Many of you will remember the claims that self-described History Heretic and former Treasure Force Commander J. Hutton Pulitzer made for a bronze souvenir sword with a Hercules hilt alleged to have been discovered off the coast of Oak Island many decades ago. Pulitzer had claimed that the sword was Roman in origin, one of twelve produced for some occult purpose, and he disputed tests conducted by Saint Mary’s University in Nova Scotia that suggested that the sword is unlikely to have been manufactured before the early 1700s, and mostly likely not before the 1880s. Pulitzer has now released a 200-page report in which he attempts to challenge those tests. The 3 GB document comes with audio, video, and what Pulitzer describes as “learning.” Like most of his productions, it’s a bit slapdash, riddled with typos and layout and design errors, and a vehicle for his own conspiracy theories against academics—and punctuation. (As with everything involving Pulitzer, it’s not clear whether the report is the final version, and Pulitzer promises that a future release will compress the report to a more manageable file size.) I viewed the document but unfortunately do not have a link for you to download the massive amount of material. I will leave it to those with expertise in metallurgy to evaluate Pulitzer’s claims about the testing done on the sword. For our purposes today, I’d like to focus on Pulitzer’s “Introduction Letter” (his term), and the strange claims he makes in it. As will become clear, Pulitzer has a very hard time distinguishing between facts and inferences, observations and conclusions. For him, they are all the same, and all part of a vast conspiracy marked by “emphatic” use of punctuation. “The system tells us with emphatic defiance,” Pulitzer writes, “that ‘they KNOW what happened 15 billion years ago or even 1000 years ago to an exact!’” (sic). Pulitzer, who seems to advocate a postmodern understanding of epistemology while remaining ignorant of both polysyllabic words, asks “How is it that mankind can issue any statement for others or regarding others with an absolute period on the end of the sentence?” He goes on to declare war on “periods” on behalf of “question marks,” blithely unaware that in denying that scholars can truly know the past he therefore undermines any case he hopes to make for his diffusionist worldview. He can never turn his question mark into a period since by his own admission facts are essentially unknowable. But that’s not the worst of it by any means. One the second page of his introductory letter, Pulitzer calls evolution into question by demanding to know how a mere man could discover a few fossilized bones and therefore declare (with “the emphatic ‘period’”) that the bones belonged to “your mother Eve, out of Africa, from which we all beget” (sic). Never mind that no one has ever made that claim, and that Pulitzer is conflating the discovery of presumed human ancestors such as Lucy (an australopithecine) with “mitochondrial Eve,” the presumed originator of the genetic line of Homo sapiens. In both cases, though, the connection between modern humans and ancient ancestors is a conclusion drawn from observations, not a statement of absolute fact. This can be seen in the continuous debate about how best to organize various fossils on the human family tree, not to mention continuing questions about how to demarcate fossil finds into species. Pulitzer’s polemical anger at inferences is best exemplified by his second example of how punctuation is shutting down creativity. This one involves Jurassic Park, that well-known science documentary: We have all seen the Jurassic Park movies and we all now know what species extinct for millions of years look like. Or do we? Once again, find a few bones, maybe a fossilized outline in sediments and amazingly we know the dinosaurs (sic) skin color, eye color, eating habits, growls, snarls, and roars. This is what this dinosaur looked like. Once again there’s that emphatic “period” at the end of the sentence. Do I even have to spell it out? The Jurassic Park movies are not science, and their artistic impression of dinosaurs was at times intentionally inaccurate. Even though we have fossil impressions of dinosaur feathers, the movies purposely omitted them for fear they’d look ridiculous. (Jurassic World addresses this briefly by noting the dinosaurs in-movie were designed to look like people’s misconceptions of them.) But the broader point is that Pulitzer misunderstands the contingency of knowledge and also denies that inferences can be drawn from observations. The skeletons of dinosaurs allow us to make inferences about how the muscles would have attached, based on what we know about modern animals. This, in turn, suggests their original appearance, something that impressions of the soft tissues left in fossils confirms. Fossils also can tell us what the texture of dinosaur skin would have been since a few samples of that texture remain. No one knows the color of dinosaurs’ skin, but studies of the melanosome pigments in some preserved fossil feathers allow for the reconstruction of the feathers’ colors. This is a terrific bit of detective work. Melanosomes provide different colors to feathers based on their shape, so even though the original colors don’t survive, the fossilized shapes can be correlated to the original coloration. Thus, scientists concluded that Anchiornis looked like giant woodpecker, with a red crest, while Sinosauropteryx was bright orange! Pulitzer would have us deny these conclusions, while simultaneously arguing that his own inferences about the “Roman” sword are “100% confirmed” because he believes that all of the above is mere academic posturing. He claims that “hard science” will find the “truth” that theories cannot.
