Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
The Truth hurts

[Merged] The Kariong Glyphs

318 posts in this topic

I couldn't give a damn what your local State Cabinet has to say on the matter. Neither you nor they speak for Egypt. Show me a professional citation by an ACTUAL Egyptologist of the existance of either Nefer-Djeseb or Nefer-Ti-Ru. Quite frankly, put up or shut up.

cormac

I for one cannot be 100% certain that a person named Nefer-Djeser never existed in ancient Egypt. The root nfr was such a common part of both men's and women's names and of course an even more common part of countless words in ancient Egyptian, that one is never surprised by an ancient Egyptian named Something-Nefer or Nefer-Something. Or, like Nefertiti, who went overboard in her full name as Neferneferuaten Neferiti (nfrnfrwitn-nfrtiyti). It's the "Djeseb" part that comes up short. It certainly sounds ancient Egyptian but I for one cannot find attestation for it as either a name or a word.

In his first post Artemis (Steve) found a web page mentioning a woman named Nefertiru, described as a daughter of Tuthmosis III who died young and was memorialized in his tomb in the Valley of the Kings. In his book on the royal families Dodson mentions a Nefertiry B as a daughter of Tuthmosis III who is depicted on a pillar in his tomb, KV34 (2004: 140). This would be the same princess, of course. The web page merely represents her name somewhat incorrectly. Whatever the case may be, Tuthmosis III lived a thousand years after Khufu, so of course there is no connection. LOL I just like to drone on and draw things out.

But you used Dodson's book, too, cormac, to clarify that no prince named Nefer-Djeseb or Nefer-Ti-Ru is known for Khufu. You listed the known sons of Khufu back in Post 23 on this page, so interested parties can refer to your post for the correct information on this matter. I have to wonder if Hans-Dieter is even aware of Dodson's book on the royal families.

And you're absolutely correct that this business with the Cabinet is irrelevant. As I noted in my previous post, two real Egyptologists have stated that the Kariong glyphs are a hoax. Anyone familiar with Egyptian hieroglyphs knows they are a hoax. In the end that matters more than the opinion of politicians, whatever their findings might be. Rex Gilroy, the Australian named Ray Johnson, Daniel Collins, and Hans-Dieter are not Egyptologists and have no real-world certification or training in the field, so in the end all of their preaching means nothing more than the opinion of politicians, whatever their findings might be. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem to be mentally ill Hans ........

For the third ( fourth ? ) and FINAL time I did not write the Encyclopedia of Dubious Archaeology it was written by K. Feder who is well known , I challenge you to email him and verify for yourself who wrote the book and the entry on the glyphs , because I am done trying to get it into your thick head that I only supplied the photo of the glyphs for the entry and yes my name does appear in small text under the photo as a credit.

If I was on my other computer I could show you a copy of the email exchange between Ken and I where he asks for permission to use my photos , but honestly I can't be bothered.

...

You've already proved your case more than sufficiently, Artemis. Good grief, you even provided at least two different links to the book, so it's rather simple for anyone to see who wrote the book.

But my question is, what does it matter? Am I missing something here? The important thing is that the glyphs have been published as a hoax, and it's on record, so why all this fuss over the author?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

And note, not a minister of religion,who deals in fiction; but a Minister of State (N.S.W) in order to protect the Kariong Glyphs.

Whilst being a well-documented hoax, the Kariong Glyphs ARE worth protecting. It has become an important part of local folklore and, no doubt, a focal point for New Age tourism. I am somewhat proud of local Australian folklore particularly because it can be so wacky (like the Gympie Pyramid claims and associated shenanigans). That is often the essence and appeal of folklore.

I would love to see them first hand some day, too...

Edited by Night Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But you used Dodson's book, too, cormac, to clarify that no prince named Nefer-Djeseb or Nefer-Ti-Ru is known for Khufu. You listed the known sons of Khufu back in Post 23 on this page, so interested parties can refer to your post for the correct information on this matter. I have to wonder if Hans-Dieter is even aware of Dodson's book on the royal families.

