Saturday, November 20, 2010

Who Were The Nephilim #2?

I got a ton of angry, crazy responses in the comments about my last post.

Expected. I could see all that coming.

If humans were thinking animals, I'd be less interested in who said it than what they said. I'd be all over the internet verifying my own fantastic, incredible claims.

How much of all that were you previously familiar with? Think about what I wrote just now.

1. For over 100 years, Neanderthal skulls have been deliberately reconstructed with a pronounced fraud, always making sure the brow comes out and the chin sits back. The resulting skull has been found to be repeatedly modified with putty to cover the seams. The traditional model of the Neanderthal skull is a colossal hoax built out of bone chips. The facts were altered to fit the evolutionary school that had already portrayed the ascent of man. People got away with this for more than a century before they got caught. In some cases they simply presented skulls of Australopithecus and labeled them Neanderthal.

2. Neanderthal "skeleton" models have been constructed from big crates of fossil bones as a hodgepodge of assorted parts which in many cases contained bones of apes and orangutangs to assure the skeleton they created were of the right heighth and appearance. Where necessary, short leg bones were inserted from gorillas to make certain the Neanderthals came out shorter than modern humans. This was done not just once but at several dozen museums all over the world and "peer review" never caught it until very recently. Even then, not widely publicized. The skeletons of Neanderthals were until the past decade or so, three-quarters hoax to support a certain agenda. Piltdown man was not an isolated exception. Piltdown man was simply an instance where the people involved got caught.

3. Despite Neanderthal digs producing evidence of textiles, jewelry, fishing tackle, complex edged weapons, richly colored paints, rope, clothing, animal harnesses, the wheel, bow and arrows, canoes and kites since the earliest digs in the Neander Valley, they've been telling you this creature was not even human for over a century. You've been buying it, too. "Peer review" only caught it very recently and only then because instead of "experts," some "amateurs" looked into the matter.

4. Despite Neanderthal villages showing evidence of extremely elaborate funerals, burial rites, folk art, dancing and beautiful perspective artwork on cave walls and floors at least 100,000 years ago ... they told you this creature was a cannibal brute who did not even possess the power of speech. You been buying that for over a century. Homo Sapiens calls it edjumafacashun.

5. Knowing full well that Neanderthal brains were 40% larger than those of modern people and that their frontal lobes in particular (often called the "seat of civilization") were extremely well developed and larger than those of modern humans, they told you these cannibal ape men did not have real societies and no language for communication. More of your edjumafacashun.

6. Being aware that Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens had overlapped at least for six thousand years on roughly the same territorial land mass in Europe, they told you that the two races did not interbreed and if they did it approached bestiality ... after all, the Neanderthals were a short, brutish race of apes without chins.

Knowing that everything you have ever been told about human history over the past million years has turned out to be a complete lie, your main concern is that Tex may be claiming to be something out of the ordinary. That's the least important part of this story. If it were me, I could care less if the author added that as an addendum to that information.

If Homo Sapiens could think or learn, it would be impossible for people to cultivate these kinds of falsehoods and appalling hoaxes. Impossible. The only explanation is that Homo Sapiens is a biological thespian who can only imitate the semblance of thinking. What do you expect, he's only been around for a little over 30,000 years. Neanderthals dominated Europe for nearly a half a million years. Homo Sapiens has yet to demonstrate they can maintain a stable civilization for much over 200 years. If Neanderthal had displayed this kind of wild, whacky flakiness he would not have lasted a week during several successive Ice Ages.


Joseph Dantes said...

I find your critique of neanderthal science plausible.

I find your personal claims interesting, if nothing else. I've heard similar claims from the now deceased Bane.

You don't link much to back up what you write, so for the most part I remain bemusedly skeptical but continue reading. Often not knowing to what you're alluding.

Anonymous said...

Mr T

Ouch ! ...

that's gonna leave a mark !

There's only one cohort extant on the planet that has no Neander genomic contribution, but that reality may not be uttered in our Cultimulcheral Kabuki.

The Change We Wuz Waitin Fo' is unfortunately the Rise of the Poo-Flingers. The folks in charge of HR are happy


Anonymous said...

Way to go Fruit Loops! said...

Those claims of widespread fraud and hoaxing on the part of - whom, exactly? - would be more convincing if you would offer the evidence. Am I supposed to just take you at your word on this, and do you expect me to do that? Do you not think I might deserve to see the actual evidence and context of the evidence? I'm prepared to hear your case, but first you need to make one.

