When your press materials describe you as “a real-life Indiana Jones” and you spent the first season of your show trying and failing to find the Holy Grail, what do you do for an encore? Well, you take a cue from Raiders of the Lost Ark and try and fail to find the Ark of the Covenant, of course! That’s the premise for America Unearthed S02E01 “Ark of the Covenant,” the series’ first new episode since March 15 of this year. But before we can get to the episode, I need to discuss what happened between seasons.
Between Seasons Events
From December 2012 to March 2013, I reviewed the first thirteen episodes of America Unearthed, and I published a book of expanded versions of these reviews, Unearthing the Truth. Between the first season finale and the second season premiere, H2 and the History channel have had America Unearthed on a near-continuous rotation, helping to build the show into the fledgling H2 channel’s first bona fide hit series, averaging 800,000 viewers per airing. As a result, hundreds of thousands of readers have visited my blog, read my reviews, and commented on them. I’m sure more than a few new readers are joining us for the first time for coverage of the second season of America Unearthed. Therefore, I need to offer some disclosure to make sure I’ve fulfilled my ethical obligations before critiquing the show.
I am the author of a 2005 book exploring the history and sociology of the ancient astronaut theory called The Cult of Alien Gods. As a result of my work, Ancient Aliens on the History Channel (as it was then called) attacked me by name in 2009. I began reviewing episodes of Ancient Aliens, and I added America Unearthed to my regular coverage in 2012 only because it happened to follow Ancient Aliens. However, the popularity of the series quickly outstripped that of Ancient Aliens, and soon more people visited by blog to read America Unearthed reviews than anything else I had written.
Show host Scott F. Wolter, a forensic geologist specializing in concrete stability issues, stopped by my blog to offer comments for a time, though these gradually degenerated into name-calling. Two days after the show’s highest-rated episode aired, Wolter came here to accuse me of being afraid of the truth and part of a conspiracy:
I now realize that you and most of your followers are the very same people I have had issues with for years. I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, but no longer. […] In the past, the strong negative reaction I've received was based on fear and I sense that is part of what is going on here. […] Based on the evidence provided by this blog, I've concluded this [is] a site driven by something closer to religious zealotry rather than truly scientific thinking. Paying lip service to "science" doesn't mean you practice it.
Wolter was not content to stop there. As I readied Unearthing the Truth for publication, Wolter contacted the lawyers for A+E Networks, the parent of H2, and asked them to do what they could to stop me from criticizing him. A+E used one of New York’s highest-profile intellectual property attorneys and had her threaten a lawsuit that appeared designed to intimidate me into silence. They demanded changes to Unearthing the Truth’s cover design to remove material that Scott Wolter claimed to own (a distinctive X-shaped rune with a hook on one stave which Wolter calls “the Hooked X,” a term he registered as a trademark) but which A+E later admitted in writing was in the public domain. They seemed to hope it would be too costly to fight them; in fact, the lawyer said as much to me in a telephone conversation, reminding me repeatedly of the cost of taking a case to court with an attorney as powerful as she. I made the requested changes (at no cost to me), which included publishing on the cover of the book a full-sentence disclaimer that my book was not authorized by A+E Networks. With no other avenues to challenge my book, the company withdrew their threatened lawsuit.
Shortly after Wolter’s efforts to sue me, he released a book, Akhenaten to the Founding Fathers, which further developed material from the America Unearthed series. (My four part review is here: Part 1 • Part 2 • Part 3 • Part 4.) At my request, given what A+E Networks required of me, A+E Networks required Wolter to publish a disclaimer acknowledging that the network did not support or endorse his book, which claimed, among other things, that a Nazi sympathizer had some good ideas about Nordic conquest of the pre-Columbian Americas and that Oreos hide Freemason-Templar secrets in their chocolaty cookies. (This did not stop H2 from advertising the book with an on-screen graphic during the show.)
Therefore, please note that this review is not and will never be affiliated with Scott Wolter, Committee Films, H2, or A+E Networks.
With that disclosure out of the way, we can move on to tonight’s episode, in which Wolter mistakes nineteenth-century British Israelist fantasies for historical truth.
The show opens with a group of men carrying the Ark of the Covenant through some sepia-toned woods. One carves a symbol for the ark, unknown to Hebrew history, into a tree trunk, and another carries a rock with the same symbol, a square with two triangles at the upper corners. We will not find out where that symbol came from until the end of the hour. They cross a desert and make the same symbol out of small pebbles. The Ark kills a man with its power, riffing on the story of Uzzah in 2 Samuel 6:6-7 (in fact, the casting sheet for the episode originally described the character as Uzzah), turning him to stone, and he crumbles away—a story that of course is not found in any texts having to do with America—or Israel. The original of this story occurred when David brought the Ark to Jerusalem:
When they came to the threshing floor of Nakon, Uzzah reached out and took hold of the ark of God, because the oxen stumbled. The Lord’s anger burned against Uzzah because of his irreverent act; therefore God struck him down, and he died there beside the ark of God.
There’s nothing about turning to stone or crumbling to dust (and somehow America Unearthed didn’t include any oxen); instead, it appears to be the show’s effort to show off its increased special effects budget for season two. The crumbly stone man is never discussed in the hour, and this marks the first time in the series’ history that the “reenactment” on the show includes blatant fiction that the show never claims as a fringe history fact.
The show’s familiar credits open by telling us that despite Scott Wolter’s best efforts in the first season, history is somehow still wrong and Wolter has more work to do to set it right.
After the credits, Wolter reintroduces himself as “a modern-day Indiana Jones,” though humbly attributing it to “some people” saying so—the “some people” being H2’s publicist, who blanketed TV trade publications with press releases making the claim. He then explains that he intends to reenact Raiders of the Lost Ark. He briefly describes the storybook version of the Ark of the Covenant and announces that he believes it is hidden in America. Although he will use conditional verbs (“may have,” “could have”) throughout the hour, on several occasions he explicitly asserts his belief that the conditional speculation is in fact true. He says he has four sites that could lead to its location: The Hill of Tara in Ireland; Aldie, Virginia; Coshocton, Ohio; and Holbrook, Arizona.
We start at the Hill of Tara in Ireland, where Wolter claims—falsely—that the Ark was last seen. This myth exists only in a certain strain of fringe history myth-making called British Israelism. Wolter fails to inform viewers of the origins of his claims for the Hill of Tara, and it is evident from the presentation of the episode that the producers explicitly tried to keep that origin hidden. As Wolter talks with an expert in Irish history at Tara, rather clumsy edits cut the expert off as she attempts to describe the very recent origins of the myth. It starts with a philosophy called British Israelism, an ideology advocated most forcefully in the nineteenth century that asserted that the British were the direct lineal descendants of the Lost Tribes of Israel and were the Chosen People of God. As a result, England was believed to be the successor state to David’s kingdom, and the royal family of Britain God’s representatives on earth. This philosophy served to justify British imperial claims to world domination, but scholars routinely attacked its outlandish distortions of history in its own time and down to the present. Today, British Israelism is a fringe belief, advocated most forcefully by the white supremacist Christian Identity movement and other white supremacist organizations. Some non-racist organizations maintain the ideology as well, including the British-Israel World Federation, which has denounced many of the original British-Israel claims cited by Wolter.
In 1861 a churchman, the Rev. F. R. A. Glover, wrote a book called England, the Remnant of Judah and the Israel of Ephraim, which I have posted in full in my Library. This was the first text to present the Tara-Jeremiah-Tea Tephi myth given uncritically by Scott Wolter without acknowledgement of the source. In this episode, Wolter claims that a genuine ancient legend said that the Ark of the Covenant traveled with the Stone of Destiny from Israel to Ireland in the company of the prophet Jeremiah and an Egyptian princess named Tea Tephi.
Glover invented Tea Tephi by conflating two mythic figures, Teah (or Tea) and Tephi, who share virtually nothing in common. The “poem” Wolter refers to that supposedly lays out her life and history does not exist—at least not in any ancient source. Wolter also fails to note that the name “Stone of Destiny” is not a biblical name for Jacob’s Pillar, and it does not appear in the Book of Genesis (28:10-22), where it is described only as a “stone” that Jacob had “set up as a pillar” at Beth-El. Colloquially, the stone became known as “Jacob’s Pillow” because he had slept on it when he dreamed of angels ascending a ladder. This was why he set it up as a pillar dedicated to God.
How that stone became attached to the “Stone of Destiny,” a name originally given to the Lia Fáil, the coronation stone of the Irish kings at Tara, is a lengthy story, primarily focused on F. R. A. Glover’s British-Israelist claims with an assist from medieval Scottish propaganda. I described Glover’s ideas in an earlier blog post, and the next few paragraphs are adapted from that blog post, with some minor changes in light of the episode’s specific claims.
Glover’s ideas start with the Apocrypha, where the prophet Jeremiah is said to have hidden the Ark of the Covenant in Mt. Nebo, where it would stay hidden and safe from the invading armies during the destruction of Babylon in 587 BCE (2 Maccabees 2:4–7), a fact Wolter partially acknowledges on the show. Because Jeremiah’s followers could not find it, later writers began to claim that Jeremiah fled with the Ark. In 1024, in the poetry of Cuan O’Cochlain (attributed; many think the source text is older), we read that Tephi, daughter Cino Bactir, a king in Spain, died and her fantastic tomb became Tara. He was repeating a claim made by Amergin in the sixth century. These are the foundational poems that contributed to the myth.
Glover and the British Israelists made Tephi into a daughter of Zedekiah, the last Jewish king before the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BCE, and had her marry a Milesian (Scot) and bring the Stone of Destiny to Ireland and call it the Pillow of Jacob. This is very much a purposeful misinterpretation of Cuan O’Cochlain’s discussion of how Tephi married Canthon of Britain, and the Britons’ most important idol, the Etherun or Taran, was left in Spain until her body was restored to that country. Tephi’s tomb in Spain then became the model for another tomb in Ireland, called Tara, after the return of the stone idol.
In the Lebor Gabála Érenn, we read that Milesians invaded Ireland, and Glover had the brilliant inspiration to decide that Jeremiah was one of them, when in fact the Irish annals specify that their leader, Ollam Fodlah, was a native king, not one from the Middle East. Glover purposely conflated Tephi, known only from the works cited above, with Tea, a native-born queen married to Heremon, son of Miletus, in Spain just before the Milesian invasion. Since the annals preserve her genealogy in Ireland back at least three generations, she was therefore not the daughter of Zedekiah, despite Glover’s slipshod efforts to revise her history.
The warrant for this is Jeremiah 41:10 and 43:5-7, where a king’s daughters (either Zedekiah’s or Josiah’s; the text is unclear) escape the destruction of Jerusalem. There is no indication they went to Ireland or anywhere else, or that any of them was Tea or Telphi.
