The Alternative Genesis
The accepted paradigm for the history of our species, when first viewed by the student of history, seems quite sound. At face value the paradigm does seem to offer a detailed explanation of the evolution of humanity and of human civilization. In fact, this overview of recorded history, in spite of its need for revision in certain areas (due to the obvious taint of cultural and nationalistic bias) is relatively accurate. There are a few problem areas though. And, unfortunately, these problem areas deal with critical periods in our overall evolution as a sentient species. All of these problem areas are directly related to the questions of Human Origins and the Origin of Civilization. In fact, it is within these two controversial historical topics that the current historical paradigm tends to fall apart. First, let’s take a look at the paradigm problems related to the origin(s) of Human Civilization.
Why is the question of the origin of human civilization such a controversial and confusing event in our evolution and why is the current paradigm so weak regarding the overview of this event? Why is the question of the date at which the first human civilization appeared such a point of constant contention? Well, these are all valid questions. The answer to all of these questions is really quite simple. In fact, the answer lies in the textual body of the first question that we posed… "The current paradigm is weak". This weakness (in addition to the weaknesses caused by bias and a rigid concept model) is due primarily to the begrudging and repetitive revisions regarding this specific event. There were errors made. There were errors that had to be corrected as evidence mounted proving the need for revision. Now these errors regarding the question of the birthplace of human civilization were (and, in some cases, still are) the direct result of the following influences:
- The Judeo / Christian Bible’s account of history as interpreted by the religious community in general. This interpretation set the age of the earth at about six thousand years. This interpretation of the history (specifically regarding the history of western civilization) of our species was taught and believed dogmatically for a very long time. In fact, as incredible as it may seem, it is still taught and believed by certain activities and organizations that are directly descended from, or claim ties to the Judeo / Christian source. This erroneously interpreted, mythical chronological influence* is still evident and still has visible effects in this and other aspects of the historical paradigm.
- A lack of, or misinterpretation of archaeological data. (In short we started with an inaccurate assumption of civilization’s origin and then compounded the problem by adding ignorance to the equation.)
*Note: I want to be very clear here regarding the subject of "myths" and "legend". Both myth and legend are extremely important factors in the interpretation of, and exploration of our historical origins as a sentient species. The problem lies with the interpretation and use of these myths and legends during the process of creating and presenting an overview of history or a particular piece of (or aspect of) the paradigm. It has been the experience of many researchers and archaeologists that the source for some of the most profound and valuable historical discoveries was found in none other than what we call myth and legend. It is all too easy to equate the terms ‘myth’ and ‘legend’ with the definition ‘worthless fairy-tale’. To do so is to perpetuate ignorance and close the door to further incredible and fascinating discoveries. This is due to the fact that hidden within the bodies of these myths and legends are the clues to historical facts. This is not a theory. It has been proven to be true time after time. The problem, as I stated earlier, is in how one interprets the myth. (This will be covered in more detail in a latter part of this work.)
It’s not at all difficult to see these two factors still active and influential in the current realm of historical research. All one has to do is to look.
Now, as to the second question we posed regarding the origins of the human species itself. Here we find the same two influences to error as were listed regarding the question of the origin of civilization. But, we have another factor to add to the list. So, we now have the following factors for error:
- The dogmatic presentation of myth as fact.
lack of, or misinterpretation of data.
And the new influences of:
- The dogmatic presentation of theory as fact.
failure of researchers and scientists to expunge the
irrational belief or attitude that views the cosmos and
its history from a Human-Centered perspective and to
accept the fact that there is nothing
ultimately impossible in
the realm of science. Let me give an example of this
factor in operation. I have heard intelligent scientists
and astronomers make some incredibly unintelligent
statements. Open mouth and insert foot.
Here is one of the classics… "It is impossible for man to fly". (Yes. But only until the technology comes along to allow him to do so.) And here is one that I hear many, many times… "There have been no visits to our earth by other intelligent beings. This is simply because the distances are too great and faster than light speed is impossible". That’s a pretty bold and stupid set of statements. They are both closed-minded and "Human Centered". It assumes that every sentient species in our universe can be no more technically advanced than Humanity. This first ridiculous assumption is not supported by any evidence whatsoever. It’s only ‘support’ is supposedly found within the second ridiculous statement… and the answer to that is…(Yes. But only until we have the technology to do so.) There is nothing impossible in science where the appropriate level of technology exists to make the impossible, possible.
- The atmosphere and attitude of warfare. Now, what I mean by this is that there is a war being fought between science and religion regarding the origins of the species. This is an old and intellectually violent conflict. And, just as in the case of all wars, rationalism vanishes and is replaced by irrational thoughts and behavior. One side attacks… the other side defends. The enemy becomes a monster and is viewed by both sides as less than human. Now this is a war that’s been stupid from the start. When Science first presented its fledgling views regarding human evolution and was immediately attacked by Religion, caution was unwisely thrown to the wind… and the battle was joined. Not to say that the stand against legislated religious dogma was not a noble stand… it was. But, after that battle was won in the courts and in the halls of academia, the war was, for all intents and purposes, over. No further discourse was required (or expedient, or edifying) with the hostile and irrational defeated-foe. The continuing discord and debate has made it all too easy for the atmosphere and attitudes of warfare to continue and to thrive. And this is the very attitude that contributes to the irrational and vehement defense of the historical paradigm from any and all data (be that data from a religious source or not) that might contradict the hard fought and hard won historical paradigm.