I have no way of knowing, of course, but I'm not sure Hans, Daniel or de Jonge would even care. They're too busy creating a story about people who have no verifiable relationship to Khufu whatsoever. And about a journey which is wholly unevidenced in Ancient Egyptian history. It's a stand-alone event and we're just supposed to believe it because a few people say so. Sorry for them, but I for one am not buying it.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst being a well-documented hoax, the Kariong Glyphs ARE worth protecting. It has become an important part of local folklore and, no doubt, a focal point for New Age tourism. I am somewhat proud of local Australian folklore particularly because it can be so wacky (like the Gympie Pyramid claims and associated shenanigans). That is often the essence and appeal of folklore.

I would love to see them first hand some day, too...

Night Walker.

I thank you from the bottom of my heart for a real question. You state that the Kariong glyphs are worth protecting. I agree. You also state that these Glyps are a well documented hoax. Well documented hoax? 2 days ago on this Forum,

the originator of the Hoax claim, publicly distanced himself from what was written in the Encyllopaedia of dubious

Archaeology under HIS NAME, Steven Spillard, and claimed, that he had not written it, but someone else done it. This is a fact, check it for yourself.

Having said this, it points directly to him or someone making an empty claim, to which even you fell. Because so far there is no proof about this matter being a hoax, just a large number of claims, but no research to back it up. This means of course, as the matter is now in the hands of the N.S.W. Minister of Enviroment, Robyn Parker (M.P.) and being investigated by the Department, to double check my research findings, which are diametrically opposed to those of Steve Spillard, aka Woy Woy Steve aka. Artemis flow claims.

As I don't hide my Identity, and as I have placed this matter in the hands of the minister, including photo's dating back to 2001. I await the outcome of her investigations with interest. Of course this is not in the Interst of the howling masses, who want their Hoax, but cannot substantiate the claim for one. Hence at present I am ducking and weaving, avoiding the brick bats flying though the Internet.

When you come to N.S.W. I would offer you my assistance in deciding for yourself, whether this is in fact a 4.500 year old set of Hieroglyphs or a hoax. I can only state what I found out by research, nothing more, nothing less.

Dr. Hans-Dieter von Senff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the originator of the Hoax claim, publicly distanced himself from what was written in the Encyllopaedia of dubious

Archaeology under HIS NAME, Steven Spillard, and claimed, that he had not written it, but someone else done it. This is a fact, check it for yourself.

Hans, Steve's explained Heavens only know how many times that the only thing under his name were the photos of the glyphs. He didn't start the hoax and didn't start the claims it was a hoax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Night Walker.

I thank you from the bottom of my heart for a real question. You state that the Kariong glyphs are worth protecting. I agree. You also state that these Glyps are a well documented hoax. Well documented hoax? 2 days ago on this Forum...

Dr. Hans-Dieter von Senff

Are you claiming that:

- in 1983 Professor Kanawati, head of the Department of Egyptology at Macquarie University, did not declare the carvings as fake?

- in 1984 Ranger Neil Martin did not catch an old Yugoslavian man carving at site and did not make note of additional carvings afterwards?

- in 1998 Dr Gilbert did not denounce the carvings as fakes?

- in 2001 Carmel Tebutt did not confirm carvings are fake based on NPWS study?

- in 2003 David Coltheart did not write an article on the hoax in Archaeological Diggings?

- in 2004 Philippe Tabuteaudid not confirm carvings were done by persons known to him?

I think the carvings are important for vastly different reasons than you, sir. I think that some graffiti provides an interesting window into the times and who we are as a society and as such should be documented and preserved. I appreciate the effort that went into this graffiti carvings (a rare thing indeed) and the wacky shenanigans that surround them. It's fabulous fakelore which is becoming enduring folklore. You are way off the mark in promoting them as evidence that Ancient Egyptians visited our shores. Yet I do no expect you to acknowledge any of your errors or false claims - I seriously don't think you are capable of honest reflection (but you are not the only one: Rex Gilroy, Brett Green, Val Osborne, etc) - it is a strange trademark of this wacky alternate subculture that promotes and ultimately profits from nonsense.