All of this is mixed up with the similar legend of Scota, the supposed ancestress of the Scots, whom Irish legends dating back to the 1100s claim was a daughter of Pharaoh from the time of Moses who was exiled, married a prince, and spawned the Scots. Various arguments have been put forward to work Scota and Tea-Tephi into the same myth, or to move Scota from the time of Moses to that of Jeremiah, etc. The Lebor Gabála Érenn however is fairly clear on the point, though some variant manuscripts offers another Scota, daughter of an imaginary pharaoh. The book also claims she was married to a Scythian, whom Glover and other British Israelists identified with the Celts and thus the Lost Tribes of Israel.
Glover, however, was on slightly stronger ground in trying to identify the Stone of Scone, the Scottish coronation stone, with the Lia Fáil in Ireland and thus both as the Stone of Destiny and Jacob’s Pillow. In 1301 Baldred Bisset rewrote Scottish history when he prepared the Scottish submission to the papal curia complaining about English aggression during the Wars of Independence. He wanted to create a counter-myth that would take the Scots from Egypt to Spain and Ireland in order to counter King Edward I’s claims to rule Scotland by descent from Brutus of the British; an older pedigree would give the Scots greater claim. Therefore, he rewrote the Scota myth to make her take the Stone of Scone from Egypt with her during the Exodus, and Robert the Bruce made use of this as anti-English propaganda in 1323; by 1327 William Rishanger recorded in his chronicle that the stone was “the regal stone which Jacob placed under his head.” It would remain forever associated with Jacob, even though geology demonstrates that the stone that passes under the name of Jacob’s Pillow—the Stone of Scone—is a local sandstone block from the region around Scone.
The claim does not appear in literature prior to 1301, and it obviously does not support, even at face value, any of Scott Wolter’s claims about the Stone of Destiny. (Scottish legend, in fact, makes the stone come to Scotland at the hands of a Greek, not of Jeremiah.) This is the only slim line of actual historical detail (though still a myth) connecting either of the coronation stones back to the Middle East—a detail that British Israelists retroactively applied back to the Stone of Destiny in Ireland.
Putting it all together with no mind for chronology or truth, later British Israelists made Jeremiah and Tephi come with the Ark of the Covenant and Jacob’s stone from Egypt to Spain to Ireland, and there hid the Ark at Tara, where it serves to bless the British with its power. And not a word of this is actually found in any of the ancient texts from which the story originates. In 1899 British Israelists conducted damaging digs at Tara in the hope of finding the Ark.
Glover had conflated fragments of genuine poetry and invented identifications for various Irish figures to interpolate Jeremiah into the story. No mention of the Ark exists in these poems; the Book of Tephi, the poem that does describe all of this, is a late nineteenth century poem written in 1897 by John A. Goodchild, based on Glover’s work, that believers like Scott Wolter mistake for a genuine ancient text. It was based on fragments of Irish poetry, Bible passages, and British Israelist literature; the author even admits his “ignorance” of the subject on which he writes in the voice of the imaginary princess!
Naturally, Scott Wolter simply omits all of this history and tells the audience that “legend” says that Tea-Tephi and Jeremiah teamed up to take the Ark and the Stone of Destiny to Ireland, a “legend” that does not exist before the late nineteenth century.
This implies ignorance on the part of Wolter regarding the origins of his claims since Glover was fairly clear that his so-called legend was only hot air and speculation:
If Jeremiah took the Stone, all the marvels about Tara, its Eastern Princess, its Judge, and Mysterious Priest, and the Law, are not only solved, but are necessary events. If it be Jacob's Pillow, and set up by Jeremiah, there is sense in the legend; otherwise, it is an absurdity, and something worse.
In short, Glover admitted that he was simply creating a legend out of scattered parts that said no such thing.
At Jack Andrews’s farm in Aldie, Virgina, Scott Wolter goes to visit the alleged “Stone of Destiny,” which no one relates to the Stone of Scone or the Liá Fail, both of which exist and have better claim to the title. He suggests that the Stone of Destiny in Virginia implies that the Ark of the Covenant is in America, too. The medieval propagandists who brought the myth of Jacob’s Pillar to Ireland and Scotland knew nothing of any Ark sightings in the British Isles; that is only a British-Israel claim, and Wolter’s uncritical acceptance is disturbing.
Andrews claims that he owns a stone that Jonathan Swift, the author of Gulliver’s Travels, gave to the first owner of the land. Wolter claims Swift had access to “secret knowledge” due to his position as a Dublin cleric, but he does not explain how the “real” Stone of Destiny was somehow swapped out for the stones passing under that name in Ireland and Scotland. (There is an entire cottage industry in Britain devoted to Stone of Scone conspiracy theories. These tend to argue that the original was replaced either before England’s King Edward I removed the stone from Scone to London or at some other point.)
The Virginia stone, Andrews says, was stolen in a planned raid by unnamed people who saw the stone as the foundation for a New Jerusalem. It was returned by an unspecified method, but the show provides no proof, such as a police report, to document the theft by religious extremists.
Andrews keeps the holy relic in his barn (of course), where Wolter goes to visit it as suggestive music plays loudly, as though this were a revelation. I often have difficulty hearing dialogue when there is loud music, and this episode was sometimes difficult to understand for all the dramatic music bellowing out emotional cues. Wolter views the stone, which is sandstone. It bears no resemblance to Jacob’s pillow, which Genesis tells us was a standing pillar. The rock is shaped like a mid-sized, shallow basin. It looks to me pretty much like a colonial-era or Victorian stone trough, like the kind used in gardens.
After the first commercial, Wolter examines the rock, repeating the fake claim of Tea-Tephi, the British-Israel fantasy created by Glover. He never mentions the concept of British Israelism, or its relationship to modern racism. Again, there is no Stone of Destiny in the Bible, and this is nothing but a medieval Christianization of pagan coronation stones. Wolter might have noticed this if he were familiar with the Bible, which we know from his book Akhenaten to the Founding Fathers he has not read, by his own admission.
Wolter chips off a chunk of the holy Stone of Destiny, damaging what he suspects is God’s own sacred rock, and then examines it under a microscope. He says that breaking a chunk off is the only way to get answers, which outweighs the damage done to the rock. Wolter claims the stone “could have” come from Israel, but he fails to note that the type of sandstone it is made from can be found in many other places besides Israel, including areas of the United States. According to the Commonwealth of Virginia’s Department of Metals, Mines and Energy, the exact type of arkosic sandstone seen here, with its combination of feldspar and quartz, is exceedingly common in the Piedmont region of Virginia, which includes part of the Potomac watershed near Aldie.
In discussing the stone, Andrews claims to have derived his beliefs about it from the “autobiography” of Tea-Tephi, which he claims to have. The Book of Tephi Jack Andrews discusses as the “autobiography” of the princess is a hoax—no, not even a hoax; it is not even presented as true. As I mentioned above, it was a poem written in 1897 by a known author, John A. Goodchild, based on British-Israelist claims and conflated fragments of Irish poetry and biblical passages.
After the second commercial break, Wolter discusses the Ark of the Covenant again, quoting the description of the Ark from Exodus 25:10-22, which he does not actually cite. Before showing us the results of his tests, he begins to tell us about the Lost Tribes of Israel, and he plans to go in search of clues to the Lost Tribes’ American plans.
In Coshocton, Ohio, he visits the infamous Newark Decalogue Stone from 1860. It was found shortly after an earlier stone, called the Keystone, which has been known to be a hoax since July 1860, when scholars determined that the stone was written in Modern Hebrew rather than the version of the language used at the alleged time of the Lost Tribes. Three months later, after the hoax was revealed, a new stone—the Decalogue Stone—emerged written in archaic Hebrew, exactly answering critics’ concerns. Inscribed on it were shortened forms of the Ten Commandments and a picture of Moses. Other stones were found at the site but were admitted to be fake by their hoaxer, dentist John H. Nichol, who inscribed his own name on them in Hebrew to show how easy it is to fake artifacts. Even if the artifacts were genuine, their writing and art style would date them from the period of 100-300 CE (as even the Mormons admit—and they love looking for “Hebrew” artifacts in America!), meaning that the group leaving the artifacts would have left what is now Israel between 700 and 900 years after the group that “brought” the Ark to Ireland. We get almost nothing about these stones before the show goes to yet another commercial.
After the commercial, Wolter claims that the Decalogue Stone passes “the skeptics’” tests of its Hebrew, and he looks at the stone under a microscope with J. Huson McCulloch, a professor of economics and finance at Ohio State and a staunch advocate of fringe history theories. Full disclosure: I have exchanged words with McCulloch over, among other things, the Bat Creek Stone, another of Wolter’s favorite artifacts. Not surprisingly, McCulloch disagrees with most of the things I write.
Wolter next delivers an astounding sentence of multiple negatives to tell us that there is no reason not to believe that the Ark of the Covenant couldn’t have come to America. Wolter then bashes academics and skeptics (I guess that’s me) for the first time this season (it was a regular feature of season one), and concludes that the academics hate anything that breaks their paradigms so therefore we viewers, as good investigators, must embrace them as real. I didn’t really follow all that, and I got a bit lost in the convoluted grammar.
Wolter returns to Minneapolis and his home base to examine his chunk of the Stone of Destiny. En route, he gives us the false dichotomy that if the Ark is in America, it either came because Jonathan Swift was privy to Tea-Tephi’s secrets or because the Lost Tribes came to America. There are a million more possibilities—space aliens, for example, or the exact theory he speculated about last year: that Henry I Sinclair, Earl of Orkney brought it to Nova Scotia in 1398. He examines the stone under a microscope and compares it to a sample of rock from “Israel”—which is a rather broad canvas to look at. How would you know where to look? Did he get his stone from Beth-El, twelve miles north of Jerusalem (possibly modern Beitin in the West Bank), where Genesis says Jacob was? Surely that’s relevant to judging whether the Virginia rock was in fact Jacob’s Pillar. We go to commercial before finding out.
As we return from what by this time I sincerely hoped would be the last commercial break of the hour, Wolter tells us that it’s only a matter of time before the Ark is revealed—rather shocking since that presumes it ever existed in the first place. (He later suggests that there is doubt over its existence, but that his beliefs trump doubt.) Oh, well, back to the microscope for a very long-drawn-out reveal. Wolter repeats his falsehood that Jacob called his rock the “Stone of Destiny”—it was not; Jacob consecrated his stone to God at Beth-El. There is no match to the Israeli sample, and Wolter reports this amidst a flurry of dramatic music and cinematography and editing designed to emphasize the tension leading up to the reveal. I would love to tell you that the negative result means that the Virginia Stone of Destiny is a fake, but since we have no idea where the Israeli sample came from, nor a control of other Virginia sandstone samples, the results are meaningless, and the entire exercise is without value.
Wolter then hands his assistant, Adam Brewer, a photo of a stone wall carving of a rectangle with two triangles atop the rectangle. The rectangle inscribed with two zigzags, and it is a well-documented petroglyph that has been repeatedly photographed at Puerco Pueblo in the Petrified Forest National Park. Wolter identifies it as an image of the Ark of the Covenant. I just don’t see it, myself. Here’s the art, as seen in Wandering Lizard Arizona magazine:
The petroglyph looks at first blush like a Native American carving, and its geometric design does not suggest an Ark to me. It could be a fake, but without seeing the carving in person, I can’t offer any additional details. As noted in the comments below, it resembles looms used for weaving blankets, and the triangles above the yarn on sticks feeding the loom. The petroglyphs at the site are believed to have been carved before 1200 CE, probably too late to have had anything to do with post-Exilic wandering Irish Lost Tribes who wrote the Decalogue in Roman-era Hebrew.