It’s also important to note that no one claims that these conclusions are “100% confirmed.” They are inferences drawn from observations, and while they remain the best available, they are not unassailable, and nearly everyone recognizes that new evidence can overturn current conclusions. Pulitzer doesn’t understand and doesn’t care about this, and he doesn’t recognize that even if we accept his “hard science” at face value, he still requires inferences and hypotheses to explain it. For example, even assuming he is correct that the “sword” is from the second century CE and made from bronze from central Europe, that does not prove that the Romans made it (and not, say, the Gauls, or Scythians, or space aliens), nor that it was taken to America in that century (and not, say, in 500, 1500, or 2000), nor that human beings carried it there (and not, say, ocean currents, or eagles, or, again, space aliens). In other words, Pulitzer doesn’t recognize his own inferences as inferences. That’s what makes it so galling that he includes a photo spread showing the sword to be “Roman” by comparing it stylistically to dissimilar genuine Roman bronze depictions of Hercules—you know “hard” science! This is to be expected since Pulitzer simultaneously argues that his report is not meant to lead the audience to a conclusion while purposely prejudicing it through rhetorical sleight of hand. Thus, while claiming to fairly and objectively investigate “both sides” of whether the St. Mary’s University study of the “Roman” sword followed scientific protocol so readers, acting as “a jury of peers,” can make up their own minds, he phrases his inquiry as “irrefutable evidence of […] educational bias [and] institutional malice.” He also calls it “bigoted.” You know, fair and balanced!
50 Comments
Time Machine
3/23/2016 11:19:27 am
>>>leave it to those with expertise in metallurgy to evaluate
Reply
Pablo
3/23/2016 12:49:02 pm
You said it perfectly Jason. If anybody is interested in seeing the report, the facebook group Fake Hercules Swords https://www.facebook.com/groups/458600194323519/?fref=nf has a post with the pages.
Reply
Only Me
3/23/2016 12:54:45 pm
"Hard science" already disproved Pulitzer's claims.
Reply
DaveR
3/23/2016 01:10:45 pm
Two eagles could carry the sword.
Reply
David Bradbury
3/23/2016 05:23:09 pm
Fully-grown eagles are reckoned to be able to carry prey weighing over 3lb. The decorative Hercules swords on sale are typically well under 3 lbs. There would be a serious effect on air-speed though.
Reply
DaveR
3/23/2016 06:05:36 pm
What's the average airspeed velocity of an un-laden eagle?
David Bradbury
3/24/2016 04:13:45 am
Do you mean a Golden Eagle, or a Sea Eagle, or ....?
DaveR
3/24/2016 07:31:04 am
You do realize this is a slight variation on the swallow/coconut bit from "The Holy Grail," right?
V
3/25/2016 03:22:24 pm
DaveR, don't see the problem. The proper response to swallows is "African or European?" and "Golden or Sea?" is right along those lines...though personally, I would have gone "Golden or Bald." Just for the added lulz.
Mike Morgan
3/23/2016 01:00:51 pm
SSSLAP! A virtual high 5 to you, Jason. An excellent critique of this "report". I took the liberty of linking this in Andy White's facebook groups "Fake Hercules Swords" @ https://www.facebook.com/groups/458600194323519/ & "Fraudulent Archaeology Wall of Shame" @ https://www.facebook.com/groups/149844915349213/
Reply
DaveR
3/23/2016 01:09:08 pm
Pulitzer isn't concerned with scientifically based conclusions using evidence and facts, he's made a claim about the sword and nothing will make him change his mind. Even if someone walked up and said he placed the sword on Oak Island Pulitzer would dismiss this as a hoax.
Reply
ghettohillbilly1
3/23/2016 01:27:50 pm
One of the things that makes me laugh about this situation is pulitzer seems to forget hes NOT Canadian he is always saying that the government should do this and that and listen to him when hes not even a citizen of this country let alone province, our government is to serve us not him, imagine if we cantered to every request from someone from another country lol e really doesnthave much touch with reality
Reply
Decimus
3/23/2016 01:30:47 pm
Of course we know what dinosaurs look like! I have four of them in cages my house right now. One is singing away right now.
Reply
V
3/23/2016 03:56:15 pm
...actually, sweetie, science is pretty clear that birds are NOT the same as dinosaurs, but instead that they are DESCENDED from dinosaurs. It's not a difficult distinction to make. Just ask yourself, are you your parents, or are you DESCENDED from your parents?
Reply
Andy White
3/23/2016 07:41:51 pm
That is not a good analogy.
Time Machine
3/24/2016 06:38:45 am
It was only a coincidence that V's mother was present at his/her birth....
Andy White
3/24/2016 08:40:46 am
Look up "clade."
mabman
3/24/2016 05:27:03 pm
The clade Maniraptora encompasses birds and birdlike dinosaurs - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maniraptora. Using this classification scheme, birds are definitely regarded as dinosaurs that survived the K/T extinction event.
The troll Krampus
3/24/2016 05:56:33 pm
Ha. V's dumb. Probably a girl too.
V
3/25/2016 03:31:21 pm
Andy - why not? ARE you your parents? For people who don't actually get how evolution works--hence the need for an analogy in the first place--they generally do understand being equated with their parents. And I never said birds weren't considered to be in the family tree of dinosaurs. But birds are not, according to any biologist I've spoken to, considered to BE dinosaurs, anymore than primates are considered to BE single-celled organisms, despite primates being of the eukaryote clade.