Stuff the theorists won't show you

2634998240064923513S425x425Q85.jpg

From the picture above, I suggest that Ancient Egyptians are still leaving similar "glyphs" in marking pen in almost every public toilet in Australia. Perhaps your talents lie in this arena...

Edited by Night Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Night Walker.

I thank you from the bottom of my heart for a real question. You state that the Kariong glyphs are worth protecting. I agree. You also state that these Glyps are a well documented hoax. Well documented hoax? 2 days ago on this Forum,

the originator of the Hoax claim, publicly distanced himself from what was written in the Encyllopaedia of dubious

Archaeology under HIS NAME, Steven Spillard, and claimed, that he had not written it, but someone else done it. This is a fact, check it for yourself.

Having said this, it points directly to him or someone making an empty claim, to which even you fell. Because so far there is no proof about this matter being a hoax, just a large number of claims, but no research to back it up. This means of course, as the matter is now in the hands of the N.S.W. Minister of Enviroment, Robyn Parker (M.P.) and being investigated by the Department, to double check my research findings, which are diametrically opposed to those of Steve Spillard, aka Woy Woy Steve aka. Artemis flow claims.

As I don't hide my Identity, and as I have placed this matter in the hands of the minister, including photo's dating back to 2001. I await the outcome of her investigations with interest. Of course this is not in the Interst of the howling masses, who want their Hoax, but cannot substantiate the claim for one. Hence at present I am ducking and weaving, avoiding the brick bats flying though the Internet.

When you come to N.S.W. I would offer you my assistance in deciding for yourself, whether this is in fact a 4.500 year old set of Hieroglyphs or a hoax. I can only state what I found out by research, nothing more, nothing less.

Dr. Hans-Dieter von Senff

Hans it is time you seriously need to get your reasoning (in short..your head) examined.

In any book, if a photograph is given, under the photograph, the credit to the photographer or the copyright holder of the photograph is given.

for example, on page 10 of |The encyclopaedia of dubious Archaeology", a photograph of America's stonehenge is provided. the credit for the photograph goes to kenneth leder himself, since he took the photograph himself.

On page the page with the photograph of the kariong glyphs, it is shown that the credit for the photograph goes to steve spillard.

are you nuts or what???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, do they establish archeological facts at ministry level in Australia now?

The facts here are pretty condemning. So we have pretty recent aboriginal carvings on that same rock that you have to search with an ultraviolet light because they are washed away but you can see the older "Egyptian carvings", obviously written by a writing challenged scribe, as clearly as if they were made in 1970?

You don't only have an archeological sensation but you also have a miracle! Better get the Pope into the boat to exploit this to the fullest!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Night Walker.

I thank you from the bottom of my heart for a real question. You state that the Kariong glyphs are worth protecting. I agree. You also state that these Glyps are a well documented hoax. Well documented hoax? 2 days ago on this Forum,

the originator of the Hoax claim, publicly distanced himself from what was written in the Encyllopaedia of dubious

Archaeology under HIS NAME, Steven Spillard, and claimed, that he had not written it, but someone else done it. This is a fact, check it for yourself.

Having said this, it points directly to him or someone making an empty claim, to which even you fell. Because so far there is no proof about this matter being a hoax, just a large number of claims, but no research to back it up. This means of course, as the matter is now in the hands of the N.S.W. Minister of Enviroment, Robyn Parker (M.P.) and being investigated by the Department, to double check my research findings, which are diametrically opposed to those of Steve Spillard, aka Woy Woy Steve aka. Artemis flow claims.

As I don't hide my Identity, and as I have placed this matter in the hands of the minister, including photo's dating back to 2001. I await the outcome of her investigations with interest. Of course this is not in the Interst of the howling masses, who want their Hoax, but cannot substantiate the claim for one. Hence at present I am ducking and weaving, avoiding the brick bats flying though the Internet.

When you come to N.S.W. I would offer you my assistance in deciding for yourself, whether this is in fact a 4.500 year old set of Hieroglyphs or a hoax. I can only state what I found out by research, nothing more, nothing less.

Dr. Hans-Dieter von Senff

Au contraire. You've not conducted any research. All you've done is elaborate upon the Australian Ray Johnson's concocted "translations" of fake, crude "hieroglyphs" etched on those rock faces around the early 1970s. You rarely respond to evidentiary challenges even though many have been presented, so we can only take this to mean that you're not prepared to defend your position against those of us who know what we're talking about.

And ever since Artemis joined us, you've done little more than rail against him. You seem obsessed with Artemis and continue to misrepresent him, in spite of the ample evidence he has contributed to counter your misrepresentation (see Post 159 for the latest and very clear nature of the authorship of Encyclopedia of Dubious Archaeology, by Kenneth L. Feder, although I am still mystified over why the authorship of this book is so important in your mind).

Artemis has clearly outlined the history of this forgery going back to the early 1970s, including examples of those who've determined it to be a forgery well before Artemis himself even entered the picture. The pages of his blog are replete with sufficient material to explain why these glyphs are a forgery, including the conclusions of the Australian Egyptologist Gregory Gilbert. Several of us in this discussion have explained in detail why these glyphs are a forgery, but you have not attempted to meet our counterarguments in any meaningful way.

So again I ask, if you're not even going to try to defend yourself on an evidentiary basis, why do you continue to post? We're interested in probative corroboration, not aimless protestations. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Au contraire. You've not conducted any research. All you've done is elaborate upon the Australian Ray Johnson's concocted "translations" of fake, crude "hieroglyphs" etched on those rock faces around the early 1970s. You rarely respond to evidentiary challenges even though many have been presented, so we can only take this to mean that you're not prepared to defend your position against those of us who know what we're talking about.

And ever since Artemis joined us, you've done little more than rail against him. You seem obsessed with Artemis and continue to misrepresent him, in spite of the ample evidence he has contributed to counter your misrepresentation (see Post 159 for the latest and very clear nature of the authorship of Encyclopedia of Dubious Archaeology, by Kenneth L. Feder, although I am still mystified over why the authorship of this book is so important in your mind).

Artemis has clearly outlined the history of this forgery going back to the early 1970s, including examples of those who've determined it to be a forgery well before Artemis himself even entered the picture. The pages of his blog are replete with sufficient material to explain why these glyphs are a forgery, including the conclusions of the Australian Egyptologist Gregory Gilbert. Several of us in this discussion have explained in detail why these glyphs are a forgery, but you have not attempted to meet our counterarguments in any meaningful way.

So again I ask, if you're not even going to try to defend yourself on an evidentiary basis, why do you continue to post? We're interested in probative corroboration, not aimless protestations. ;)

Because "Nuh uh" is apparently a valid fringe argument. :lol: And evidently in Australia, at least in regards to Hans' way of thinking, people making claims can't think things through for themselves but have to rely on the State Cabinet to do their thinking for them. That's a sad state of affairs.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, do they establish archeological facts at ministry level in Australia now?

It's worse. The mere act of receiving a communication from some outback nutjob actually establishes every possible claim as factual (apparently.)

Time for me to submit my claim that I am the rightful owner of all of Australasia and it's territorial waters.

After all, if I merely send this info to some Aussie minister, that proves my claim!

Again:

anubis.gif

That's a pic of my great-grandpappy.

The above pic is all it takes to make this idiotic claim collapse into raucous laughter. No need to argue about who wrote what excerpt from what book, or which Dutch chemist wants to pretend he has some knowledge of Ancient Egypt.

No, just the pic. It'll do the trick.

Harte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

It's worse. The mere act of receiving a communication from some outback nutjob actually establishes every possible claim as factual (apparently.)

Time for me to submit my claim that I am the rightful owner of all of Australasia and it's territorial waters.

After all, if I merely send this info to some Aussie minister, that proves my claim!

Again:

anubis.gif

That's a pic of my great-grandpappy.

The above pic is all it takes to make this idiotic claim collapse into raucous laughter. No need to argue about who wrote what excerpt from what book, or which Dutch chemist wants to pretend he has some knowledge of Ancient Egypt.

No, just the pic. It'll do the trick.

Harte

Everytime I see that pic, I have to think of Wile E. Coyote:

1321846092_wile_coyote_xlarge.gif

It's a prank, goddamnit.