We hear that that no other petroglyph from the area is anything like this carving. This is a lie. A nearby petroglyph is very similar (with a decidedly “Templar”-style cross no less!), indicating that the geometric shape was simply part and parcel of the stock of geometric images used in the area’s rock art.
It occurs to no one on the show to ask the Hopi or the Navajo, descendants of the Ancestral Pueblo (Anasazi) people of the region, whether the rock art has particular meaning in their culture. Instead, Wolter simply imposes an Anglo-American meaning onto the art, annexing it to his fantasy of Lost Tribes in America. Oddly enough, Wolter chooses not to mention that the Ancestral Pueblo carved a summer solstice marker among the petroglyphs, which the National Park Service has up on its website—odd because Wolter is otherwise so interested in how Templar-Freemasons taught astronomical alignments to all the various American peoples.
Wolter claims that his “trail” of the Ark leads from east to west, which suggests to him that the Ark is hidden in the Grand Canyon—the subject of a later episode of this series. But how exactly does the “trail” do that if the Irish site and the Virginia site are not actually associated with the Ark at all, and the Ohio one is a hoax?
Wolter concludes by telling us that the Ark “could” exist and if it “could” exist then it’s not impossible that the Ark is in America. It sounds like this is going to become the overriding theme of this season, like the Grail last year. Wolter tells us that he will bravely stand up to those who believe that religious relics should be left hidden because he alone has the cojones to get to the truth. Equal parts self-aggrandizing and blindingly ignorant of the “facts” he seeks to find, Scott Wolter lets us know that he’s all man and will keep on fighting those darn ol’ academics and skeptics no matter how much he has to twist truth, adopt fiction as fact, or simply ignore reality to force history to conform to his vision.
Remember: He found no evidence of Jacob’s Pillar, the impetus for this whole investigation, yet somehow this only made him more convinced that the Ark really is in America—even though all of the claims he examined were tied to British-Israelist ideas about Jacob’s Pillow traveling with the Ark—stories that emerged only in the 1800s as “divine” justification for British imperial rule over the vast domains of the Empire.
12/1/2013 05:34:44 am
I, for one, was a wee bit disappointed he didn't take a 2-inch core sample from the Cistern of Destiny.
12/1/2013 05:38:53 am
Odd that their prop department magically produced an ark on which the cherubs are configured to look like triangles. Anyone ever seen the ark represented like that before? Anybody? Beuller?
12/1/2013 06:09:42 am
Agreed that was a weird interpretation. I have seen many versions and that was not at all close to what I would come up with.
12/1/2013 07:21:31 am
I believe the triangular angels are an idea left over from Ancient Alien Theory, positing that those were electrodes and the Ark was a generator or a radio.
12/2/2013 04:46:00 am
Well, if Wolter does find the Ark, he'd best take great care. Tsoukalos says it's nothing more than an atomic reactor.
1/13/2014 08:18:01 am
Does anyone else feel it'd have been funny to have made a full replica of the Ark and put it in some cave in the Grand Canyon then direct Scott to its location by some 'old legend'?
12/1/2013 05:40:37 am
Alack and alas.....Money needed for true research was blown on special effects. #CrumblingMan
12/1/2013 05:59:51 am
Sooo many problems with this episode. Each of the four pieces of "evidence" was extremely weak. The final piece was laughable - artists who can create representative drawings of people and animals can only manage stylistic triangles for angels? Also, as a life-long Ohioan I can assure you there are thousands of pre-Columbian Native American artifacts found throughout the state - but not one "Hebrew" item.
12/1/2013 06:06:20 am
Oh, yes, it certainly stretched the material out a long way. Last year, they had more crazy claims per hour. This year, looking ahead to the long haul, they seem to be throttling down on the number of claims to get more episodes out of less material.
7/28/2015 11:27:29 am
amazingly childish. you attack and accuse people who lived 200 years ago and more consistently. what facts can you offer to prove that the people you attack were purposefully creating propaganda for Englands sake? sounds like your just another biased whining roman or another whining homosexual atheist. you offer no proof to your readers concerning the accusations you make against the people you have attacked. REAL scientific! your a fucking self deluded spoiled little nerd. go crawl in a hole and fucking die. and take your chubby little fag boyfriend with you.
The Other J.
12/2/2013 08:15:33 pm
Not only were the four pieces of evidence weak, none of them were really all that connected -- and the Tara-Swift-Virginia link is only valid if you believe the 19th century fictions as ancient history.
12/1/2013 06:50:29 am
The resemblance is uncanny:
12/1/2013 10:43:46 pm
Indy only taught at a fake coppege, his degree came from a real one (U of Chicago) so he has a leg up on Wolter.
12/1/2013 07:04:22 am
I'm fairly sure it wasn't the Virginia Stone that was stolen...
The Other J.
12/2/2013 08:18:57 pm
If not, any enterprising relic hunters in the Piedmont region now know that the guy keeps his sacred relic in a barn that doesn't look too hard to get into. I'm not far from there; I wonder if there will be reports of a break-in soon.
12/1/2013 07:06:01 am
"If the Holy Grail is in America, I'm going to find it." "If the Ark of the Covenant is in America, I'm going to find it."
5/16/2016 01:55:13 pm
Scott Wolter was absolutely telling the truth. Neither of those items are in America, so he didn't find them.
12/1/2013 07:09:20 am
The scene at Tara was almost vaudevillian in its humor. The bemused look on the face of the Irish expert was worth the price of admission alone. She's basically telling Wolter that the entire Ark legend is simply the creation of imagination, but he can't let her actually explain without interrupting. Then she gets him, if backhandedly, by describing the very Wolterian 19th Century amateur dig that discovered nothing at all related to the Ark, but actually discarded real artifacts.
12/1/2013 07:51:12 am
What noticed about the Ireland segment was that when it was revealed that no Ark was found, Scott immediately concluded that "Well then it has to be in America". Why would anyone reach that conclusion?
12/1/2013 05:04:39 pm
The obvious conclusion would be that in now rests in Oompa-Loompa Land. You could plug in any location you can think of and it would have had the same credibility based on his "evidence."
12/4/2013 07:27:28 pm
He actually didn't conclude that the Ark was in America. When she said the Ark was not found there he said then its possible that maybe the Ark did go to America. I'm just stating what was actually said.
5/10/2015 08:25:40 am
Weren't you listening? It could have been brought over and there's a stone that Wolter thinks probably could have been it, if it were brought over that is, and then in that event maybe that means the Ark came with it, so probably that means, if things are as said which seems it must be true, necessarily the Ark is almost probably maybe certainly in America, so we're doing to find it there for sure!
12/4/2013 07:23:09 pm
I just watched this episode again and you are incorrect. She didn't have any look on her face as the camera wasn't even on her when he made the statement. She actually only smiled the entire time.And she didn't say anything about the Ark being a creation of legend, she actually said that there is so many stories that it's hard to separate fact from fiction. She also stated that they knew they found real artifacts but discarded them because they were only focused on finding the Ark.
12/1/2013 07:29:39 am
I really like watching America Unearthed. I also like wrestling. I like shows about aliens and bigfoot. I know they are all fake.
12/25/2013 02:52:53 pm
I want Jason to review one episode of finding bigfoot for my entertainment...
12/1/2013 07:51:37 am
The "Arc of the Covenant Petroglyph" resembles the weaving looms used by the Pueblos and the bottom pattern depected would fit with how blankets and rugs were commonly decorated.
12/1/2013 08:08:25 am
Great observation. I will add it to the review.
Nor does the image conform to the "sacred geometry" required for the Arc; one side is different from the other, making the container not at all symmetrical. It's too out of balance to be representative of the Ark.
12/1/2013 12:59:10 pm
I was being facetious, Gunn. It obviously isn't a Templar cross.
12/4/2013 07:35:01 pm
He's only stating that it resembles a weaving loom, not concluding. It also resembles a Hopi Indian ritual chest which would explain the triangle like features at the top. Then again, it also does have a resemblance to an "Ark type structure" ......still doesn't mean that's it's any of those that I would add to a review.
12/1/2013 11:19:22 am
re: "The "Arc of the Covenant Petroglyph" resembles the weaving looms used by the Pueblos and the bottom pattern depected would fit with how blankets and rugs were commonly decorated."
12/1/2013 12:02:41 pm
12/1/2013 12:26:02 pm
The petrogragh looks like the b2 stealth bomber. Just tilt the white squares and iPod have four flying wings. Where is that guy with te crazy hair? Next weeks episode Scott and David Childress and the hair guy tie it all together.
12/4/2013 04:07:16 pm
I noticed that your spelling of ark is arc...as in a arc of current. Spell check much?
2/9/2014 09:32:32 am
Spell check doesn't pick up on incorrect words that are spelled correctly. So to you I say , shutty uppy! Lol
12/1/2013 07:57:42 am
If Wolter went to Ireland, why didn't he take a quick trip to Ethiopia where their claims to have the Ark are much older? I suppose it more pleasant to think of white people with the Ark than black people. And if he was mimicking Indiana Jones, why didn't he go to Petra? A bit of an anglophile clearly.
12/1/2013 08:48:51 am
There is "an" Ark in Ethiopia without any doubt, but it's not "the" Ark.
The Other J.
12/2/2013 08:21:11 pm
I imagine if he goes to Ethiopia at any point, it'll be to prove white people were there first, which would be hard to do in Africa. At least he's on safer ground in Ireland.
12/1/2013 10:45:02 am
While I believe there probably was an ark of some sort, I don't think it took the form we all know and love. Probably started as some sort of vessel and was embellished over the years until the account was written down during the Babylonian captivity. Tudor Parfitt suggests it was a ceremonial drum/vessel of some sort. Perhaps.
Dr. Sheldon Cooper
12/1/2013 10:55:50 am
OK...let's take a critical look here.
The Other J.
12/2/2013 08:33:58 pm
Take his goofy claim that Jonathan Swift sent the Stone of Destiny to America (at one point he says Swift took it to America -- pretty sure Swift never set foot in the New World). First, Swift was a bit more than a cleric; he was Dean of St. Patrick's Cathedral. Second, the church was founded in 1191 and was Catholic until it converted to Protestantism in 1537 because of the Reformation. So for just a bit under 400 years St. Patrick's was Catholic.
Dr. Sheldon Cooper
12/5/2013 07:04:41 am
You are correct about the Roman Catholic church amassing "relics" and "artifacts." So, yeah, if there was such a thing, it would be sitting in the Vatican, or chipped up and sent to various parishes (every church has some sort of relic...be it a splinter of the "true cross" or a nail clipping of a saint).