PorkBones said...

Tex, maybe if you just focussed on your subject matter isntead of waffling on about what a superhero/superhuman you are (again and again), people wouldn't flood you with comments you don't like!
Is there no *humility* in your version of Christianity?

Anonymous said...

The scientific establishment will use any forgery and bogus theory to hold on its linear progression of evolution when there are tons of evidence and documents from ancient sources that suggest a cyclical one with periodic destructions/extinctions.

Mainstream Egyptologists are trying to convince us that ancients could carve red granite found inside the pyramids with copper tools. Uh-huh. Apparently, they seem to forget that, until recently, in order to open passageways through the granite rooms of the pyramids we used...dynamite

And how about the cave paintings found at the Bernifal Cave in France and show the head-to-head struggle of a mammoth and what appears to a remnant of the...dinosaurs, painted by Neanderthals. Mind you, the Bernifal cave in 1982, for yet unaixplained reasons, was closed to the public.

I'll post more later if I have the time.

Anonymous said...

Its all so blatantly obvious,I've known this since the age of 15. I can remember doing biology at school and argueing with the teachers about these things. I got idiotic responces off them like " yes his brain was larger but he could only think backwards" . I tried to explain to them that such a thing doesn't make any sence, the complex communication methods of bees with brains smaller than a pin head.
I was told to go read "Clan of the Cavebear" a fiction book!!!

Anonymous said...

I'm not entering into the debate over Neanderthals & Homo Sapiens and whether one is superior to the other. I say these things and ask these questions knowing that more than the average Homo Sapiens possesses little more intelligence than how to use a TV remote, and shove food into their faces (have you ever noticed the ability to eat in a polite manner no longer exists?)And that the successful dumbing down of the populace has long since been completed. But what do you see as the reasoning for the flourishing of the Homo Sapiens and not the Neanderthals? Why didn't we seen the Neanderthal being the dominate creature?

j said...

Interesting post. The obvious question, though: if inferior homo sapiens has only existed for 30,000 years, and superior neanderthals dominated the earth for 500,000 years, why is it the homo sapiens that are discussing this on the Internet? It would appear that we have accomplished much more, and in much less time, than the neanderthals did.

If I understand your argument correctly, you believe that human progress has been dependent on neanderthal/human hybrids (aspies). Why, in that case, did thoroughbred neanderthal civilization collapse in the first place? In 500,000 years, why didn't they take steps to ensure their own survival?

Maybe its because my brain is one of those puny homo sapiens models, but I don't see how a bigger brain-case and some cave-paintings prove the superiority of neanderthal-kind.

Texas Arcane said...

You misunderstand evolution to be a process which selects the best and brightest, as opposed to the best adapted for the situation.

As discussed before here many times, Neanderthal was a high powered sports car demanding 4000 calories of quality protein a day just to keep his engine running. Homo Sapiens is like a Yugo that runs on urine. When the environment changed, Neos found they had evolved into creatures of such quality they could not compete.

The most successful organisms of them all biologically speaking are tapeworms, which live in people's bowels and eat feces.

Texas Arcane said...


It is impossible to engage the Sapiens brain without the initial troll. It won't fire otherwise.

Anonymous said...

"Mainstream Egyptologists are trying to convince us that ancients could carve red granite found inside the pyramids with copper tools."

They used toothless copper saws and a fine sand for that. The saw 'rubs' the fine sand particles over the granite, slowly grinding it away.

Very slow, but it works.

You dont need dynamite and powertools to make something as magnificent as the pyramids. We've just been so used to modern tools that we think its impossible to do it by hand.


j said...

>As discussed before here many times, Neanderthal was a high powered sports car demanding 4000 calories of quality protein a day just to keep his engine running. Homo Sapiens is like a Yugo that runs on urine.

I understand that natural selection favors blind survivability, but if neanderthals were so smart, wouldn't they have left undeniable relics of a civilization more advanced than ours? Surely more than cave paintings would have survived of a 500,000 year-old race of supermen. They would have had time to build underground cities, establish moon-bases, maybe even hit a technological singularity and spread out into the stars. In 500,000 years, a race of uber-intelligent demigods would advance to such a point that an ice age would be a minor inconvenience at most, it seems to me.

It's possible that you're right, and I just need more urine. A lot can happen in a hundred thousand years. It's an interesting hypothesis.