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NPWS will be interested to learn the Hans and co. have been conducting illegal excavations and removing Aboriginal artifacts from the national park without permission , should the " basalt chisel " actually exist ( see the Ravings of a Madman pg 15 )

Basalt was mined nearby in the 1920's by Basalt Quarries Ltd and there are noted basalt " spurs" on private property within 5 km of this site.

http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/16406026?searchTerm=quarry%20woy%20woy&searchLimits=

http://dbforms.ga.gov.au/pls/www/geodx.strat_units.sch_full?wher=stratno=20642

http://www.adderley.net.au/geology/exhibition/03/03_10.html

This fact makes a total mockery of the Ravings of a Madman by Hans Dieter Von Senff ( available on Google docs only because no one will publish it ) on pg 15.

I did print it out though , it's the long weekend and I'm out of toilet paper :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NPWS will be interested to learn the Hans and co. have been conducting illegal excavations and removing Aboriginal artifacts from the national park without permission , should the " basalt chisel " actually exist ( see the Ravings of a Madman pg 15 )

Basalt was mined nearby in the 1920's by Basalt Quarries Ltd and there are noted basalt " spurs" on private property within 5 km of this site.

http://trove.nla.gov...y&searchLimits=

http://dbforms.ga.go...r=stratno=20642

http://www.adderley....n/03/03_10.html

This fact makes a total mockery of the Ravings of a Madman by Hans Dieter Von Senff ( available on Google docs only because no one will publish it ) on pg 15.

I did print it out though , it's the long weekend and I'm out of toilet paper :P

careful, printer ink is not wipe resistant :devil:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

see Post 159 for the latest and very clear nature of the authorship of Encyclopedia of Dubious Archaeology, by Kenneth L. Feder, although I am still mystified over why the authorship of this book is so important in your mind.

Could it be as simple as this , Hans is jealous because I have work published in a credible book and he doesn't ?

In that case " ner ner ner I have the ice cream ! "

runs away

Edited by Artemis Flow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's worse. The mere act of receiving a communication from some outback nutjob actually establishes every possible claim as factual (apparently.)

Time for me to submit my claim that I am the rightful owner of all of Australasia and it's territorial waters.

After all, if I merely send this info to some Aussie minister, that proves my claim!

Again:

anubis.gif

That's a pic of my great-grandpappy.

The above pic is all it takes to make this idiotic claim collapse into raucous laughter. No need to argue about who wrote what excerpt from what book, or which Dutch chemist wants to pretend he has some knowledge of Ancient Egypt.

No, just the pic. It'll do the trick.

Harte

Come on, Harte, hasn't anyone ever told you not to judge a book by it's cover? :w00t:

As ridiculous as the Anubis figure looks, that alone is not enough to rule it as a forgery. Plenty of authentic Egyptian monuments reveal low-quality craftsmanship in figural composition. We have a display case at the Field in which we present fakes that worked their way into our collection, but some months ago a truly awful stela was pulled by an Egyptologist at the University of Chicago because she wanted a closer look. She determined that as bad as the stela looks (the figures in particular are poorly shaped) the stela is in fact authentic.

But despite the fact that this particular Anubis looks like he had been scratched into the wall by a sixth grader, a couple of things jump out at me. First, Anubis is shown wearing the robe of a Sem-priest (note the spots on the torso). I have to wonder if the hoaxer who etched this figure even knew what a Sem-priest in Egypt was, but to my knowledge Anubis is not displayed as a Sem-priest. Second, notice the ankh Anubis is clutching. It's barely recognizable as an ankh. Now that makes one automatically suspicious, and while the crudely formed ankh by itself does not necessarily scream "Fake!" one must wonder, if it's supposed to be authentic, an ancient Egyptian craftsman (even of low training) could do a better job with one of the most recognizable icons of his culture.

In total the rock etchings themselves scream "Fake!" There seems to be little to no observance of Dynasty 4 canon of proportions (or any pharaonic period of proportioning), but most of all these etchings are just a random scattering of hieroglyphs. The late Ray Johnson (the Australian version, mind you) and Hans-Dieter might have concocted elaborate "translations" for these glyphs, but rest assured there can be no doubt that the glyphs don't say anything at all. The only recognizable things are a couple of names.

