Monday, March 2, 2015

The Crazy Man of Bosnia: A Bosnian Native Has Spent 10 Years Trying to Fool the International Scientific Community into Believing there Are Ancient Pyramids in Europe - Why?

There's a crazy man in Bosnia!! Can someone please institutionalize him before he does any more harm?
Dr. Semir Osmanagich
This fantasy-concocting man has attempted to fool millions of tourists into bringing tourist dollars to his war-torn country by claiming that there are ancient pyramids in Bosnia.

Fortunately, this deranged individual has succeeded in bringing only 450,000 tourists (not millions) to Visoko in the ten years since he boasted to have discovered ancient pyramids there in April 2005.

Perhaps you've heard of this madman: the man who "discovered pyramids" in the small town of Visoko, Bosnia, only a short distance from Zenica -- the town of his birth -- this Bosnian native who loves his country so much he has been willing to lie to an international audience for ten years and to try to fool a perspicacious international scientific community into believing that there are ancient pyramids in Europe . . .

Yes, I'm talking about Dr. Semir Osmanagich, the Crazy Man of Bosnia.

Look at how one man has distorted a country's entire real estate market. Here's an interview with Amir Hota, owner of Cicko Nekretnine (an agency in Bosnia and Herzegovina that deals with property transactions):

"'There is a big interest among foreign citizens and governments to buy land near Visoko' . . . explained Hota. 'Visoko has become a tourist center due to the pyramids, so foreigners are interested in buying land, houses in Visoko and in the areas around it . . .'"

Madness!!

My friends, if you don't believe that Dr. Osmanagich is crazy, perhaps you'll believe the European Association of Archaeologists. 

Anthony Harding
former president of the EAA
This venerable organization, full of trustworthy academics, signed a declaration on December 11, 2006 to have Dr. Osmanagich's archaeological excavations in Visoko stopped, declaring:

"We, the undersigned professional archaeologists from all parts of Europe, wish to protest strongly at the continuing support by the Bosnian authorities for the so-called “pyramid” project being conducted on hills at and near Visoko. This scheme is a cruel hoax on an unsuspecting public and has no place in the world of genuine science."

My friends, if a notable organization like the European Association of Archaeologists, whose membership extends into the previous century -- yes, all the way back to 1994 -- with 11,000 members from 60 countries -- if this honorable Association says that Semir Osmanagich is off his archaeological rocker, how much more evidence does any of us need? Clearly, this man is crazy. Right?

Well, oddly, there are some questions. And more than questions. The strange facts of the matter are these.

It turns out that the man who wrote this libelous Declaration, Anthony Harding, then President of the European Association of Archaeologists, spent 15 minutes looking at the geology of Visoko before holding a press conference offering his unequivocal conclusion that there are no pyramids in Bosnia.

What did Harding's scientific team consist of for that 15-minute local survey? Geologists? Archaeologists? Anthropologists? No. A secretary and an administrator.

Hmm. Could it be that something is amiss in Archaeology Land?

The below is excerpted from an article titled, "The Mysterious Anti-Scientific Agenda of Robert Schoch: Part 1 - The Bosnian Pyramid Complex":

Interestingly, before signing the above Declaration, none of the archaeologists except for Harding visited the site.

Concerning his visit to the site, Anthony Harding himself stated that 1) he did not contact the archaeological team before his arrival, 2) he did not ask anyone on the Foundation's archaeological team to be shown the relevant digs and/or artifacts, and 3) he did not meet with anyone who could have shown him the relevant digs and/or artifacts.

To this date, Harding has provided no photographic evidence to back up his claim that he visited the site, and Harding has provided no photos or data to support his public conclusion on the pyramids hypothesis in Bosnia, a conclusion which, very oddly, he asks us to believe is "scientific."  . . .

In the January/February 2007 issue of British Archaeology, a publication of the educational charity called The Council for British Archaeology, Professor Harding amplified his detraction in "The great Bosnian pyramid scheme," stating that any claims of pyramids in Bosnia "belonged to a fantasy world" and adding that "a manned landing on the (non-) planet Pluto in the next 20 years is more likely" than ancient pyramids in Bosnia.

Harding admits that he drew his negative conclusion about ancient pyramids in Bosnia the first time he read about Dr. Osmanagich's archaeological project. It's true: Harding admits, in print, in his own article, that he dismissed the idea of ancient pyramids in Bosnia before looking at any data, before weighing any new evidence whatsoever on the Bosnian pyramids hypothesis. This is a startling admission for a scientist to make. Shocking.

We also know, without question, that Harding's visit to Visoko was meant solely to forestall criticism that he hadn't visited the project. We know this without question because he states it himself in his own article. Anthony Harding writes:

"In the days following my letter [to the London Times], I was bombarded with requests for information. As a result, I decided that I would take advantage of a visit to Zadar, Croatia, in early June to drive on to Sarajevo to discuss the situation with professional colleagues there.  On our way down, Predrag Novakovic (EAA secretary), Sylvie Kvetinová (administrator) and I called in at the hill of Visocica, on the edge of the town of Visoko, and looked at the excavation trenches that had been opened. We did this solely in order to avoid the charge, already laid at our door, that we had condemned the project without seeing it for ourselves. [Bolding mine.] As we expected, we saw areas of natural stone (a breccia), with fissures and cracks; but no sign of anything that looked like archaeology. The cracking in the rock was similar to many exposures we had seen in the past on natural rock formations, and did not look anything like a human construction. Geologists who have seen the site have said the same; the hill is similar in formation to many others in the Sarajevo-Zenica mining basin."

Notice that Harding doesn't name these "trenches" that he tells us he has studied with his two colleagues (a secretary and an administrator – hey, that's better than nothing). How could he tell us the names of the trenches, when he never met with, or spoke with, the archaeologist who named them? And because he never told us the names of these trenches, scientists cannot be sure to which trenches he is referring. This is the opposite of science, which leaves a trail as plain as day.

Harding's admission of conclusion before study is absolutely shocking. And it leads us to wonder if he was able, in fact, to "study" any archaeological evidence at all in Visoko. Can a person study something about which he has already made a conclusion?

Imagine the hubris of a man who believes that his position as president of the European Association of Archaeologists obviates him from weighing evidence in making a scientific conclusion. Imagine what a man must think of himself to believe that his opinion should be taken as scientific conclusion and scientific fact. You have just imagined Anthony Harding. This is a man whom Robert Schoch, anti-science to his core, might idolize.

Oddly, Harding is still around. He is no longer president of the E.A.A., but he is still a professor of archaeology, influencing students year after year. Professor Harding's continuing belief (confirmed Friday, January 4, 2013 by his email response to my email query) from the pedestal of his academic position, is that there are no ancient pyramids in Bosnia. 

Can scientists have differing opinions about the Bosnian pyramids? Of course they can. Scientists are entitled to their opinions about anything and everything under the sun.

But science is a harsh mistress. She makes heavy and specific demands. None of the seven archaeologists listed above, including Anthony Harding, have complied with a single one of the many rigorous demands of science in the case of the Bosnian pyramids hypothesis. Not a single one of these scientists ever properly visited any of the Foundation's excavation sites. What does "properly visited" mean? It means "visited the sites with an open mind" and with an intent to gather and critique data.

What, then, are the views of these seven archaeological professionals, in early January of 2013, on the subject of ancient pyramids in Bosnia? What do these seven scientists have to say six years after trying very, very hard to take down an archaeological project that would in the end brilliantly survive their attacks and forever change human history?

From Anthony Harding and his six Declaration-signing colleagues, we have the following replies to my January 3, 2013 email request for a quote on the subject of pyramids in Bosnia. (Please note that none of the replies below are quotes but simply brief summaries of respondents' replies.)

1. Anthony Harding - Replied on January 4, 2013 to say that his views on the subject of pyramids in Bosnia have not changed and that he declines to be quoted in this article.

2. Romuald Schild - Replied on January 4, 2013 to say he has not followed the archaeological work on the Bosnian pyramids.

3. Jean-Paul Demoule - Replied on January 9, 2013 to give me the text of his 2007 article, "Les pyramides bosniaques" (Encyclopaedia Universalis, pp. 298-299). . . . He also replied to my further inquiry and gave me permission to quote his January 10, 2013 views on ancient pyramids in Bosnia.

Demoule writes on January 10, 2013: "The [Archaeological Park] excavations have only found geological features and mining tunnels from the Middle Age. It is clear that it was never any prehistoric 'pyramid' in Visoko. [Bolding mine.] Bosnian prehistory is perfectly known as are known the paleolithic societies there 15.000 years ago. The expertise of the European Association of Archaeologists and of all the Bosnian professional archaeologists was perfectly clear and unanimous. The only interesting point in Visoko is the invention of a new national myth based on natural curiosities. The reason for my interest on this problem is my more general interest about the connexion and interrelations between archaeology and the actual societies, and the role, use and abuse of archaeology in national identities. Sincerely Jean-Paul Demoule" 

4. Willem Willems - Has not replied.

5. Hermann Parzinger - Has not replied.

6. Vassil Nikolov - Has not replied.

7. Mike Heyworth - Has not replied.

Thus the majority – five out of seven – of the men who sought to shut down the Archaeological Park's work in Bosnia in 2006 have nothing to say on the subject six years and one month later. No shouts of victory, no satisfying list of concrete evidence that the idea of ancient pyramids in Bosnia was nothing more than myth, no scientific consensus that the idea of ancient pyramids in Bosnia was always just a fantasy. Nothing. Only silence.

From the other two, Harding and Demoule, we have categorical denials of pyramids in Bosnia, 1) without evidence and 2) without citation.

These seven men, remember, are the men who were so certain that there were no pyramids in Bosnia that they were willing to advise, in fact implore, Bosnian state and local governmental agencies to halt financial and promotional support for the Archaeological Park nonprofit foundation.

Ignoring Anthony Harding's excoriating and defaming Declaration, 450,000 tourists have visited the Bosnian Pyramid Complex since Dr. Osmanagich discovered the ancient complex in April 2005.








Here is a short excerpt about tourist visits, from a January 2015 interview with Dr. Osmanagich titled, "Archaeology by the Numbers":

"Jock Doubleday: Two Wikipedia pages claim that the Bosnian pyramids are 'natural hills,' and Yale geologist Dr. Robert Schoch agrees. Have any of the estimated 450,000 tourists who have visited the Foundation's archaeological sites in the Bosnian Pyramid Complex asked for their money back, saying that these archaeological sites are not pyramids but simply natural hills?

"Dr. Osmanagić: I haven’t heard of cases of visitors asking for their money back. However, I’ve heard so many times people congratulating us, supporting us, and wishing all the best in our project. They know that something history-changing is hidden here in the heart of Bosnia."

So, none of the tourists visiting the Bosnian Pyramid Complex have asked for their money back in 10 years, yet Wikipedia and Yale geologist Robert Schoch continue to claim that only "natural hills" exist in Visoko? Hmm.

Bizarrely, the most prestigious archaeological publication in the world, Archaeology magazine, has joined Wikipedia and Robert Schoch in their displeasure with the Bosnian Pyramids hypothesis. The magazine's nine-year moratorium on Bosnian archaeology is looked on a bit oddly by Bosnian (and other) archaeologists. One wonders when this prestigious academic magazine, which states that it "offers compelling narratives about the human past from every corner of the globe," will get around to Bosnia. Feel free to drop the magazine's Editor in Chief, Claudia Valentino, a line at: cvalentino at archaeology dot org with any questions you might have. And be sure to mention my article, "Letter to the Editor of 'Archaeology Magazine (October 16, 2011).'"

The true facts about Dr. Semir Osmanagich:


Dr. Osmanagich and his wife Sabina
after a presentation in the Czech Republic, 2014
First, Semir's last name is spelled Osmanagić, but it has been Americanized, phonetically, to "Osmanagich." If you want to pronounce his name correctly, the emphasis is on the first, not the second, syllable of "Semir." And the first three syllables of "Osmanagich" are equally stressed, and the "gich" dips down. I occasionally get it right, and almost nobody else (no other foreigner, I mean) seems to. I have no idea if this bothers him, but he's never mentioned it, or corrected anyone, in my presence. There's a good chance that I have a misplaced optimism for my own pronunciation of his name, so, if he ever does correct someone, it might be me.

Second, Dr. Sci. Semir Osmanagich is "Director of the Center for Archaeology at American University in Sarajevo,[4] author of ten books on ancient civilizations,[5] youngest foreign member[6] of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences,[7] and U.S. Congressional Award-winning entrepreneur.[8]"

You've noted the Wikipedia notation in the above paragraph -- but don't get too excited. This article is still in draft form here, having been rejected twice by Wikipedia. The war over humanity's past is presently being waged in a conversation with Wiki editors on that page. Feel free to breeze over there and have a look.

Third, Dr. Semir Osmanagich is the discoverer of the Bosnian Pyramid Complex in Visoko, Bosnia. He discovered the Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun and the Bosnian Pyramid of the Moon (which he named) in April 2005, and then he discovered 8 additional structures over the coming months and years.  There's a lot more to that story, but we'll leave it there for now.

Fourth, Semir is a scientist. One of the least crazy men I know, Dr. Osmanagich has been accused by the scientific orthodoxy of being a lunatic trying to get tourists to come to his beloved and beleaguered country of Bosnia by hoaxing the world into believing that ancient pyramids exist there. In fact, Dr. Osmanagich is a scientist without peer, in my opinion, a truly open and objective and knowledgeable man whose mind never runs afoul of the facts for which he seems to have an encyclopedic memory. 

His equanimity is unparalleled. If you don't know what equanimity means, that's okay -- I went to public school, too, and I had to look it up to make sure I was using the right word. It means "mental or emotional stability or composure, especially under tension or strain; calmness; equilibrium." Dr. Osmanagich has the unique ability to listen, to contemplate, and to decide, although he has been under siege by the scientific orthodoxy for ten years. His mind is open to science and has not been blocked or abraded by years of ad hominem (character) attacks by libelous and slanderous defamers like Robert Milton Schoch.

He is also one of the kindest men I know, and I've met a lot of good men in my journeys to Central and South America, Poland, the Czech Republic, France, and Bosnia.

Let's let Semir (Se'-mir, not Se-mir') have the last word:

"Ladies and gentlemen, the most conservative and dogmatic science is history. What they've been telling us about the origins of man, civilizations, and the pyramids is wrong. The 21st century is the time for the scientific paradigm to be changed. We hope that there will be no more elite science and no more selection of the information."
And below, Dr. Osmanagich proposes a new kind of science, a science of openness of information (gasp!) -- a science starkly juxtaposed to the elite science of the archaeological orthodoxy housed in prestigious universities and generating ego-driven projects and publications across the globe -- an open-source science that brings people from all disciplines together in the excitement of discovery:

"The Bosnian Pyramid Project is also a platform where scientists from different scientific disciplines meet. And we want to encourage exchange of the ideas, research, investigations, and open-minded theory. And I know that many other projects are very closed to such openness and exchange of information between the scientists. We are not like that. Science is about knowledge, sharing the knowledge, staying open. Because the knowledge belongs to all of us."
- Dr. Semir Osmanagich, July 30, 2014
"Semir Osmanagić explains Archaeological Park Foundation's open information policy, July 30, 2014"

Dr. Semir Osmanagich. Crazy like a fox.




Resources:

BosnianPyramids Youtube Channel playlist: "Scientific Videos 2014" (19 videos shot in 2014 officially for the Archaeological Park: Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun Foundation)

BosnianPyramids Youtube Channel playlist: "Scientific Videos Archive (2005 to 2013)" (46 videos shot between 2005 and 2013, inclusive)

Archaeological Park
(60+ videos shot beginning in June 2014 )

"How Many Times Has Dr. Robert Schoch Been Wrong?" by Dr. Semir Osmanagich

The ten ancient structures so far discovered by Dr. Osmanagich in the Bosnian Valley of the Pyramids are "the Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun, the Bosnian Pyramid of the Moon, the Bosnian Pyramid of Love, the Bosnian Pyramid of the Dragon, the Temple of Mother Earth, Vratnica Tumulus, Dolovi Tumulus, Ginje Tumulus, KTK Tunnel, and Ravne Tunnel Labyrinth."
Official site of Dr.sci Sam Semir Osmanagich, PhD.

Daily updates on the Bosnian Pyramid Commplex



Tuesday, March 26, 2013

Witchcraft Cartography and Clairvoyant Archaeology


A Review of Robert M. Schoch's 
"Voices of the Rocks: A Scientist Looks at Catastrophes and Ancient Civilizations" (1999)

by Jock Doubleday
March 26, 2013

  


THERE IS SO MUCH NONSENSE in Robert M. Schoch's book, Voices of the Rocks: A Scientist Looks at Catastrophes and Ancient Civilizations, that it's hard to keep up with it.

Almost every page of the book boasts unsubstantiated, diversionary, reductionistic, and simply nonsensical statements in the guise of academic discourse.