Anonymous said...

Mate, your Aspergers is showing. You read comments about your egotistical attitude, your blatant self aggrandisement, and you misinterpret them as a sign that the writer can't understand your point?

Sorry buddy. Wankers just need to be called out as wankers sometimes. You may get away with being a big mouthed fat jerk in America (the norm) but in Oz you're still in the minority.


You're right more often than not, but get the fuck over yourself.

Texas Arcane said...

Anon 1:06 am

You have failed to consider the possibility that I am simply telling the plain, unadorned, unvarnished, unrehearsed truth. You neglected the possibility that I really am a refitted Neanderthal. In terms of Ockham's Razor, it explains an awful lot. You probably wouldn't understand how much it explains. I hope you won't mind my saying that Homo Sapiens simply isn't an observant animal. He never really sees anything, understands anything or comprehends anything. It's not in his nature to do so. Where his civilization has advanced it is solely because of "Aspergers" (Neanderthal gene expression) and not through any virtues possessed on his own.

Remember, your kind has had 30,000 years to work it out and has failed to notice any of it. Kind of like Africans and the wheel, it's pretty fair to say they were just never going to "get it." Time has nothing to with it. I first had intimations about all this at the age of 27. If you figure I was only really functional by age 7 in terms of analytical reasoning, then it means I figured out in two decades what ordinary humans had failed to deduce in more than 30,000 years of free inquiry.

If I didn't say it, it's fair to say your kind would have never worked it out on their own. Never. As in ever.

Texas Arcane said...


Also as discussed on here many, many times ... is it possible the history of the planet has been far more catastrophic than has previously been realized?

The most advanced societies also create the most transient artifacts. It's the primitive societies that leave the monolithic structures that survive the worst - where not subsumed by the seas, which is where nearly all civilizations end up. Are you familiar with the conveyor belt of the Earth's plates? It rolls things into the troughs (oceans) and then drags them underneath the tectonic crust. It's a very rare city that merely ends up at the bottom of the Mariana Trench. We know more about the moon than we know about the bottom of the ocean.

Anonymous said...


I don't think anything we built in 2010 would remain recognizable 30 000 years from now. Primitive constructs like the Pyramids and its wall paintings will stand for longer and stronger than any of our skycrappers and feeble houses. None of our gadgets made of polycarbonates, silicon, silicium could stand the test of time. Our knowledge is highly dependent on replication for none of our storage mediums could prevent slow, creeping data corruption on the scale of decades for most storage mediums, and centuries for the stronger, pricier methods.
And just as books will last longer than computers and magnetic hard drives, stone tablets have lasted for longer than anything made of paper.

I'll let you think for yourself by giving you a hint but not the full answer. What do you think an open landfill would look like, five decades from now, if we stopped piling newer trash on top of the old, already decaying waste ? What is the effect of permanent exposure to solar radiation ? Would the effect be accelerated if it happened under an era of magnetic reversal ?

Anonymous said...

I find it amusing when people ask why if a people are so superior, they did not survive.

Look at what South Africa used to be, compared to what it is now and is still becoming.

Are the people running South Africa today, superior to the former rulers, or did they just out breed them?

South Africa is the future of the entire Anglo-sphere. Its former rulers were a superior animal, yet too foolish and idealistic, to do something as basic as preserving its own living space, for its own kind.

And what is a superior species that willingly gives ground to its competitors for a high minded ideal?

An extinct one.

Anonymous said...

In defense of Tex's theory; having a glacier moving over your city for a thousand years will grind every sign of civilisation into dust. Seismic activity and flooding would collapse underground structures.

Only large stone structures like the Pyramids, Stonehenge or the Great Wall can survive years of erosion.

But Tex is still nuts :)


Anonymous said...

Don't forget the question of age hanging over many artifacts and monuments, Tex. Many of them they are just guessing and assuming they were made by certain cultures at certain times....but they could be much, much older. Perhaps some of them have survived for more than one extinction cycle.

Texas Arcane said...

About 6 years ago, after I read about the images being sent back by Hubble, I began to assume that the universe has been here an eternity, forever spontaneously creating matter out of the void, forever populated by life somewhere. I have begun to assume in the past two years that the Earth is trillions and trillions of years old if it is a day.

The Big Bang and Black Holes are rubbish science just like Global Warming, Neanderthal skulls and the notion that space is abiotic and oil is biotic in origin. All junk science by weak minds.