of expertise, and its been my experience that the best way to leverage their skillsets is to begin with a 'no boundaries' approach in order to define the scope of the possible, then use reductionist scientific techniques to form hypotheses and test them. By necessity this means entertaining some pretty crazy ideas, at least until they can be disproven by method, rather than by inborn bias.

I have found that in that way, we are able to uncover some of the most exciting discoveries, especially those previously overlooked.

{"commentId":8568474,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

2 votes

#9.1 - Sat Aug 1, 2009 10:21 AM EDT

{"commentId":8580424,"authorDomain":"darreth"}

Darreth01

I have been very strongly influenced by writers such as Graves, who suggest that there is vastly more to mythology than we currrently believe, and am pleased that the tide seems to be turning in favour of giving mythology its place as a valuable tool within the suite of techniques available to modern research.

Joseph Campbell is another good one... his "The hero with a thousand faces" was one of the books we used in a mythology course I took in my first year of college! Very interesting to look at the similarities in all the world's mythologies and say "Why do they all have these similar motifs?"

{"commentId":8580424,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"darreth"}

2 votes

#9.2 - Sun Aug 2, 2009 2:18 AM EDT

{"commentId":8580479,"authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

Synthesis

I like Campbell, too. I have a couple volumes of his Masks of God set on my bookshelf, next to Bulfinch.

{"commentId":8580479,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

1 vote

#9.3 - Sun Aug 2, 2009 2:27 AM EDT

{"commentId":8581505,"authorDomain":"federalist101"}

Federalist101

I agree with where you are going. Like how old is the underwater city close to Japan. I believe I heard it is close to 200 miles long. How long ago was it above water and a living society. It is not in our present recorded history. Keep up the good work.

{"commentId":8581505,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"federalist101"}

4 votes

#10 - Sun Aug 2, 2009 8:10 AM EDT

{"commentId":8583815,"authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

Synthesis

Thanks, Federalist. The presence of a city submerged beneath the waves off Japan fits like a glove with my emerging thesis. Still, I believe it remains to be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the ruins are, indeed, a city.

I think they will be, though.

{"commentId":8583815,"threadId":"85755","contentId":"619562","authorDomain":"PrimarySources"}

3 votes

#10.1 - Sun Aug 2, 2009 12:14 PM EDT

{"canLink":false,"threadId":"85755","isPrivate":false}

SYNTHESIS

Backyard

Crypto-History, Instalment 2: In the Beginning

Published to:

FUN STUFF:

COMPANY STUFF:

LEGAL STUFF: