Could Big Science Be on Trial?

If you thought that important archaeological discoveries were being kept hidden from the public, and that laws intended to preserve the public’s right to know were being routinely violated, you could expect to be sneered at by the science-and-media establishment, but you would, nevertheless, be right. That is the view of highly respected Professor Keith Kintigh of the Arizona State University, School of Human Evolution and Social Change. Kintigh sits on the Board of Directors of the Center for Digital Antiquity,

“Today, nearly all archaeological field work in the U.S.,” he says, “is executed by private firms in response to legal mandates for historic preservation, at a cost of about a billion dollars annually. However, only a minuscule fraction of the data from these projects is made accessible or preserved for future research, despite agencies’ clear legal obligations to do so. Severe loss of these data is not unusual—it’s the norm.”

In a column for The Conversation, an independent, not-for-profit media outlet, featuring important articles by the top authorities in many fields, Kintigh explains that the primary data from many important archaeological investigations is being lost, and the federal agencies that are legally required to protect it, are not doing so.

The loss of such hard-won information about our past, Kintigh would probably attribute to misfeasance, rather than malfeasance, but more disturbing patterns have long been clear to some of us. Over the years, Atlantis Rising has reported on many of these.

Regular columnist Michael Cremo has written about what he calls a knowledge filter, which automatically screens out data, which does not fit the prevailing knowledge paradigm. In his books, Forbidden Archeology and The Hidden History of the Human Race, Cremo cites many rigorous studies documenting evidence that challenges the standard timeline of human development—research that, if it is mentioned at all by the establishment, it is only to be mocked and otherwise disrespected.

Serious researchers on many controversial subjects have seen their work routinely dismissed as ‘pseudoscience’ because it violates the accepted paradigm. Rupert Sheldrake, for example, despite the most rigorous of educations at Cambridge University and years of the most advanced work in his field, finds his research now banished from Wikipedia, and his Ted Talks removed from mainstream circulation, simply because he has produced irrefutable evidence of nonphysical fields on human and animal behavior, thus contradicting the materialistic dogmas of mainstream science.

In the 1950s, the great Russian scientist Immanuel Velikovsky, father of the ‘Catastrophist’ school of natural history, was ostracized and personally vilified by the orthodox academic establishment for questioning the standard model of ancient history. There are many other examples.

Fundamental differences between modern academic practice and the inquisitions of the Middle Ages appear related more to the degree of punishment than to the justice of the charges. Burning at the stake may now be out, but character assassination, it seems, is still in.

 

CAPTION: Scene from an Inquisition (Francisco Goya)

 

By J. Douglas Kenyon