Now that we know these factors exist, we are able to more objectively pursue the answers to the questions that the science / art of history is set to answer. And, we can start at the beginning (or as close to ‘the beginning’ as our finite minds will allow). We can clarify some misconceptions and propose some alternative views. We can look at what we know, and what we think we know and we can begin our journey of discovery.
Well then, what are the questions that history must answer? 1.) History must, to the degree possible, tell us where we have been… from where did we come and, how it was that we came to be where we are now. 2.) History, through the accurate overview of both pre-history and recorded history, must provide the student of history (and philosophy) with the tools required for answering the question of what we are, why we are, and, of where we may be going.
Now, that’s a pretty tall order indeed! And, the only place to start is at the beginning…
Let’s look at our genesis… our Alternative Genesis, if you will. (Remember to keep in mind as you read this work that its purpose is not to present the detailed results of research. It is to stir up the curiosity of researchers and hopefully drive those researchers to re-evaluate and re-interpret the current overview of history.) Let’s look at the beginning through the eyes of modern scientific theory as it is interpreted at its simplest level.
In the beginning there was the "absolute potential" for cosmic existence. It was an infinitesimal and absolutely concentrated potential of condensed energy. Its very nature demanded dynamic and explosive ‘change’… and that ‘change’ happened with a bit of a bang!
Science tells us (and rightfully so) that the universe exploded outward in every direction from this central point of what I refer to as ‘cosmic potential’. And it did. The universe expanded outward from that center and eventually came to the point in its expansion that we find evident today. There is both physical astronomical evidence and mathematical theory to support this scenario, much more evidence than the current religious view has to support its misinformed and tenuous version of events. In fact, there may very well be evidence (and I firmly believe there is such evidence) to support an even more astounding and revolutionary addition to this scenario. This evidence appears to indicate that the universe, once it completes its outward expansion, through entropy, will contract once again to that same point of origin! Even more astounding is the evidence (see works on quantum and ‘new’ physics that are widely available through various publishers) that also tends to support the theory that this expansion and contraction of the cosmos is a repetitive cycle of exponentially increasing big bang events. No. I’m not going to prove it to you. The evidence is there for the open-minded researcher to review and interpret. Go find it. Half the joy and wonder comes from the quest for knowledge.
Well then, let’s look for a moment at what science tells us about the beginning of life on earth and how we got to where we are now. This is where things begin to get a bit sticky.
So, from the energy of that initial point of ‘cosmic potential’, through the dynamic action of the big bang we come to the physical universe. A physical universe that is (up to this point in evolution) a manifestation or visible result of that expanding point of ‘energy’. From this, a person can reasonably conclude that all the matter of this cosmos was originally ‘energy’ (at least at the point of expansion). And if taken a step farther, the individual may reasonable assume that the underlying ‘reality’ of matter is its source energy. If you doubt this conclusion… simply review the results of the "Manhattan Project". Now this data, if kept in mind by any given researcher, will provide valuable guidance and assistance in answering those difficult questions that tend to be unjustifiably relegated to the realm of the religious (we’ll go into this in more detail in a later portion of this work).
Now that brings us to the more current portion of that cosmic cycle or event. Our physical world has formed and life begins to develop. How? Once again… even mainstream science has it right… up to a point, that is. The process that caused life to appear on this world was called ‘Evolution’. All living things on this earth to one degree or another are the result of this cosmic process. Is evolution the only factor involved in the nature and characteristics of the living things on this earth? Science would say yes… and, to a small degree they are right… but not quite. One has only to look at the genetic influence that man has exerted in the development of plants (especially in the arena of grain) and the modification, through breeding techniques, regarding domesticated animals. Oh, and did I mention the modern science of genetic engineering which now includes the technology to produce viable clones and the technology to do many other frightening things through the artificial manipulation of the basic code of life? Is this influence the direct result of evolution? No. Not the direct result… however, if modern man is the direct result of natural evolution (and natural evolution alone), then there is a case for, at least, an indirect result. What do I mean "if" modern man (by ‘man’ I infer ‘Mankind’ or Humanity as a whole) is a direct result of natural evolution? Isn’t this true?
So, am I saying that there was some ‘other’ influence involved in producing modern man?
There is as much (or more) evidence indicating that there were influences in our development beyond the influence of natural evolution, than the evidence indicating that we are the result of natural evolution alone. What I am saying, at this point is, that there is a possibility that ‘some form’ of ‘artificial’, unnatural evolutionary catalyst may have been a factor in our current developmental state. Am I a nut? No… (At least not in the technical sense of the word) I am a firm proponent of fair and unbiased research, however. I try to give all data a fair shake… no matter how far outside the bounds of the current paradigm it might fall.