12/1/2013 11:37:07 am
What seems to be completely overlooked in the lost tribes strand is that the northern tribes of Israel were conquered and dispersed by the Assyrians in 722 BC ... 150 or so years before the Ark was lost!! How on earth did they get their hands on it, to bring it to America?
12/1/2013 11:42:16 am
" How on earth did they get their hands on it, to bring it to America?"
12/1/2013 11:43:24 am
The theory is that the Lost Tribes colonized Ireland and Jeremiah, somehow knowing this, took the Ark to them centuries later for safekeeping.
12/1/2013 12:06:50 pm
No doubt as were the treasures referred to in the Copper Scroll.
12/1/2013 01:04:03 pm
I seen a show and the place in Ethiopia that is said to house the "Ark." I could walk in there in take it if I wanted-that's just as bogus as any other claim. There's no Facts to prove it, but I'm sure other people had made it to the unknown land aka America before Columbus.That's what this show is about, and if you don't like it simply don't watch and bitch about something else. A lot of these artifact "hoaxes" were reported hoaxes many years ago, and with better technology they should be reanalyzed. Some of these"Hoaxes" don't make sense. Why would someone go through the trouble to create them, put them out in the middle of the dessert, and hope Scott Wolter stumbles upon 100 years later?
12/1/2013 01:49:55 pm
People fake things for many reasons: 1) money, 2) They think its funny, 3) They think it proves them to be superior to the people they fool, 4) Creative Challenge, and 5) Psychosis. I am sure there are a few more reasons.
12/1/2013 02:56:28 pm
You need to understand that a lot of research done back in the 20's, 30's, isn't as accurate, nor were the academics who studied them as knowledgeable as they are nowadays.These artifacts need a further look with new technology, not too say Wolter is doing this exactly, but I'm sure a geologist can tell whether a rock was carved yesterday in a garage or carved years ago and is highly weathered. Plus who knows what tests go on behind the scenes, as most shows are highly edited. Wolter makes bold claims and hypothesis but always does so with IF and Could statements. Which I see this author leaves out to further his own hypothesis about how fake Wolter and the show are.
12/2/2013 02:51:12 am
"I'm sure a geologist can tell whether a rock was carved yesterday in a garage or carved years ago and is highly weathered."
12/2/2013 03:42:04 am
I agree, context is everything, which is why preserving objects in-situ is so vitally important.
12/2/2013 01:10:38 pm
"That's what this show is about, and if you don't like it simply don't watch and bitch about something else."
1/11/2014 01:35:04 pm
The thing (stone..thought it was under the coronation stone at Westminster Abbey anyway) looked like a fake right away to me. It's sandstone & it's old & it was found in a creek and erosion surely would have worn it down over the years. Sandstone may not be common to the area of the fellow's farm, but it IS common to North America. To me it LOOKS like it WAS carved yesterday. The Native carving of the "ark" looks to me like a native rug on a loom. Hey! Maybe the Apollo astronauts took the ark & the stone to the moon? LOL We will never know...
12/2/2013 03:46:35 pm
The location of the Ethiopian ark is the Church of St Mary in Axum, Ethiopia. It is very heavily guarded by men with AK47s and heavier arms. It ain't going nowhere!
12/3/2013 12:05:20 am
I would grow my beard longer and tell them I am the second coming of Christ, they would let me right in.
Dr. Sheldon Cooper
12/5/2013 07:07:32 am
Obviously. Israeli Special Forces could never get past a bunch of Ethiopians...
12/8/2013 03:40:19 am
There is no doubt in my mind that inspired by Wolter's show, we will have a flood of artifacts that are being created today that will be "discovered" 100 0r 200 years from now.
12/8/2013 08:30:07 am
Cory, I saw a History Channel show (years ago when they actual talked about history) that there are many Ethiopian churches that have Ark replicas as part of their belief system. Only outsiders have claimed the Ethiopian Arks to be anything more than ceremonial representations.
Dr. Sheldon Cooper
12/8/2013 07:34:04 pm
Basically, it boils down to this:
12/1/2013 01:47:15 pm
What I find interesting is that Wolter changes his mind after facing a road block to his theories. Last year the Knights/Freemasons/Sin Clair brought the holy grail and the covenant over. This year its a whole new twist. I loved watching this show last year, as well as reading your weekly reviews. The more you prove Wolter wrong Jason, the more I just really wonder about this show. I am treating it as a fictional show. All the content is so subjective, but obviously the show is biased. I applaud you Jason for siting the real facts. Next week at Denver should be interesting!
12/1/2013 02:29:28 pm
I am starting to get that feeling to change channels because I am so embarrassed for the people (in this case Wolter) that are on the screen. Kind of like watching people stink on a talent search type show.
12/1/2013 02:44:39 pm
"Wolter next delivers an astounding sentence of multiple negatives to tell us that there is no reason not to believe that the Ark of the Covenant couldn’t have come to America. Wolter then bashes academics and skeptics (I guess that’s me) for the first time this season (it was a regular feature of season one), and concludes that the academics hate anything that breaks their paradigms so therefore we viewers, as good investigators, must embrace them as real. I didn’t really follow all that, and I got a bit lost in the convoluted grammar."
12/1/2013 04:57:16 pm
There's another point I think is worth making: Wolter at no point talks about Jonathan Swift's love of satire. It's quite possible that Swift told whoever he gave the stone to it was the "Stone of Destiny" entirely because it would be an amusing thing to do. Certainly, as soon as I knew Swift was in the story, the whole "Stone of Destiny" turns up in America became even more unlikely than I originally envisaged.
12/1/2013 05:20:10 pm
I don't think Wolter knows that Swift was a satirist. He hasn't even read the Bible, the primary source of everything we know about the Ark of the Covenant.
12/1/2013 10:52:00 pm
For that matter, who gives someone a big rock as a wedding gift?
The Other J.
12/2/2013 08:43:28 pm
If he had such an object, and he gave it away to someone in America, and the Church of Ireland found out, Swift wouldn't have remained Dead of St. Patrick's.
Dr. Sheldon Cooper
12/5/2013 07:11:10 am
Heh. "I just found out Swift wanted to sell babies for food! And he thought people would just accept it!"
The Other J.
12/2/2013 08:42:04 pm
12/8/2013 03:47:48 am
I never saw Wolter's explanation of the large hole in the center of the Stone of Destiny. It must have been part of a large machine with a tree fitting into the recess.
12/1/2013 08:55:36 pm
American Unearthed makes Dan Brown seem scholarly by comparison, and like Brown's output, AU is for entertainment purposes only. All kidding aside, hearing Scott Wolter babble
12/1/2013 09:24:20 pm
As someone who lives in Israel, reads/writes Hebrew, I observed the "Decalogue stone" is covered with can be best described as jibberish.. It's 100% a hoax, and yes I'm not religious I'm anti-theist a la Hitchins. This episode was depressing almost as if Scott's gone nutsnext episode has a dash of Alex jones NWO stuff yay. Uncovering lost pre Colombian history is one thing, this is just reach, I'm now convinced history left this channel with Robocop.
The Other J.
12/2/2013 08:46:09 pm
Can you tell us what the gibberish translates to in English? Even if it's gibberish, I'd like to know. Actually, particularly if it's gibberish.
12/1/2013 09:35:27 pm
I feel that every episode of this show is incomplete without this review. Thank you.
12/1/2013 10:51:52 pm
Remember the apocryphal quote attributed to Lenin: A lie repeated often enough becomes the truth.
12/1/2013 11:05:38 pm
Chances of Glenn Beck being mentioned or featured on the Denver Airport episode? Or is that too much ego for one screen?
12/2/2013 01:39:24 am
12/2/2013 03:01:45 am
I'm in that camp with you! I only watch AU and AA because I know I'll be reading Jason's Blog afterwards. Hey, maybe we can make 'smores during the next episode! Better not snack on Oreos though... those are the work of the Templar/Free-Mason/Holy-Bloodline/Sinclair conspiracy. It says so right on the Kensington Rune Stone.
12/2/2013 04:13:16 am
(Hey, another Shane!)
The Other J.
12/2/2013 08:49:57 pm
A dead-eyed traveller of dubious virtue -- I like it. If you're a writer, save that description for a character.
12/2/2013 02:20:16 am
one thing that really concerns me ( besides the stupidity of his claims) is that his declarations to mistrust factual research, expertise and evidence REALLY plays into something this old lady has watched really explode over the last decade. The assault on reason and exchanging rational evidence, educated expertise is getting worse. It is the creating of the "my gut tells me" instead of facts and the cultivation of conspiracy theories. I see the effort to destroy trust in government, trust in institutions, in facts, in reason and expertise leading to trouble for America ( besides stupid voters)
The Other J.
12/2/2013 08:53:07 pm
The weird thing is he continually fails at actually proving what he sets out to prove, yet claims it's proved at the end of the episode. And he does this while telling his audience not to trust academics or experts, but to trust him WITHOUT any proof or evidence to back up his claims.
12/2/2013 03:18:34 am
I said it last season, but I think it bears repeating....If you have not seen the movie "Strange Wilderness", then stop what you are doing and go rent it now! Imagine what real-life must be like for Scott Wolter as you follow the movie's main character. You will laugh out loud. Instead of labeling Scott Wolter as a "real-life Indiana Jones" we should start a campaign to out him as a "real-life Peter from Strange Wilderness". Maybe then the fascination with this show will wear off.
12/2/2013 04:11:23 am
I turned the episode into a fun game with the stepkids. As we watched, I told them to listen for words like could, maybe, perhaps, if, allegedly, might, etc. they heard throughout the broadcast. By halfway through the broadcast we were all too tired to keep up. Suffice it to say that if there were an AU drinking game based on those words, everyone would have died from alcohol poisoning.
12/2/2013 12:15:06 pm
As a student of history, I find the factual and logical improprieties of this show appalling. As a former television production professional, I find the writing and production quality of this show horrendous. The pace was terrible. It was repetitive. The shot of the man being turned into stone I think I counted being used 5 times. I guess they were trying to make use of their one special effects shot.
5/10/2015 08:39:29 am
I do wonder out of the ~800K audience how many watch for bemusement or other entertainment purposes versus how many either partially or wholly take it seriously?
12/2/2013 12:15:23 pm
Hello, the ark of the covenant, if it did exist, is in Ethopia. They are people guarding a building and a person that will be dead soon because according to him, the ark of the covenant is in there. There is no way that it can be in North America. That is 1 billion percent impossible. The ancient Israelite would have moved it to a place that was more reachable back then. Beside, no one in the old world knew about the Americas. Connect the dots correctly, people.
Dr. Sheldon Cooper
12/2/2013 01:12:12 pm
Of course they knew about the Americas. The proof is that the Templars sailed to America, with the children of Jesus and Mary M. (the St. Sinclairs), had the cup that both held the wine at the last supper and caught his blood on the cross, the Ark of the Covenant, the entire Lost Tribe of Celtic-Welsh-Scottish-Irish-English Jews. How? The Ark of Noah. Simple. They all sailed here, made passionate love to the Lost Tribe of Native American Jews (that obviously came here first...probably on Minoan copper boats). All was well as they build the pyramids here, as well as circular clit stone churches (but not the outer circular part), wrote in Old Swedish runes on lead swords (because, you know, making swords out of a soft, heavy metal like lead makes so much sense). All was well until the other Native Americans showed up and killed all of them...making sure to destroy completely any evidence that they were there.
12/2/2013 01:23:53 pm
Scott Wolter is a genius....my peaches this country was founded by people like dr wolter
The Other J.
12/2/2013 09:01:11 pm
Most of the problems have been more than adequately dealt with above -- I have nothing really to add but snark.
12/3/2013 06:21:34 am
Perhaps a Lilliputian with Brobdingnagian delusions of grandeur?
The Other J.
12/3/2013 09:55:48 am
Check out A Tale of a Tub, or its prelude, The Battel of the Books (yes, Battel was the original spelling on the frontispiece). They're about scholars who try to one-up each other by diving into seemingly-erudite digressions that go nowhere, and the way the scholars leave reason behind in their effort to attain cultural fame. Wolter seems straight out of that mold.
12/3/2013 12:00:30 am
...and if it was such a valuable relic why would the recipient then park it out in the woods?
12/3/2013 08:58:38 am
In case anyone is interested, there's a great book about the search for the Ark of the Covenant at Tara (where, of course, it never existed) by Mairead Carew (called, fittingly enough, Tara and the Ark of the Covenant). For the history of the Stone of Destiny in Scotland (including the great story of some nationalists who once stole it) I'd also recommend Nick Aitchison's "Scotland's Stone of Destiny." Oh, and I am a specialist in Irish archaeology, and pretty much everything that Wolter said about Tara is wrong, distorted, or misleading. Nice deconstruction, Jason! I personally no longer have the patience (after going a few rounds with Ulf Erlingsson, who tried to argue that Atlantis was in Ireland...).
The Other J.
12/3/2013 09:48:14 am
You're a specialist in Irish archaeology? Can I ask what your focus is, or what you're current work is on? Are you working in Ireland now? I did my M.Phil at Trinity, and although I'm no specialist, it's an interest of mine. If you study 18th-to-early-20th century Irish literature and history, you can't escape archaeology and geology; uncovering and engaging ancient Ireland was a key component in trying to create a national identity in that era. (That doesn't mean they were always right about what they were engaging with, but that didn't change its importance.)
12/3/2013 10:44:28 am
Thank you for your blog Jason. You've given us a lot of credible information that must have taken some time to collate and compose.
12/3/2013 01:16:32 pm
What a waste of prime air time. No evidence at all just lots of opinions, speculation and "could have beens". I watched this program a couple of times last year and couldn't make it through either episode. Now after wasting my time on this new season opener I can honestly say I will not be turning in for the rest of the season.
12/3/2013 04:41:13 pm
High comedy as always. The show and this blog go together like PB & J. Thank you for your work.
12/3/2013 04:49:43 pm
It's just entertainment, dummies. You people take all this mumbo jumbo too seriously. There is no ark, and even if a bunch of nomads made some stupid wooden container, it has no special powers. Religion, and all the so-called relics are nothing more than fairy tales done at a time when people knew close to nothing and everything was to be explained by the supernatural.
12/4/2013 02:52:35 am
Wow. Jason, I've been pretty resistant to your idea of occult racist themes being inherently woven into the pre-Columbian European American discovery narrative. But.....now I'm starting to see your point.
12/4/2013 03:19:25 am
It's like that every day. You should see the foul, racist emails I get. It's awful.
12/4/2013 04:02:00 am
"This more subtle racism simply justifies current (or past) social practices as the inherent outcome of market forces, culture, history, and "natural" factors affecting all people."
12/4/2013 05:02:05 am
I just had an a sudden realization that there is a twist of irony for you in all this, Jason. Consider that hapless, Swedish Olaf Ohman found the Swedish KRS--an insult to overcome, just as you must overcome, or attempt to overcome, a similar fate of coincidence...you, having an obviously Italian name, in the role of a Christopher Columbus defender. We are talking about holding the line, of course, that imaginary pre-Columbus/post-Columbus line of history. See the irony? You are a defender of something ethnic, as was poor Olaf.
12/4/2013 05:28:47 am
I don't understand your rambling post, Gunn. Who is denying that the Vikings were in America? Just because many people don't believe they were in your particular hometown doesn't translate into denying they ever set foot in America.
Dr. Sheldon Cooper
12/5/2013 07:28:51 am
Yeah...Columbus...Italian...sure. He was a Spaniard.
12/5/2013 08:13:42 am
Rambling post? Yeah, rambling in a tighter and tighter circle, to an identifiable you. I thought you wanted to be in the spot-light? I was explaining why you might be getting the negative attention you described so pitiably.
12/5/2013 08:59:32 am
I was referring to the continent, not the country Gunn.
12/5/2013 01:16:10 pm
In that case, I guess the "uh-oh" was right. I thought maybe you were confusing America with North America, and I thought I might as well run with it...but you did catch it. Well done!
12/4/2013 12:42:08 pm
I agree that European culture has developed te technology, govt, and various institutions including rul of law and the idea of natural rights that have brought great improvements to the human race. But they also developed such horrible ideas lie central banks, total war, communism, and killing on a massive scale.
Dr. Sheldon Cooper
12/5/2013 07:38:28 am
Lucius...derived from Lucifer...the light bringer...folks, we have an Illuminati shill here. [For the Scott Lovers: See how easy it is?]
12/3/2013 05:00:07 pm
12/3/2013 07:21:50 pm
Well stop the presses!
The Other J.
12/3/2013 10:39:51 pm
I like porches. Porches are big here in the south -- they help keep houses cooler in the summer. They weren't really a thing in Europe, and didn't become a thing in the colonies until the 18th century -- and in America, they came from West Africa. Because West Africans made their own porches, and slave owners adopted that architectural style from the houses their slaves built.
12/4/2013 06:52:48 am
Since medical breakthroughs were brought up, Daniel Hale Williams should probably be mentioned.
The Other J.
12/4/2013 09:46:08 am
Heh. I *played* jazz. Now I'm better at hitting play. Is jazz your gig?
12/4/2013 12:00:56 pm
Nowadays it's more of a hobby. See, I've always covered a lot of old pop, and that used to include Nat King Cole, Tony Bennett and the like, but in the last few years, that audience has started to dwindle. These days, catering to the older crowd means Ricky Nelson, Doo-Wop--even the Beatles.
12/3/2013 08:46:53 pm
Ark of the Covenant in America??? What a bunch of Rot and Rancidness.
12/4/2013 02:48:51 am
Please understand there is no theory in a map..so with that said : please chk out my channel that shows the solid scientific evidence of truth .. www.youtube.com/user/ancientcartography here you will see where the temple is , commandments were put, solomon's house and throne,ect.. this is no BS..America was upper egypt..the land given to Jacob was TENN...so now go see the facts..I have studied maps 35yrs...no theory in a map...
12/4/2013 10:50:50 am
Sounds like Jason is jealous he does not have his own show.
12/4/2013 07:21:47 pm
Scott, is that you...?
12/4/2013 12:50:12 pm
America unearthed is a great show. I go to weekly show discussions on the show sponsored by my local library. Like a book club. Wolter is a genius.
12/4/2013 03:41:35 pm
Twaughthammer forever, Yo!
12/4/2013 04:03:34 pm
You make mention that the petroglyph of the "ark" looks like a loom for weaving blankets. I know that you got that information from a website that states as much. If you ever go to the site, there are four different "offical" explainations for what it could be. They range from a migration symbol to clan marking (none of which say "blanket" by the way). The other petroglyphs that show a cross and another "box" are known fakes carved by some tourist in the late 1800s to early 1900s (these were examined by Scott Wolter while we were filming the segment, but for some reason those conclusions were not included). The "ark" symbol also appears in the Observsation Tower located on the east rim of the Grand Canyon. A local Navajo artist was chosen to recreate significant petroglyphs from the area when it was built in 1932. The "ark" petroglyph is one of them. I do like how you make conclusions without any proof nor even visiting the site for your self. It must be easy to make statements from the comfort of your computer at home.
12/4/2013 05:54:16 pm
Since you pointed out Mary J's lack of using of spell check, may I point out you're mistake in not using it as well?
12/5/2013 12:33:56 pm
So, you're saying that the petroglyph isn't a "new" discovery as Wolter pretended and actually has academic explanations that he pretended didn't exist.
12/4/2013 04:06:26 pm
I did not read all comments, but the "ten commandments" could not have been produced by Jewish believers. The commandment to make no graven image was very severely observed. In putting it on the stone with the ten commandments they would be breaking them. Just an observation from a layman.
Dr. Sheldon Cooper
12/5/2013 08:04:56 am
Actually...there is some debate over what exactly the "ten commandments" actually are. Not just the Catholic v. Protestant versions, but the Jewish people actually have a different version than the Christian version. (Good summary: http://www.jewfaq.org/10.htm). IF it was written by Jewish people, it would likely not mesh up with the Protestant or Catholic ones. Just saying...
12/4/2013 04:43:07 pm
It amazes me how so many people are certain that somebody is wrong yet nobody can prove that anything in the bible is right or even true for that matter. I don't believe any of Wolters theories are true OR untrue. I believe he presents a lot of decent evidence to his theories, and yes, some evidence he presents is sometimes very far reaching and questionable at best. I'd be willing to bet everyone including myself here hasn't even done a fraction of the work he's done yet we are so certain that everything he claims is wrong and just plain silly. Why is it then when anyone has an "alternative theory" to anything there are always the stalwarts to the mainstream?? Why wouldn't we be open to new ideas and debating theories rather trying to "debunk" them? There is evidence to debunk many claims of the bible itself which actually contradicts itself within its own texts. Somebody stated a profound quotation on here that a lie eventually becomes the truth the more people believe it. That can be a dangerous quotation to state as it could technically be applied to the bible and religion in a debate. Mr. Colavito seems like he is more interested in debunking, if that's even possible on a topic of religion, aliens or the bible, than he is open to new ideas, alternative theories, or just being open minded in general. Most of his work that I've managed to read seems almost entirely focused on debunking theories which seems to be an oxymoron in itself. Definitively speaking, you can't actually "debunk" a "theory." In topics like this you are only dealing with evidence but evidence is not fact. Evidence that can disprove or prove either way but evidence does not automatically make anything fact. I for one enjoy Ancient Aliens and America Unearthed and I totally support what both shows are doing including Scott Wolter. That doesn't mean I believe any of it but it makes me think and opens up my mind to new avenues of thinking, making me want to do my own investigating and research. Doesn't mean I'll come to the same conclusion as either of the shows but isn't that what it's really all about? I'd like to add though, that Mr. Colavito is an intelligent and knowledgable and respected man from what I researched about him for those who are ridiculing his critiques of Scott Wolter.
12/4/2013 06:24:36 pm
I don't think you understand the nature of evidence. You said that you can't debunk a theory, because evidence is not fact. Wrong. I can theorize that I can drive a sixteen penny nail into a two-by-four by staring at it, but if repeated experiments show that it can't be done, then the evidence (the results of the experiments), prove that it's a fact that staring at the nail will not drive it into the board.
12/4/2013 06:53:33 pm
Thanks....you just proved my point to those who will understand.
12/4/2013 08:34:05 pm
Do enlighten me, please. What *is* your point?
The Other J.
12/4/2013 08:06:01 pm
If evidence isn't fact, I was taught wrong and I've been teaching others wrong. Evidence rests on itself -- it needs no other support, argument, appeal, or anything else to prove its veracity, and it's not really challengeable. I drank all of my tea. The evidence? My cup is empty. Someone telling me my cup is really full or not empty of tea will have a hard time proving that based on the evidence -- the fact that my cup is empty.
12/5/2013 01:36:05 am
So you're saying our knowledge of history is all fact? Sorry, but just because you claimed to drink all the tea doesn't actually support evidence that you did. You could have spilt some! Some reasoning is based off little evidence left behind by a particular civilization. Theory's are created by this evidence, but having little evidence means it's a partial fact and there's more to the story. The "ark" is one of those stories which people are debunking with more "stories." Has the "ark" ever been found? No = fact. Did the "ark" ever exist? Who knows, but it's funny people are debunking its location when nobody truly knows if it exists!
The Other J.
12/5/2013 08:48:17 am
"So you're saying our knowledge of history is all fact?"
The Other J.
12/5/2013 08:51:21 am
(cont.) what the word actually means in their language, or how the word may have evolved. (Fun English Fact: The word "with" used to also mean "against" in Anglo-Saxon.)
12/5/2013 01:01:47 am
Good post only human. This is the mindset to have when dealing with certain topics such as history.
12/5/2013 04:01:29 am
Because all the analogies being presented are whimsical and clearly off what is actually being presented. If you saw a YouTube video of a man driving a sixteen penny nail into a 2x4 by staring it that then that means his evidence is fact? Some marine life do not have gills yet are able to breath air both on land and sea. A dolphin's natural habit is in the ocean yet they can't breath underwater. My cup is empty of tea therefore it's a fact I drank it? Did you give it to somebody else? Did you really have any tea at all? Did you dump it out? There's mounting evidence that O.J. Killed his wife yet not one fact has been found to support it. There's mounting evidence that J.F.K. Was killed by a conspiracy yet not one fact has been found to support it. Facts support reasons, not evidence. Also where is it assumed that I'm a proponent of alternative theories when I clearly stated I didn't believe nor disbelieve? The notion and conclusion that my assertions indicates science is false is just silly. That's exactly my point too. And to actually have a "point" where nothing should be considered unless there is a need is very narrow thinking. On the flip side, there is truth to your rebuttals. Conceding that fact now probably confuses everyone which is why I said those who really took the time to not only just read my post but to understand what I'm stating would get it before responding.
12/5/2013 06:49:55 am
Now you're just being disingenuous.
12/5/2013 07:25:25 am
Let me break the rebuttals here for a moment...
It seems that there is an unintentional misunderstanding.
12/5/2013 08:26:16 am
Oh good. That actually makes me feel better. I'd like to clarify that the "whimsical off topic" comment was about the analogies being used and not your comment about evidence which I agree with. I may have worded that wrong. And I also understand and even agree with your statement about fringe theories. My original point was that it seems everyone is always so resolute and resolved to dismiss anyone who has a different idea that goes against the traditional view and are close minded to anything else. Specifically on the topics of religion, aliens, history or archeology. Galileo for example. Maybe that's not the best analogy either but I think you get what I'm trying to say.
12/5/2013 04:32:55 am
You make about as much sense as Scott Wolter deciding that the Ark is in the US because he has found that a fake Hebrew relic has some evidence of aging.
12/5/2013 04:40:17 am
Haha! Yet another one...
12/5/2013 07:41:31 am
By the way, were you able to prove that the Hebrew relic was a fake? Did I miss a follow up that proved it to be so?
12/5/2013 08:13:37 am
So, "Only Me", I'm curious as to who you are. Until now, I thought I was the only one with that pseudonym.
12/5/2013 08:42:54 am
No, sorry, that's me. I guess I typed Only Me right after I got done addressing you above, my apologies. What's funny is that I thought I chose an original name and didn't realize until after my first post on here that there was somebody named Only Me. Seriously, it wasn't a knock on your name! See? We think alike after all! Haha...
12/5/2013 09:14:08 am
Thank God! I thought my inner child, who I traded for a Twinkie in third grade, had found me. That's a relief.
12/5/2013 09:21:40 am
Maybe I am your inner child. Can you prove that I'm not?? And you "claim" you traded it for a Twinkie but where is your evidence to support the fact that it was a Twinkie?? Can you argue that the Twinkie you supposedly traded even existed??
12/5/2013 10:40:35 am
Interesting question about the Twinkie. The package it came in said it was, so, there's that bit of evidence. It was also golden, oblong and cream-filled, but, that may be inconclusive.
12/5/2013 10:55:48 am
Well if you heard it from Ghostbusters then it has to be true. I have no grounds for a rebuke after that.
12/5/2013 05:07:02 am
Maybe the arrows were supposed to indicate Scott's travels, like in Raiders of the Lost Ark. They should have faded in a shot of some old cargo plane.
12/5/2013 07:48:00 am
I agree. I think there are those who are reading too much into the map. I think it's only there for an effect for the show just to merely show where Wolter had been or traveling to. If Wolter is using it in the way that Mick described than I also agree it's a gross misdirection.
12/5/2013 07:56:06 am
Honestly, the only thing more pathetic than Scott Wolter wasting his life and all the money on these ridiculous persuits, is YOU wasting your life bashing him and calling it critiquing it all. Seriously, get a life and/or grow up. Wow... can't believe this is the garbage on the internet, or that you people actually spend your lives doing this...
12/5/2013 08:12:49 am
You obviously fail to appreciate the irony of your own post in this forum.
Dr. Sheldon Cooper
12/5/2013 08:15:25 am
I always find it hilarious when someone posts how people need to "get a life" and stop posting.
12/5/2013 08:29:34 am
Dan and Dr Sheldon said exactly what I was thinking. See?? We just proved now that mind reading is real !!
Dr. Sheldon Cooper
12/8/2013 06:50:37 am
12/5/2013 09:19:06 am
If the comments on the History Channel facebook are any indication, it would appear that this episode of America Unearthed has really bombed!!!
My 15 year old son asked me why I watch America Unearthed as he understands most of Mr. Wolter's conclusions are totally off the wall. I explained to him that I watch the show for the entertainment value and to see if Mr. Wolter will actually reveal any incontrovertible evidence of a European presence in America prior to 1492.
12/5/2013 10:35:58 am
I'm kind of wondering if so many people who are claiming they watch the show for "entertainment value" are only saying that to hide the fact that they are genuinely watching because they are interested and embarrassed to say so.
12/5/2013 10:41:21 am
The Vikings had a colony in Canada, at L'Anse-aux-Meadows, around 1000 CE. They may have explored somewhat to the south. There is no evidence of any European presence in the continental United States prior to the Contact Period.
12/5/2013 10:51:23 am
Specifically in America? No, although there is controversial evidence to suggest it.
12/5/2013 11:03:19 am
United States, yes, I should have clarified. My mistake.
I believe I learned about Amerigo Vespucci in 4th grade. But I do watch the show for entertainment value as Mr. Wolter never really seems to prove anything he sets out to prove. I am intrigued by his assertions; I keep an open mind; and I really hope that he finds something of substance. However, he ends up discrediting himself by making outlandish assertions with hardly even a wisp of hard evidence. I do find it entertaining!
12/5/2013 11:18:14 am
What was your point about this lighthouse you mentioned? Did it have something to do with his assertions or were you trying to implicate something about Freemasonry?
My point in bringing up the lighthouses is I submitted to Mr. Wolter a case in which history seems to have it wrong, and I wanted to give him a subject of substance in which I feel he could really prove something historical. I brought up the fact that two Freemasons played a major role in the story, only because Mr. Wolter does not seem to consider pursuing any lead unless it can be tied back to either Freemasons or the Knights Templar. Either way, I did not hear back from Mr. Wolter. If you would like to take a look at my research on the subject, please click the website link in my name or go to the Frank's Island Lighthouse Blog...
12/5/2013 12:06:18 pm
That does seem strange, since he went to the trouble of claiming that a keystone in a colonial windmill was the stone effigy of a vagina...waiting patiently for a solar penis to strike it in a daily replay of cosmic nookie.
12/5/2013 12:12:42 pm
It's ironic because the basic structure according to the architectural drawing loosely resembles the Newport Tower which is what Only Me is also referencing. I am not saying they are in any way connected but if they were it may serve to prove the Newport Tower is definitely not from pre-Colombian times.
12/6/2013 08:46:32 am
Just going off-topic briefly...here's an excerpt from a website I found some time ago.
12/7/2013 07:35:16 am
I'd say that's keeping right with the topic. And you can probably find a basis for the sun and moon and the constellations in almost any culture or civilization.
12/5/2013 10:39:30 pm
I am a real archaeologist. I do real archaeology. I am not now, nor have I ever been, part of a conspiracy to hide true history from the American people.
12/6/2013 01:12:22 am
You won't hear back from them, because as an "academic" you don't understand the scientific method. You and your ilk are far too emotional to see the evidence. You lack the qualifications required for a TV show on the History channel, or for uncovering the Truth.
12/6/2013 01:18:43 am
I disagree: I think my passion for revealing the true hidden history of concrete testing will be obvious. If the History Channel can't appreciate a money making idea like this one, I'll take it to Spike.
12/6/2013 01:12:31 am
You and Jason could team up...
12/6/2013 01:39:41 am
I would certainly look into his books (which I have not yet read) if I ever teach a course on junk archaeology.
Dr. Sheldon Cooper
12/8/2013 06:57:15 am
Here's where you messed up...you shouldn't have just pitched concrete testing...instead...<i>forensic</i> concrete testing.
12/6/2013 03:28:20 am
This is hilarious!! One guy who has no real background in archeology, owns a concrete testing company, has only a bachelors degree and gets a TV show testing rocks VS a guy with a bachelors degree in anthropology and journalism, has done no real field work, only believes what came out of his textbooks from school and connects everything to a science fiction writer that had mental instabilities and died penniless and homeless having a smackdown?? And they are both suddenly experts in science and archeology to boot!
12/6/2013 03:52:30 am
What fieldwork is needed to evaluate whether an ancient text says what Wolter says it says, or if it is even ancient? I have never claimed to be an expert in anything, and I don't hide that.
12/6/2013 04:10:47 am
12/6/2013 04:27:24 am
Hey, Chris, there's no land to the west so don't bother looking.
12/6/2013 04:51:20 am
I went to a community college so I'm not as smart as the university graduates
12/6/2013 05:04:37 am
Of course I can't evaluate everything from my computer. But you don't have to travel to Ireland to evaluate the "Book of Tephi," which exists all on its own as a book that I have a copy of. You don't have to travel to Israel to evaluate whether the Bible says anything about whether Jeremiah hauled the Ark to Ireland. Questions about ancient texts can be answered by reading the texts in question, which is something I do all the time.