Mike Morgan
3/25/2016 06:43:17 pm
Once, over 50 years ago when my mother caught me swearing, she admonished me saying "Michael! Using profanity and vulgarity shows a lack of intelligence. You are not unintelligent." Although I took that to heart, I am no saint and have and do occasionally slip in the heat of the moment during a verbal exchange.
Eric
3/25/2016 07:13:45 pm
Let me be the first biologist (PhD in Zoology, specifically) to tell you that birds are definitely dinosaurs and that most of my peers are very emphatic about this.
Bob Jase
3/23/2016 01:58:32 pm
So when will JHP be submitting his 'paper' for peer review?
Reply
Shane Sullivan
3/23/2016 02:33:29 pm
Perhaps some Masonic scholarly bodies would be interested.
Reply
Mike Morgan
3/23/2016 05:19:04 pm
In the original "Boston Standard" article on 12/16/15, it was said to be "early 2016".
Reply
Jonathan Feinstein
3/24/2016 02:21:18 pm
Hey... this is J. Hutton Pulitzer we're talking about. Given his spelling and grammatical talents, maybe he meant it would be "Pier reviewed" instead. You know, he just dumped all his arguments into the bay.
Reply
Clete
3/23/2016 02:10:20 pm
My two year old niece knows what color dinosaurs are....purple.
Reply
Thomas Schroeder
3/23/2016 04:45:06 pm
This was great. So this posted on the "Fraudulent Archaeology Wall of Shame" facebook page. Thanks!
Reply
Alex Stallwitz
3/23/2016 05:07:40 pm
its kind of frighting how much the Fringe historian think that movies are documentaries or super accurate. they have this obsession with pop culture thats kind of bizarre. look at how many real life "Indiana Jones" are floating around
Reply
Randal W Taylor
3/23/2016 06:19:51 pm
That's what a degree in Mythochronology and Cacheology can do for you. It allows a view inside the back end of the space time continuum to see and verify what nobody else can nor ever will.
Reply
BobM
3/28/2016 06:54:38 pm
"learning"
Reply
Angie
2/21/2017 02:14:24 pm
#TheHistoryHeretic
Reply
The "Mona Lisa" isn't the only Old Master painting that Sagaki has reproduced using manga-inspired characters -- he has also created his own versions of Leonardo's "The Last Supper," Botticelli's "The Birth of Venus" and Hokusai's "The Great Wave off Kanagawa," among others.
Reply
"Sagaki actually dreamed of being a manga artist drawing cartoons when he was a kid," Sveinn said in a phone interview. "He used to draw cartoons in his notepad, and he thought to himself, 'Maybe I should do something interesting with this; maybe I can apply this technique to works that I can see in a museum.'"
Reply
3/7/2020 11:35:42 am
This is a very good tip particularly to those fresh to the blogosphere.Short but very accurate info… Many thanks for sharing this one.A must read article!my web blog
Reply
At the point when you are prepared doing all that we have discussed in the past sections, which is thinking about your shopping list with cautious arranging exactness, discovering the medications you require recall that we have an incredible number of sildenafil pills, which are conventional Viagra tablets in their various versions, structures and measurements and sending them to the shopping basket, you will be diverted to the page with your own subtleties. at the point when I have time I will have returned to peruse much more, Please keep up the When I take a gander at your blog in Chrome, it looks fine however when opening.
Reply
3/23/2024 12:32:25 pm
Jason, I think you are a fair critic, while often very much to the point. This is why I would love for you to review my work. Probably the bests book of my eleven that you could read and critique would be either "Oak Island and New Ross," or "Perpetual Prohibition." In either case, no matter what you say about them, it will be taken as a lesson to keep on track or do better next time. I can send you PDFs of either or both so you won't have any expense in the process beyond you time. I have been in six war rooms and two war zooms with the OI team. I'm not of fan necessarily of how my presentation appeared on the 12 or 13 shows where they've used snippets of me. My work is based on historical documents and people and events, and I don't get into star charts or fragmentary codes and ancient legends. Therefore, I don't fit the narrative, but they liked to hear what I had to say. My last presentation was in 2021 and since then, it appears the honeymoon is over despite me sending them hundreds of historic facts that might help solve the mystery. Anyway, if you are up for it, I will send the PDFs. Thanks.
Reply
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorI am an author and researcher focusing on pop culture, science, and history. Bylines: New Republic, Esquire, Slate, etc. There's more about me in the About Jason tab. Newsletters
Enter your email below to subscribe to my newsletter for updates on my latest projects, blog posts, and activities, and subscribe to Culture & Curiosities, my Substack newsletter.
Categories
All
Terms & ConditionsPlease read all applicable terms and conditions before posting a comment on this blog. Posting a comment constitutes your agreement to abide by the terms and conditions linked herein.
Archives
November 2024
|