Now when I’m talking about an artificial, external evolutionary influence, am I hinting at ‘God’?
But… now that you brought up the subject of ‘God’ or for that matter the very concept of a ‘God’ or ‘Gods’… you’ve managed to open up a very large and very messy can of worms! First of all, it is my belief that if your looking for ‘God’ in the common use of the term, you are not on the right track. But we’ll discuss all that in a latter part of this work. The very concept of ‘God(s)’ will take many pages to cover, even briefly. But, no, I am not talking about divine influence.
Let’s try to pin this thing down a bit.
Science, in accordance with the current paradigm, would have us believe that our present developmental state as a species is one unbroken and fluid evolutionary vein that can be traced back through time via the fossil record to the common ancestor of all primates… and then some. But, although the evolutionary vein seems fluid and intact it is not completely so. There are some minor holes in the evolutionary path that are rather insignificant and not really worthy of mention, but… there is one very critical problem spot in regard to human evolution. And that problem spot seems to be the lack of a viable and widespread link between Homo erectus and us… the modern human. It’s a (not ‘The’) ‘missing link’… and contrary to what some folks may be saying, this particular link is still… well, …missing. This problem area is not easy to find. The researcher has to dig between all the anthropological speculation and rhetoric and look at the physical evidence alone in order to even see that the problem area exists. No. I’m not going to do your research for you. But, I will give you a hint at the approximate time-period that in which this unusual break (and apparently inexplicable "jump" to modern human status) occurred. Dig into the data (remember… facts…physical evidence, only) available for the period of human development approximately 450,000 years BCE to about 4000 BCE (give or take a couple of thousand years) and you will find it. Also, when you do your research, you must bear in mind that this ‘discrepancy’ is not obvious and this obscurity is for a reason. Your search will not be easy at all. It took me a couple of years to find the data that would satisfy my own curiosity and answer some of my more perplexing questions.
How does one know when they have found the data?
You will know because some of the related "anomalies" will vanish. In other words the anomalies will begin to fit in with what you uncover.
Have you folks been digging for those anomalies?
Okay, assuming something rather inexplicable did happened in our evolutionary development some 452,000 to about 6000 years ago, how does this inexplicable event threaten the paradigm? Well, it doesn’t really threaten the paradigm… it blows it apart (and, no, it does not support the Creationist Stance). But, in order to answer this question at all we need to take a look at another critical problem area of the paradigm… and this particular problem area deals with the rise of human civilization. And folks, no matter what you’ve been taught, the rise of human civilization is the most mysterious aspect of the history of the human species! If anyone tells you differently, they are either ignorant of the facts or simply lying to you.
Hey! Wait a minute! …What about the theory of Creation? Aren’t we going to discuss that?
Well, first of all, "Creation" is NOT a theory. In order to have a genuine ‘theory’ you have to have at least some sort of supporting physical evidence to back it… and there isn’t any. But, yes we will be touching on this subject in a latter p--
Okay, Okay! We know… already! "…In a latter portion of this work".
Jeez. You folks are a tough crowd.
Well, let’s go on…
The important thing to remember (as you prepare yourself for your journey of research regarding the origins of human civilization) is… "No matter which road of history on which you may be traveling, the data along that road (and all the roadways of history) will take you back to (about 3800 BCE, give or take) one place… and that place is Sumer (or more properly, Shumer)". And when you arrive at Sumer… that’s where the mystery only deepens. And once again… you have to really look only at the physical evidence and not the paradigm fitting (twisted) interpretations and explanations of the mainstream historians.
Note: Contrary to what I’ve read in many works regarding ‘esoteric’ or occulted knowledge, neither Ancient India, Assyrian-Babylon, Ancient Egypt nor Ancient China was the ‘source’ of ‘true esoteric knowledge’. If a possible source (not to be confused with its ultimate source) were to be properly identified, it would have to be identified as Sumer.
really amaze you to find out just how many people… educated
people, know very little to absolutely nothing about Sumer. It currently
stands (within the current view of mainstream history) as the oldest (as identified
through physical archaeological evidence) Civilization of
Humanity. Now, right off the bat (if you’re practicing ‘good
research habits’) you should note a little problem
with this stated view… and that is it should be viewed and
stated as "the oldest identified Human
Civilization"… which, of course it is. Its
influence, from language to cosmogony, can be seen in all of the
well known younger grand societies (i.e., Indus Valley, Israel, Egypt
and Ancient Greece… just to name but a few). Yet, it seems
that this strange place gets very little historical attention.
And, believe me, Sumer needs to be the subject
of great attention
And that is exactly why we are preparing to travel there…
with our open-minded reserve in place and the blinders of the
current deified paradigm removed from our eyes.
Oh… and when we arrive, don’t you folks start to think that we’ve reached our goal. There may very well be clues in Sumer that will lead us even further down the path in our search for the source of Human Civilization…
Okay… lets travel on to Sumer.
(An excerpt from "Ki-umun") COPYRIGHT: Mark Brock-Farrington