12/6/2013 05:25:32 am
Exactly, so you take everything at face value from a book. If it's not in a book it didn't or couldn't have happened. Armchair archeologists. Why don't you go look and do the physical investigation yourself? How do you know you won't find something that may prove or even disprove something, or interpret something that's been misinterpreted that proves or disproves what we think we know?
12/6/2013 05:35:15 am
So you completely misunderstand the concept. I'm not taking a claim "out of a book." The book IS the claim. I imagine you've never engaged in archival research, which is an essential part of the discipline of history.
12/6/2013 06:04:48 am
No, your not understanding my point. And I'm not talking about a specific instance or detail. I'm talking about the entirety of what he does and what you do.
The Other J.
12/6/2013 08:33:52 am
So tell us true history, oh great Black Hole oracle?
Dr. Sheldon Cooper
12/8/2013 07:07:24 am
Obviously someone hasn't taken the "Critical Thinking" components of his/her GE yet.
5/10/2015 08:59:20 am
The contrast here is between pseudo-scientific rambling loaded with speculation passed off as academic thought and the application of critical thinking. Mr. Colavito simply applies proper methodology and thought to demonstrate the hucksterish nature of the show; he's not coming up with some competing theory as a non-expert and trying to advocate for that against Mr. Wolter.
12/6/2013 06:18:12 am
Each episode of the show purports to lay out a compelling case for some idea or event or interpretation that runs counter to "mainstream" science, archaeology, history, whatever. One doesn't need to follow in Wolter's footsteps to make a judgement about the strength of his case based on the evidence he presents. It's really not that complicated.
12/6/2013 06:32:39 am
So I say again...
12/6/2013 06:38:48 am
Then please be the first to donate to a travel fund so I and my readers can tour these sites to "draw our own conclusions." Not everyone is made of money. On the other hand, Immanuel Kant never left his hometown and yet made amazing contributions to intellectual history.
12/6/2013 06:41:46 am
Thanks for the pep talk Black Hole. You've really inspired me to . . . oh wait - I already do those things. Nevermind.
12/6/2013 06:47:04 am
Ok, now we are going to go to that level.
12/6/2013 06:49:10 am
Inspired you to do what?? You shouldn't need inspiration and you were the one that gave the review of the show.
12/6/2013 06:50:58 am
There is no H. P. Lovecraft conspiracy.
12/6/2013 06:54:34 am
You said you hadn't seen the show - I was trying to help you out.
12/6/2013 06:55:04 am
Wow....who said anything about a conspiracy???? Did you just make that up to support your own conclusion?!
12/6/2013 06:57:38 am
How? By the sarcastic "inspiration" remark?
12/6/2013 07:01:44 am
I was just trying to summarize. If you'd like the longer version of the book you obviously never read yet somehow felt entitled to comment on (gee, how can that be?), I discussed the way Lovecraft's fiction preserved Theosophical ideas and introduced them to the authors of Morning of the Magicians, who are the acknowledged inspiration for Erich von Daniken, the most famous ancient astronaut theorist. See? Not "everything" relating in a "spiderwebby" way; just a straightforward set of influences.
12/6/2013 07:07:58 am
Truly, I'm happy for you, and your book. And the clarification.
12/6/2013 07:09:37 am
I wouldn't be surprised if you and Wolter are working together just to drum up business for your shows and books.
The Other J.
12/6/2013 08:37:51 am
Black Hole: "I still don't understand how you claim that I am accusing you of conspiracy."
12/6/2013 07:13:58 am
OK, so you did not follow anything I wrote at all. You didn't accuse me of a conspiracy, nor did I think you did. I was summarizing your point about Lovecraft as a connecting link in a spider web as a "Lovecraft conspiracy" for short.
12/6/2013 07:28:00 am
You responded by telling me there is no Lovecraft conspiracy. Therefore you were accusing me of accusing you of having some sort of Lovcraft conspiracy. All I said was I don't believe everything somehow relates to Lovecraft in some sort of spiderwebbed way.
An Over-Educated Grunt
12/6/2013 07:12:44 am
You know, I hadn't felt the need to comment up until now, but I think that there's reason enough to do this just because so many of the new names and faces are astoundingly negative.
12/6/2013 07:20:40 am
Interesting indeed. Yes, block the voices of dissension. Can't have that on your own open blog. And from what I can tell, I'm only one of few negative comment posts on here. Also, I'm bashing him just as harshly as Wolter and the Alien show and no more than he bashes them.
An Over-Educated Grunt
12/6/2013 07:26:03 am
Really? You want me to engage you directly? Okay, I'll bite.
12/6/2013 07:39:06 am
This is amazing. Trying to engage "YOU" directly?? You state that like I'm going to be afraid because it's you?
An Over-Educated Grunt
12/6/2013 07:45:28 am
You responded to my comment. Of course, clearly, you were speaking to the ether. My apologies.
12/6/2013 07:51:57 am
Your being a bit immature about this now and I'm not going there. So I'll let your last response speak for itself to anyone reading that that is now your argument.
An Over-Educated Grunt
12/6/2013 08:03:17 am
You want to call me immature? Fine, if that's what it takes to make you stop talking, you're a no-good doody-head poopy McPoopenstien.
12/6/2013 08:08:14 am
Haha...ok...as I said!!....
An Over-Educated Grunt
12/6/2013 08:24:32 am
As you've said, what? You've said so much it's hard to find the pony under the manure.
12/6/2013 08:54:23 am
12/6/2013 11:15:04 am
I'd have to side with black hole here. That argument sunk kinda low and technically grunt broke the rules of the forum.
12/6/2013 10:27:50 pm
Poopyhead? Find the pony under all his manure?
12/6/2013 07:30:09 am
I was able to examine the "Stone of Destiny" about two years before Scott Wolter, and Jack Andrews allowed me to have a small chip to perform some petrologic analysis on. Its mineralogy, grain size distribution, and grain morphology compared favorably with the Devonian Age "Old Red Sandstone" of the British Isles. I did not look like any of the sandstones from the Culpeper Basin of VA/MD. I'm fairly convinced that the stone originated in Britain, but any connection to the Ark of the Covenant is, in my opinion, wild-eyed conjecture and not supported by objective fact.
12/6/2013 08:04:25 am
Given that the area was settled by British colonists, and ships carried all sorts of Old World stones in their ballasts that were then reused and recycled here, this would be an entirely expected conclusion. Thanks for sharing.
12/6/2013 11:36:45 am
If this is true, wouldn't there be rocks from America in Britain? If so, is there anyway way to find them to do testing? Wouldn't that answer the question? Also, why would they have brought the stone of destiny here? I mean everything from jesus crucifixion site, his tomb and Solomon's temple to the foundation stone had a shrine built around them so You would think if they found the stone of destiny they would have done exactly the same. And even if it were the stone of destiny why would it have that hole craved in the middle of it? I thought it was a ladder or stairway he saw.
12/7/2013 06:30:21 am
Red and soft sounds like possibly pipestone, which was dispersed from MN for hundreds of years...but sandstone may be more coarse and accurate to the description. A geologist could tell quite easily.
12/9/2013 02:58:10 am
Gunn, I said "Old" Red Sandstone, not "soft" Red Sandstone. If you were at all familiar with the geological nomenclature and stratigraphy of the British Isles you would know the Old Red Sandstone is a formally described lithostratographic unit of the Devonian series. It is called "Old" to differentiate it from the overlying "New Red Sandstone".
12/11/2013 01:41:49 am
No, sorry, I wasn't at all familiar with the geological nomenclature and stratigraphy of.... Whew! And again, sorry, I didn't know the letters "CPG" means Certified Professional Geologist. Additionally, I wasn't attempting to quote you. If that were my intention, I would've used quotation marks. I was simply honing in on the red and soft and quite innocently speculating about how it might resemble pipestone. Not being an expert, as you are, I was attempting to gain more information, which you did kindly provide. Next time, I'll research online more instead of being dumbly curious on the blog...I guess.
12/6/2013 03:57:29 pm
12/6/2013 04:15:49 pm
After watching the episode this evening I did a search on the stone of destiny and found your website.
12/6/2013 07:28:41 pm
Honestly, I enjoy America Unearthed! I find it interesting and offers a new take on history. True or false, compelling or fringe, I don't judge that way. Do I personally believe it or not? I can't really say either way. The show says how it could of happened and Covalito says how it's not possible. My own belief is that we will eventually find a few things to prove certain topics and then find a few to prove that it's not true, but probably 99% of it we will never know for sure.
5/10/2015 09:05:36 am
The problem is the show does not really say how it could have happened. The show makes a series of often-unsupported wild speculations with "maybes" and "probablys." Covalito does not say "how it's not possible," but focuses on the logical fallacies presented.
12/7/2013 07:12:11 am
This website only serves to promote the shows it criticizes. Controversy generates a great buzz among people.
12/7/2013 07:14:50 am
That is the risk of all criticism, drawing attention to that which it criticizes. However, given the number of people who are looking for answers about questions raised by the program, I felt it was my duty to provide those answers. I sincerely doubt that this website is controversial enough to generate "buzz."
12/7/2013 08:02:16 am
I disagree. With as popular as the shows have become I think your website will only grow with more people looking for the answers you provide. And it wasn't meant to imply that your website on its own is controversial, but the shows that your website is reviewing.
12/8/2013 01:44:50 pm
I actually QUIT watching Ancient Aliens after I found Jason's blog. I was already fed up with the show and tired of the way they mutilate and exploit any snippet of potentially ambiguous history, and came here after Mike Heiser's blog provided a link for one article or another.
12/7/2013 07:41:52 am
True, but it also serves to promote the author as well. And it should!!
12/7/2013 09:13:19 am
Anytime anyone challenges academic scholars or the Catholic Church they are instantly branded a crackpot or a heretic.
12/7/2013 09:29:05 am
That is nonsense, at least as far as academics. "Academic scholars" are not one unified, monolithic group with a single viewpoint. There are plenty of archaeological/anthropological topics that are the subject of vigorous debate. But if your "challenge" uses completely different standards of evidence from those accepted in the discipline, don't expect to be welcomed into the debate as an equal partner. Some evidence is inadmissible in court because it has been tampered with or is hearsay. Peer review is rough even for "established" academics. If you can't take some punches, get out of the ring.
12/7/2013 09:42:53 am
His statement is not nonsense, it just way too broad in the time we live in. A long time ago it would have been valid on its own. Today, scholars seem more open to to considering new ideas that have some basic foundation of evidence and reason. The Dead Scrolls for example. And the church today doesn't have anywhere near the influence it once had to "damn" people. Dan Brown for example was inadvertently helped by the church's attempt to discredit him.
12/7/2013 10:02:28 am
Relax, Andy, it's just one persons opinion and he is entitled to it. Wording your responses to be aggressive, sore and defensive is only giving him the reaction his statement is probably intended to evoke.
