Dating sites norwich norfolk married dating in barnhill illinois
These ghostly images carried with them spiritual, philosophical, and aesthetic implications." Archaeological evidence for earlier contact than promoted by the mainstream science and historical communities includes appearance of new food crops, animals, calendars, religious practices, medical procedures, genetics, etc. D, Professor Emeritus at Brigham Young University, Dept. They are co-authors of the ground-breaking book, was rejected for publication by mainstream presses and university presses alike.The Archives' main focus is on The website's moderators are Carl L. D, Professor Emeritus at the University of Oregon, Dept. The blocking of evidence that does not adhere to mainstream views is a common problem for researchers who are challenging scientific dogma and is Dr.In one way or another, groups of this nature support a premise of the Pleistocene Coalition that mainstream scientific behaviors such as suppression of conflicting data need to be fought, that is, unless we are all content to become puppets of an international belief system presented as science yet which is somehow immune to the standard scientific requirement of testability in real time.under the safety of anonimity via avatar or nicknames.It is likely that many of these scholars will come out publicly when the paradigm changes and the evidence begins to be weighed in an equitable manner"There has to be stated a continuous line showing how ethnocentristic our scientific view is focussed and thereby rejecting our ancestors like the Neandertals as being only another aberration and not at all a part of our ancestral line." -Jrn Greve, PD, MD, neurologist, author "Pre-Symbolic Interaction and the Palaeo-Ecology of Religion."Department of Pediatrics, Neurology (retired), Justus-Liebig-University in Giessen.Often, they have provided dates for artifacts and even human remains specially-tailored to fit the preconceived notion that only modern This website is based on the comprehensive volume by archaeologist, Christopher Hardaker, detailing the entire story of how a whole generation of science readers have been deliberately steered away from data that might confuse them regarding the aggressively-promoted paradigm of no-early-peoples in the Americas.Are you, as an objective thinker, concerned by those attempting to do your thinking for you? Hardaker's page also features updates on an American archaeological site deemed invalid by promoters of the above-mentioned paradigm though one taken seriously by famed anthropologist Louis Leakey. Rather than allowing yourself to be prodded along, take a look at the data and think for yourself.Prior to the Internet, the peer review system in anthropology so effectively blocked conflicting data from publication that the general public had no way of knowing that conflicting data even existed; it believed that mainstream science was giving them a true and balanced interpretation of all known evidence.However, the Internet has changed everything; more people are privy to the fact that dissenting evidence—awareness of which is an absolutely crucial part of critical thinking and objectivity—is being withheld in anthropology while selected evidence is being presented as unchallenged and in the context of what is increasingly being recognized as a belief system or worldview.
What matters, and what skeptics should pay attention to, is that these groups have mounting empirical reasons to doubt the veracity and objectivity of what is presented to them as fact by mainstream science.In short, if we take you on as a client, we guarantee you will go out on dates!