LOL An actual ancient Egyptian who carved something like this would've been flogged immediately and never allowed to own a stylus, palette, or chisel ever again. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I came across something interesting:

These Australian researchers (Steve [strong] and associates [Dr. Hans-Dieter von Senff]) have recently found a large skeleton which they think is over one hundred thousand years old and will soon be in the newspapers and change the history or Australia and the world; as well as a big astronomical configuration on the Blue Mountains and an axe over one hundred thousand years old ...

John Byrnes (Nov 27, 2011)

Source

It has already been established that these blokes (Strong, von Senff) are NOT archaeologists. So, isn’t it illegal to remove aboriginal/archaeological artefacts? And what about the skeleton? Shouldn’t the police be involved here?

Care to comment, Dr. Hans-Dieter von Senff?

Do you know anything more about this, Steve (you are a far more reliable source of information)? And who is John Byrnes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

lol 6 degrees of separation

I know John Byrnes through a Google group called Elvina of which I am a member , he is a geologist and has an interest in the glyphs story and is compiling notes on the subject.

The page you have found is another Google group called OzArch , an email discussion group for Australian archaelogists , John is posting the latest waffle he has found to this group , I'm sure the info came from one of Strongs websites

I'm currently asking the Elvina group ( which is more inclined to local history , Aboriginal rock art and geology especially the Hawkesbury Sandstone that is abundant in this area www.elvina.info ) for more info on the " basalt chisel " Strong claims to have removed from the site illegally .

Strong and co have broken a few laws set by the NPWS Act of 1999 btw.

I suspect the chisel pictured is not what they claim it to be , it's probably not even Aboriginal and I doubt they actually found one there in the first place.

Strong and Von Senff gave 2 public talks at an obscure arts hall late last year , nothing has hit the news yet ! , people I know who went said it was an unprofessional rabble by both of them , some walked out.

Personally I haven't come across the skeleton story yet but have heard all the other crap from Strong like finding an Egyptian complex near the glyphs site

Another Elvina member is currently investigating Strongs claim that Australian Aborigines were the first humans

Thanks Steve

As I’ve been doing some genetic genealogy testing lately I’ve been attempting to follow up on the claims Steve Strong made about aboriginals being the first nation.

My requests for references to the ‘recanting’ he said was going on by the original researchers came to nought: just refs back to their initial findings, not any subsequent contradictions.

As a distinctly NON-organic chemist / molecular biologist I have also been trying to understand to best of my ability the state of current research on haplogroup origins internationally.

Those of a more scientific bent might be interested in a major new peer reviewed article (6th Apr 2012- hot off the press!) at:

http://download.cell.com/AJHG/pdf/PIIS0002929712001462.pdf?intermediat&intermediate=true

on the use of human mtDNA phylogeny to establish deep ancestry, and advocate a recommended new reference point: The RSRS (Reconstructed Sapiens Reference Sequence.) in lieu of the rCRS.

Http://www.Phylotree.org also shows no signs of absorbing Steven Strong’s claims: Perhaps another scientific conspiracy ! Their last (14th) Phylotree build was as recent as 5th April 2012.

Edited by Artemis Flow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Found the source of the info on the skeleton , its in the comments section on this page http://forgottenorigin.com/our-theory

kerry says:

June 10, 2011 at 9:21 pm (UTC 10)

Reply

I am an initiated Wiradjuri,

We have just discovered a skeleton suspected to be dated around 120,000 years old,

not far from where I live, at present this is being verified by several Archaeologists.

this is the greatest find in the history of Australia if not the World.

a healthy male of great build and strength, it will be in the News papers World wide very soon, and it will predate Mungo Man and Mungo Woman.

More and more will be found soon, and bought foward to be released to the outside World. Australia is awakening from a long sleep, what is found here in these Indigenous cultures, will shake the World.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Care to comment, Dr. Hans-Dieter von Senff?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I came across another interesting site: The Secret Visitors Project

The Secret Visitors Project blog has been set up to support my PhD research at the University of Sydney into the role of pseudoarchaeology in Australian archaaeology.