12/7/2013 01:20:59 pm
Religious dogma and academic inertia are not the same thing. Academic journals are a graveyard of ideas that turned out to be wrong - that's how science works. It takes time for ideas to be evaluated, accepted, built upon, etc. Real archaeologists publish things all the time that provoke criticism, debate, and further work. That's how the system works. If a person does not like his or her ideas being closely examined, he or she should protect them as "belief" rather than present them as "science."
12/7/2013 05:27:13 pm
I don't think he was saying they were the same thing. I think he's saying if you challenge scholars with whatever radical idea then your a "crackpot"
12/7/2013 11:43:17 pm
I think putting those things in the same sentence is pretty clearly making a comparison. They are not the same thing. It is a refrain that one hears all the time now - blaming the rejection of "outside ideas" on some kind of closed academic culture rather than the weakness of the idea or its presentation. Academic culture has its issues, but it does not work by repressing new ideas. It actually thrives on new ideas. But those ideas have to be presented and defended in a way that they will be taken seriously. You can't just assert whatever you want without evidence, say "all ideas should be given the same consideration no matter how weak the case is," and then complain when you're not taken seriously.
12/7/2013 11:30:34 am
I like america unearthed. I think what Wolter is doing, or at least attempting, is radical but refreshing. I feel most of his shows at least present a decent postulation. I'll admit this recent episode was sloppy and probably his worst presentation of a theory. Call me what you want and criticize me as you will but it's my opinion.
12/7/2013 11:35:59 am
Yeah but did you see the preview of his next episode?? The Denver airport and a secret hidden bunker underneath. It has nothing to do with history or archeology which is the point of the show.
12/7/2013 12:49:12 pm
I wonder that also, my guess is the Georgia Guide-stones will be mentioned.
12/7/2013 12:57:39 pm
Aren't they a modern invention as well? And they are sitting right out in the open. So again, it's not archeology or history. He's venturing off into Jesse Ventura conspiracy theory.
12/7/2013 12:18:13 pm
Ironically ancient aliens latest show was also about the ark of the covenant. The put forth that if it was not Divine power of god than what else could it be. A form of primitive nuclear power given to them by ancient aliens. They also believe it is hidden under the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. If you remove the divine power of god then what else could give it the power to do as it supposedly did? I actually found it be a very interesting question.
12/7/2013 12:42:56 pm
If you remove the divine power of God from the Ark, then it's nothing more than an ornate box.
12/7/2013 12:45:23 pm
Oops. That should have read deus ex machina. Apparently it was auto-corrected the first time.
12/7/2013 12:53:36 pm
That's another way of looking at it too. But I wasn't really talking about any kind of faith. I meant that if it was not the Devine power of god, and it still accomplished the feats the bible claims, what else could it be that gave it the power it had? I guess I mean the question itself was interesting and not necessarily or entirely what AA put forth.
12/7/2013 03:27:29 pm
I'm waiting for the episode of AU where Wolter speculates that there is a massive "hooked x" on the dark side of the moon indicating that the Knights Templar hid the holy grail there in the 6th century by crafting a rocket made of gopherwood, and inlaid gold.
12/7/2013 04:16:58 pm
I believe you mean the 11th century.
12/7/2013 03:52:14 pm
I too enjoy the show and am looking forward to the new season. Despite all the criticism.
12/7/2013 04:03:42 pm
I love the show but I also look forward to reading Jason's reviews. Some things I side with Wolter on because I think he present decent evidence to suggest it could be the way he claims. But some things I side with Jason on as he produces facts to state otherwise. The ark of the covenant show....I have to side with Jason.
12/7/2013 04:29:36 pm
I've seen segments of episodes of both shows. I'll say they are intriguing although I've never really watched a full episode of either to give a true judgement. But I noticed on the media section of this page that the author Jason mentions being involved in some way on the pilot episode and then the review on this page he mentions being "attacked" by the show and that is why he is now doing these negative reviews. This seems like a case of a little jealousy and bitterness.
12/7/2013 04:44:20 pm
I wondered that as well.
12/7/2013 05:08:53 pm
He's had a career of debunking these topics before and beyond these shows.
12/7/2013 10:48:03 pm
I've never been involved with America Unearthed. I provided research assistance to a few History channel shows a decade ago, but not any of those I cover here. I've had my name used on Ancient Aliens (pilot episode) and America's Book of Secrets, in both cases to attack work I did prior to these shows ever airing, when I published my first debunking article back in 2004.
12/8/2013 02:46:58 am
I just watched the New World Order episode, and I am shocked that Scott didn't go Jesse Ventura. He actually debunked all the conspiracy theorists.
1/3/2014 09:47:44 am
You comments are entirely too long. Please get to the point.
5/10/2015 09:09:03 am
Whose comments? I think this comment could have been a bit longer, as it leaves so many questions.
Trying to ignore all the sniping and get back to the episode of AU being critiqued. I have done fieldwork in archaeology in the Great Plains, the Southwest, and Jordan (I only have a BA in the field; I do have an MA in linguistics, so have some academic cred). The petroglyphs that Mr. Wolter claimed represented the Ark if the Covenant are clearly Native American. The patterns are similar to others throughout Arizona and New Mexico. Mr. Wolter's evidence is non-existent. I don't oppose new theories; it wasn't that long ago that no one believed any Europeans were in the Americas (north or south) before Columbus. Solid work at Lanse Aux Meadows (sorry spellcheck keeps changing things) proved that "fact" incorrect. That was work, not wild speculation. If there are actual facts, and solid evidence, then Wolter's theories (almost hate to call his ideas "theories") may get my serious attention. Now I watch the show for laughs. Why doesn't he get real experts and not edit those he does contact? He just said Isis was a Greek goddess! Yes, the name Isis comes from Classical Greek, and the Greeks and Romans adopted her worship, but she was an Egyptian goddess first. He was trying to prove Egyptian artifacts hidden in Grand Canyon (still laughing) so why not say she was Egyptian? (Oh the evil conspiracy that causes the FAA to prevent flights below the canyon rim!) okay, I'm sniping, but NOT at other posters. Just at the nonsense that is AU. I can't watch AA because it has moved from amusing to annoying. Darn Von Daniken anyway!
3/31/2014 02:45:11 pm
come on everyone know the ark is in a big warehouse somewhere
4/12/2014 07:35:05 am
Just an observation: Tara was Margeret Mitchell's setting in Gone with the Wind, that is, the mansion the Irish-family settled in the South, and which, if you listen closely in the movie, was mentioned as where the name of the mansion was derived--the land of heritage in Ireland which the now-Southern based family pays homage. Tara.
5/3/2014 04:57:08 am
The box with the three XXX's is definitely respresenting the ark. The X represents the MacCurry coat of arms. The MacCurry's and other variations of that is the anglicized form of McMurrich or MacVurrich which is the galecized form of Korach or Korah as in Sons of Korah the only levitical priesthood family which was allowed to touch or transport the Ark of the Covenant. Also in a book called the Invention of Scotland by Hugh Trevor Roper he speaks about an incident where an Englishman named James Mcphereson traveled to Scotland to Clan Ranald to see if he could borrow one of two famous books of Clan Ranald one being the Red Book the other being the Black. He was a writer wishing to write a compilation or history of the peoples of the Isles (allegedly) Whilst there the Chief of the McDonalds told him about a far more ancient book that was in the possession of my family of famous Irish/Scottish bards named the McMurrich's. My famous relative Muiredach McMurrich fled to Scotland to The Chief of the McDonalds Clan Ranald where he became equally famous there. This book that he was speaking about was a huge book of what had previously been the Oral Histories of the Israelites spanning back to Adam and Eve up to the Israelites present time in Ireland. This Mcphereson man borrowed our book and never returned it. Not only that but the English ousted everyone after that completely rewrote history and claim that NO poems of the bards were preserved. They don't want the real Israelites to know that the fake Zionist "supposed jews" are imposters but here is what God has to say about them. Revelation 3:9 I know the blasphemy of those who call themselves Jews but do lie but are the synagogue of Satan. The Windsors are (Gog Magog imposters) They are descendants of Cain the dragon kings. You know how Isaiah 13:22 speaks of the dragons in their pleasant palaces. David Icke calls them reptillian shapeshifters although they are not aliens they are half human half fallen angel hybrids. Look up a disease called Porphyria that is associated with them. This is where the vampire legends come from. Because they are not fully human they need the Heme from humans blood to survive because sometimes they are not able to produce enough on their own. Ironically they do have an allergic reaction to garlic. Are extremely photosensitive and will blister and burn if exposed for too long. They will have painful stomach cramps if they need to feed. This is why the Rothschilds another one of the 13 Illuminati Satanic Bloodline families set up the Red Cross Blood Bank to stop all of the witch hunts that resulted from their abducting and ritually sacrificing humans. The apostle Paul says that Lucifer masquerades as an angel of Light/Lumen hence illuminati are what his offspring call themselves. This is why Lucifer is described as a reptile in the Garden of Eden. He was a seraphim angel seraph/is hebrew for serpent. Seraphim means burning ones as in illuminated ones. If you look up quetzecoatl you can tell by the descriptions of him he must also have been another fallen angel cast down to heaven with Lucifer also every where on every continent where there are the ancient pagan mystery school religions and pyramid or mound builders their are the fallen angel reptillian "so called gods to them" the history channel likes to call them Ancient Astronauts. I don't know why I got off on this weird subject but I digress. If you look into the famous McMurrich bards it says that they were the most illustrious body of learned men and that they went to school for as much as 20 years. It also says they didn't go to war or pay taxes. Just like the Levites. The more you research into it you will see the connection.
5/18/2014 06:17:17 am
It's all silly pseudoscience disproved and thoroughly debunked by competent investigation long ago. For some odd reason, people want to believe in fantasies.
8/18/2014 06:43:00 pm
If it's all silly pseudoscience disproved and thoroughly debunked by competent investigation then explain to me why when the english replaced the lia fail stone. With an obelisk (penis of Lucifer) shaped stone, like they were telling Jesus to sit on it. Why did the great irish potatoe famine breakout?
3/4/2015 05:26:26 pm
This show is just clap trap made up of legends and twisted theories just to rope in viewers and make money. It is good for a chuckle...there is about as much science in this show as there is in my big toe. What is disturbing is how many people believe this muck?
10/25/2015 12:50:33 am
3/24/2017 04:19:41 pm
Posts began from 2013- was enjoying the reads when KABOOM, somehow The Red Cross became involved in nefarious evil, the poor royals have yet another National Enquirer headline in flames to put out and NOW we know what happened in November. Shapeshifters!
5/19/2019 04:54:55 pm
Okay, you don't actually have to be an historian to figure out what's going on with this show.
V. L. Levy
11/20/2022 05:34:16 am
Actually, even though the show was a total hot mess from the beginning, and I agree with everything you said, I will tell you this much- he WAS right about ONE thing; the Ark IS in Arizona!
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply.
I 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.
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.
Terms & Conditions
Please 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.