The subtitle of the book, "A Scientist Looks at Catastrophes and Ancient Civilizations," is a misnomer. There is no scientist at the helm of this book but something strange and spooky.
Robert Milton Schoch
 Associate Professor of Natural Sciences
at the College of General Studies,
a two-year non-degree-granting unit
of Boston University

Robert Schoch's Voices of the Rocks, written by a Yale PhD in geology and geophysics, presents itself as a book of plain science, by which the author takes us on a journey of reasonable exploration. But in fact it is a book of witchcraft science, by which the author uses jargon word incantations to cast a smoky spell over his readers.

Fortunately, this spell can be broken with simple research and a skoch of common sense.


The Piri Reis Map
 
Let's look briefly at Schoch's bizarre treatment of the Piri Reis map in Chapter 4, "Looking for the Lost Cities":


Piri Reis map, 1513 (the only surviving fragment)

For reasons unknown, Schoch spends three pages trying to debunk the undebunkable Piri Reis map, or, more accurately, trying to debunk the small fragment of Reis's map that is the only fragment to have survived into modern times. Schoch uses his trademark method of "investigation by insinuation," or "science by surmise," also known as the Lazy Man's Science, finally concluding:

"The Piri Reis map contains no information of indisputably ancient origin, and the supposed coast of Antarctica could well be the lower reach of South America instead."

There is no truth to be found in Schoch's two statements above. Let's look at Schoch's statements one by one.

First, the Piri Reis map is in fact of indisputably ancient origin, because Piri Reis could not otherwise have drawn it in 1513 AD (Islamic year 919 AH).

Turkish Admiral Piri Reis

Reis states on the map itself that the map is based on 20 source maps: eight from the 4th century BC, six contemporary with Piri Reis, and six for which Reis gives no date.


How do we know for certain that Reis used ancient source maps? Because he depicted part of the coastline of Antarctica, the entire continent of which, in Piri Reis's time, had not been visible for at least 4,500 years. How could Reis have known what the coastline looked like? The answer is that he could not have known, unless he had access to maps created, at minimum, 4,500 years earlier, when Antarctica was at least to some extent ice free.

Many of the source maps Reis used must themselves have been based on even more ancient maps. Because accurate maps were so important to seafaring peoples, maps were constantly being compared, copied, and improved. An accurate map in ancient times was without any doubt whatsoever the most precious item onboard a seagoing ship.

Second, Schoch concludes that Reis's depiction of Antarctica may not be Antarctica at all but in fact simply the lower reaches of South America, a conclusion that only a nonscientist could make. 

The sole evidence that Schoch gives for his opinion is that the lower portion of South America curves east on the map. Schoch attributes the curving of South America's tip to Reis running out of room on his gazelle-skin parchment. Mimicking the CIA's Wikipedia, which states that "the 'extra' landmass is simply the South American coast . . . bent round to fit the parchment," Schoch states that "the supposed coast of Antarctica could well be the lower reach of South America." 

To make the statement above, Robert Schoch, the lazy man's scientist, had to believe the following: Piri Reis, a man competent enough to navigate the ancient seas, was dim-witted enough to start a three-year map project on a piece of material too small for the map. 

Not only did the project take Reis three years to complete, it was a project that included translating from different map scales and projections, a phenomenally challenging task that very few people on earth could perform successfully today.

Here Schoch commits one of the Seven Sins of the Scientific Orthodoxy, namely the Sin of Self-Projection (Sin #2): Unconsciously projecting one's flaws (egotism, small-mindedness, laziness) onto the peoples of the past. Robert Schoch might be too lazy to obtain the right materials for his projects (having read Voices of the Rocks, we know that he is), but ancient mariners, whose lives depended on their energetic competence, could have had no such weakness.

In fact, as simple research reveals, the reason the lower part of South America is curved to the east on the left-hand lower corner of the map, and the reason that the continent of Antarctica looks as if it might be South America's extended tip at the bottom center of the map, is that Piri Reis used an azimuthal equidistant projection, a sophisticated cartographic method that gives more accurate relative continent sizes than the modern standard of cylindrical projection, which unnaturally enlarges polar-region continents. 


Below is a letter from the U.S. Air Force to Charles Hapgood, a college professor and amateur scientist who, in the 1950s, was just beginning his journey into the ocean of ancient history, a journey that would lead him to write the classic text, Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings, which demonstrated that ancient peoples had mapped the earth long before what people call the "ancient" Egyptians had come onto the scene. 


Hapgood asked the USAF to examine the Piri Reis map, and the Air Force's reply is below:


From the date of Lt. Colonel Harold Z. Ohlmeyer's letter, we know that, 39 years before the publication of Schoch's Voices of the Rocks, there was solid evidence that the Piri Reis map accurately depicted the coastline of Antarctica.


Further, at a
1997 lecture at Leeds University, two years before the publication of Schoch's Voices of the Rocks, Graham Hancock revealed that Piri Reis's depiction of Antarctica is corroborated by the depiction of Antarctica on maps drawn by both Mercator and Oronteus Finaeus, two well-known and highly accurate 16th century cartographers. 

The Sin of Superficiality (Sin #4) is: Reaching scientific conclusions without properly engaging available scientific data. Robert Schoch, stirring ingredients into the witches' brew of his 1999 book, ignored the hard-won evidence of solid scientific research and instead gave his readers shoulder-shrugging speculation, superficial surmise, and cackling belief.

The Yonaguni Monument


Illustrated model of the Yonaguni Monument



In Schoch's treatment of the Yonaguni Monument, our strange, lanky, bent, brew-stirring Yale graduate lopes deeper into Wonderland, beginning with
his trademark high-five to himself:

"When, not long after my work on the Sphinx, I received an opportunity to explore one of the most recently discovered sites pointing to the possibility of this vanished and unknown civilization, I jumped at the chance to have a scientific look at it myself."

(It must be noted here that Schoch performed no original work on the Great Sphinx but, at the behest of John Anthony West, slapped his Yale degree across Rene A. Schwaller de Lubicz's much earlier groundbreaking work. The prestige of Schoch's university degree allowed West to gain mainstream credence for the ancient Sphinx theory and allowed Schoch to enter pop culture as a rising archaeostar. Now Schoch's mind-numbing, science-free babble appears in tens of thousands of discussions worldwide on a significant array of subjects.)

Schoch continues:

"I got wind of Yonaguni through John Anthony West, who himself heard about it from Shun Daichi, a translator who has worked with both West and Graham Hancock. . . . Hancock and [his wife Santha] Faiia made several dives to the monument [***actually hundreds of dives were made by Hancock***], whose regularity convinced them it was indeed the work of humans. Hancock, however, is no geologist, and he suggested to [wealthy businessman Yasuo] Watanabe that he bring John Anthony West and me over for a closer examination."


(Please note Schoch's phrasing in "Hancock, however, is no geologist," which gives the reader the impression that Hancock doesn't know mud from sand and at the same time  gives the reader the impression that Schoch's expertise in geological matters is unquestioned and unquestionable. This kind of egotistical rhetoric is missing from real scientists' publications, as you will discover if you embark on research into any subject that science investigates.)

Schoch continues:

"Superficially the monument has the appearance of a platform or part of a step pyramid . . ."


The Yonaguni Monument. Photo by Santha Faiia.

Marine biota covering the Yonaguni Monument.
Photo by Danielle Caceres-Bricheno.
"[T]he asymmetrical monument has uneven stone steps, ranging in height from a foot and a half to several feet, on its southern face. It looks like a great staircase up which only a giant could stride. The surfaces have a regular smooth surface, like dressed stone.

"In all, I made six dives on the Yonaguni Monument. Despite my initial shock, the closer I looked at the monument, the less convinced I was that [professor Masaaki] Kimura was right about the structure's human aspect.  Much of the regularity of the surface was due not to a tooled smoothness of the rock but to a thick, even coating of algae, corals, sponges, and similar organisms."

(But Schoch is no marine biologist! How could he possibly know about these mysterious things called algae, corals, sponges, and similar organisms? Can't only marine biologists know about marine biota, in the same way that only geologists can know about mudstone, sandstone, granite, etc.?)

Marine biota covering the Yonaguni Monument. Photo by Danielle Caceres-Bricheno.

Marine biota covering the Yonaguni Monument. Photo by Leanne and Rik Brezina.

Marine biota covering the Yonaguni Monument. Screen-grab of video image by Brett Terpstra.

Marine biota covering the Yonaguni Monument.

Looking at the photos above of the Yonaguni Monument, do we (who are no marine biologists but who do have eyes) find that marine biota make the surfaces of the monument look more smooth or less smooth?

Schoch drones on:

"In a number of spots I scraped the coating away, both to determine what kind of stone lay beneath and to look for tool scars or quarry marks. I found none."

If Schoch were making an argument, one could rebut it, but there's nothing of substance here. A civilization capable of fashioning the Yonaguni Monument, with its incredibly smooth and precisely angled surfaces, would have no reason to leave tool or quarry marks, and certainly not marks that could be found in a few minutes with a scraping tool wielded clumsily underwater in one of the strongest currents of any dive site in the world. That Schoch cites his senseless scraping as evidence of anything is evidence that he has wandered from Wonderland to a place even more strange: Wonderland 2: The Halls of Insanity.

To fill the pages of the book that he hopes to sell, Schoch has to write something, of course. And because his agenda is, for reasons unknown, to dismiss the intelligent design of the Yonaguni Monument, he has to come up with words to string along in sentences. Those were some.

Our clairvoyant archaeologist continues with word-stringing:

"Even more telling [?], I couldn't find any evidence that Yonaguni consisted of separate pieces of stone. Stone blocks carved, set in place, and arranged in an order would clearly indicate a human-made structure.  Rather, the monument is essentially a single piece of solid, "living" bedrock . . ."

This is an extremely good example of what is known as a "straw man argument." To make a straw man argument, you 1) create an easy-to-rebut argument that your opponent did not make, 2) pretend your opponent has made that argument, and 3) rebut that argument, claiming victory.

Schoch pretends that someone, anyone, ever said that the Yonaguni Monument is, or should be, separate blocks of carved stone. The only way Schoch's evidence could be "more telling" is that, since nothing had been told, this evidence is more of nothing.

Precisely parallel stand-alone stone blocks
at the Yonaguni Monument.
Of course, there are in fact blocks of carved stone associated with the monument, huge blocks whose placement and shape suggests a highly technologically advanced culture. Which is why Schoch had to say "essentially a single piece" of bedrock, because he knew that many other stand-alone structures comprise the monument, though as a practitioners of the lazy man's archaeology, he makes no mention of them.

Let's see how much more nothing Schoch can give us. You'll be surprised.

"The horizontal terraces aren't really horizontal, and the steps are not cut at precisely 90 degrees. A long channel about two feet wide, which looks as if it had been excised by some giant stone-cutting tool, proves to have a ragged, unworked bottom and to disappear into the bedrock as two parallel natural fault lines."


Horizontal terrace pool on top of the Yonaguni Monument.

When Schoch states, "The horizontal terraces aren't really horizontal," he lies in two ways. First, he sets up another straw man argument, pretending that anyone ever stated as evidence for the monument's artificial nature that there are perfectly horizontal surfaces on the monument. Second, his bold statement of fact lacks original data to back it up: he doesn't give us his own measurement data showing the terraces' true angle(s). Thus, we can only conjecture that he's guessing: he didn't measure anything, and thus we must conclude that he doesn't really know if there are perfectly horizontal surfaces on the Yonaguni Monument. Guessing-and-proclamation is science, according to Robert Schoch, geologist and geophysicist from Yale.

For a detailed response to Schoch's claim that "the steps are not cut at precisely 90 degrees," please see my February 19, 2013 article, "The Mysterious Anti-Scientific Agenda of Robert Schoch: Part 2 - The Yonaguni Monument  与那国記念碑."

 Trench (10 meters, or approximately 33 feet, long) near the
Yonaguni Monument.
Schoch's "treatment" (conscious dismissal) of the long-run trench at Yonaguni is similarly corrupted by straw man arguments. Schoch claims 1) that anyone ever said that this obviously human-made trench had a perfectly flat floor (in fact, it's stepped, like the rest of the monument) and 2) that anyone ever said that the trench did not follow two natural fault lines in the sandstone. In fact, it would have made sense for the ancients to take advantage of these two parallel fault lines in creating the trench, and one can imagine that these fault lines were indeed the inspiration for the trench. Schoch makes no attempt whatsoever to address the mirror oblique angles that comprise the sides of the trench, nor does he address the regular smoothness of the trench's sides. Why does he leave out these crucial features? No one but Schoch knows.

End of the trench.

Beginning of the trench.

Beginning of the trench.

Beginning of the trench.

Steps near the end of the trench.

Beginning of the trench.

Beginning of the trench.

Looking at the photos above, do you find that the trench looks as if it were naturally created? If you do, you may want to compare the photos above to a photo of a trench that was naturally created (below).

Naturally created trench near the Yonaguni Monument.

Schoch concludes his "treatment" (conscious dismissal) of the Yonaguni Monument with a foray into elementary geology, telling us that he discovered, by taking rock samples, something that everyone already knew: that the monument was composed of sandstone and mudstone "of the type we geologists call the Lower Miocene Yaeyama Group." 

He can't help condescending to his readers; we're not "we geologists." His arrogance tells us everything we need to know about Robert Schoch. But let's watch him drive the last nail into his own coffin.

"Rocks of this type contain numerous, well-defined, parallel bedding planes that allow easy separation of the layers, and they are crisscrossed by many joints and fractures running parallel to one another and vertical to the bedding planes. . . . The more I looked at the highly regular yet completely natural weathering of these sandstones, the more I became convinced that the steplike and terracelike features of the underwater monument resulted from natural processes working on the stone, not from the activity of humans long ago. With its both vertical and horizontal fractures and joints, the stone was like a huge, many-tiered wedding cake cut into pieces and ready to serve. Subjected to thousands of years of surf, tides, typhoons, and storms, the rock had broken off in great square and rectangular chunks that left the visual impression of steps, plazas, and platforms."

Schoch never mentions the obvious flaw in his argument, committing Sin #1 of the Seven Deadly Sins of the Scientific Orthodoxy: The Sin of Omission (Consciously omitting key information that might undermine one's position). He doesn't mention that sandstone does not break smoothly or regularly on vertical planes. To achieve a smooth, regular vertical sandstone surface, one must in fact intelligently fashion it.

Schoch performs two egregious acts right in front of our faces, hoping we won't notice. He 1) proceeds unscientifically but 2) uses just enough science to suggest that his nonscience is scientific.

It's quite a magic act, if you step back from it. Schoch is a master practitioner of words without substance, smoke and mirrors, what I call Clairvoyant Archaeology, aka the Lazy Man's Science.

In Schoch's Hall of nonRecords, anything goes: even saying the opposite of what one has just said, which is what he does in the next few pages of his subchapter, "Yonaguni: The "Lost City" of Japan."

Schoch backtracks, indeed swivels fully, saying that, "the ancient inhabitants of the island may have partially reshaped or enhanced a natural structure to give it the form they wished, either as a structure on its own or as the foundation of a timber, mud, or stone building that has since been destroyed. It is also possible that the monument served as a quarry from which blocks were cut, following the natural bedding, joint, and fracture planes of the rock, then removed to construct buildings that are now long gone."

Having just authoritatively informed us a page before that "the steplike and terracelike features of the underwater monument resulted from natural processes working on the stone, not from the activity of humans long ago," Schoch does a dizzying about-face and says that it's equally possible that it wasn't natural forces at all.

And of course he is correct. Here's what a truly natural, long-weathered sandstone structure looks like:

Natural sandstone structure on the coast of Yonaguni Island.
Photo by Cecelia and Gary Hagland from above the submerged Yonaguni Monument.

For this reason, and for other reasons, we know that the Yonaguni Monument, also a sandstone structure, has been fashioned by intelligent hands.

Schoch ends with the only scientific argument he is kind enough to make in this subchapter, a very good scientific argument indeed, and one that is fully opposed to his main argument.

He notes, quite rightly, that the Yonaguni Monument is set on the Tropic of Cancer as it appeared approximately 10,000 years ago, when it is posited that the monument was created (before the post-ice age sea-level rise that submerged it).

Whenever Schoch presents science, it is virtually always someone else's idea, though Schoch invariably presents it as his own. Graham Hancock was the originator of the idea that the Tropic of Cancer, which moves over time, would have lined up with the Yonaguni Monument at a time in the past when the monument was not submerged and could have been fashioned. Schoch stole this idea outright. He gave Hancock no credit whatsoever. Anyone reading Schoch's book would think that Schoch came up with the idea himself. This plagiarism is a documented fact (documented in Schoch's own book) and is truly shocking and scandalous.

Real scientists give credit where credit is due. The lineage of ideas must be able to be traced for science to work properly. Schoch arrogantly breaks this line, leaving his readers to reconstruct it if they can.

Science in Schoch Land, as I have exhaustively and conclusively demonstrated in my two articles on 1) Schoch's views on the Bosnian pyramids and 2) Schoch's views on the Yonaguni Monument, is akin to the science of a man on a cell phone taking a 15-minute stroll through a museum. At the end of it, he doesn't know much, and all he can impart to others is a vague sense of having been there.

It is impossible to respond to the profound level of obfuscation, misdirection, scientific fraud, and full-on nonsense that Schoch presents us with in this book. So I'll leave it to you to find the book at a library as I did and draw your own conclusions.

* * *