Archaeologists believe that Australia was settled at least 50,000 years ago by the ancestors of the Aboriginal people. Apart from the appearance of the dingo within the past 5,000 years or so there is no evidence that they necessarily had any contact with the remainder of the world, apart from their nearest neighbours. More than a century of historical and archaeological investigation has developed this view and is supported by all of our human physiological, historical, genetic, linguistic, biological and geographical evidence. Despite this, many people still believe that the Spanish, Portuguese, Egyptians, Chinese, Vikings and others mapped, explored or even settled in Australia. Why?

In this blog I look at the evidence that has been put forward in support of secret visitor claims by advocates over the past two centuries. Much of it has never had a serious critical examination and, frankly, a lot of it doesn’t convince or survive well from a steady gaze. We will also meet the people who have put these theories to the public.

On the Kariong Glyphs:

Sunday 11th December, 2011 Artsbarn 2 Dandaloo St Kariong, NSW, Australia. Steven will be accompanied by Dr. Hans-Dieter von Senff.

Father and son team Steven and Evan Strong have written several detailed works on why they believe that modern human evolution began with Australian Aboriginal people...

Dr. Hans-Dieter von Senff is the leading promoter of the authenticity of the Kariong engravings. Its not clear whether he will be speaking.

On the face of it there is little shared ground between the two – Strong is dealing with early human evolution and a refreshing twist on the usual diffusionist scenario. Von Senff’s interest in the hieroglyphs, apart from some chronological issues, requires less a reversal of the current view and more a suspension of disbelief.

Not sure I can make it, but would love to hear from anyone who goes.

You should get in touch, Steve…

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There will always be psuedo archeologists in Australia I think, too many of them get bored with finding the same aboriginal painting/carvings.

Anyone remember the Portuguese rifle found on some island just off the coast of Australia? They went crazy saying the Portuguese colonised Australia. Turns out it was made in Indonesia during the 16th century and was pushed along the seabed by the tides.

Its possible they might find something Portuguese related since the Portuguese visited Papua New Guinea during the 15th century and possible something Javanese related since they most likely brang the dingoes here 10,000~ years ago.

But Egyptian is a whole different story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nightwalker

Yes I have come across that site and I think he may already be connected to us via the Elvina group I belong to , he is a member of OzArch so that's where I may have first heard of him , I thought I might contact him after I got some feedback from my well placed moles who attended the fantasy fest at Kariong Arts Barn ( a community art workshop set up in a big old building ) last December but haven't as yet.

Anyway I do have some feedback and information in relation to the Basalt Chisel that Strong and Von Senff claim to have found near the glyphs site:

My contact is an experienced local Aboriginal rock art expert who has documented every Aboriginal site around the Kariong area and Central Coast , since 1960 he has located and recorded 6000 pages of information on Aboriginal art sites.

He is also a long time local who lives at Kariong and can attest the glyphs were not there as he played and rode horses in this area for all of his childhood years , last year he attended one of Strongs lectures....

Here is another reply to your email this time about the Egyptian Basalt chisel. All along *Bambara Road can be found these mysterious tools which are part of the basalt road fill that Gosford City Council once used on Bambara Road, there are many places in this district where basalt is to be found which has washed down from council road works. Dr Von Senff showed us this piece of road fill after his rubbishing talk at Kariong last year but would not admit he was wrong even after one of his detractors produced several other wonderful tools he had picked up from the edge of Bambara Road. Now I am pretty sure Bambara Road was not there 4000 years ago

Myth busted again Hans ....... just a bit of old rock , basalt with chew marks from a crusher plant at best :lol: and your lucky for that because you might have copped a nasty fine from NPWS B)

* Bambara Road is the nearest access road to the glyphs site.

DKO - it seems every town in Australia had it's own little mystery , you could write a book on them , and several people have! must be money in that ^_^

I have read some pretty convincing accounts of lost Spanish and Portegese shipwrecks along the coast here http://www.stradbrokeislandgalleon.com/index.html not sure how legit the info is as they are also pro Gympie Pyramid as well :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.