Review of America Unearthed S02E07 "Secret Blueprint of America"

1/12/2014

I am frankly at something of a loss to determine how best to introduce tonight’s episode of America Unearthed. It immediately recalls the Dan Brown novel The Lost Symbol (2009), which also featured Freemasons, hidden symbolism in Washington, DC, and the suggestion of suppressed religious truths. Normally, I have a list of historical background material that places the episode’s claims in context, but this is somewhat hard to do in this case since the claims on offer tonight emerge largely from the historical fantasia concocted by Alan Butler and his longtime writing partner, Christopher Knight, and not all that long ago. The fullest account is Butler’s own, in City of the Goddess: Freemasons, the Sacred Feminine, and the Secret beneath the Seat of Power in Washington, DC (Watkins, 1999). Oh, and both of tonight’s protagonists—Alan Butler and Scott Wolter—have, directly or indirectly, threatened me with legal action.*

* I have amended the wording from "tried to sue me" in order to be absolutely, painfully accurate after Steve St. Clair demanded legally unimpeachable wording.

Background

Regular readers are well aware that, according to the attorney involved, Scott Wolter asked A+E Networks to threaten suit against me earlier this year in an effort to quash publication of a printed collection of my America Unearthed reviews.

But for this episode I also need to disclose before discussing Alan Butler that he and Christopher Knight sent me a threat of legal action because they mistakenly believed it was illegal for me to review their 2004 book Civilization One prior to its publication date without their permission, despite the fact that their own publisher had sent me advanced galley proofs and asked for an early review in Skeptic magazine. Because there was no embargo on the book’s contents (nor would I have signed such an agreement), there was nothing illegal about reviewing the book. The authors' publicist eventually apologized to me.

This disclosure is particularly important because that 2004 book introduced Butler’s ideas about the “megalithic yard,” abbreviated by him as the MY, which Butler also wants to apply to the layout and design of Washington, DC. We’ll get to that in just a moment, but first a little bit of background on the pseudoscientific uses of metrology is probably in order.

For a long, long time nobody really cared all that much about units of measurement. Most measurements were based on the human body, and as such they varied significantly from location to location depending on who was doing the measuring. Even when a relatively standardized set of measurements came into force in a given time or place, they were not shared across cultures or from one time period to the next. Thus, the Romans and the Egyptians, for example, did not share their units of measurement.

For the most part, this ad hoc system of local measurements continued down to the early modern period, when the rise of science led to a movement for more consistent units of measurement. Queen Elizabeth I standardized the mile, for example. In the late sixteenth century the forerunner of the metric system was first proposed, and it was fully developed during the 1600s. In these same years, John Greaves, an Oxford don, launched modern pyramidology by publishing a tract called Pyramidographia (1646) discussing the measurements of the Great Pyramid. It was the age of scientific metrology.

Then, during the French Revolution, France adopted the metric system, which at the time was based on estimates of the earth’s polar circumference. Long story short, fringe theorists took inspiration and started to wonder if ancient people hadn’t based their measurements on the size and shape of the earth as well. In 1859 John Taylor claimed that Noah had built the Great Pyramid as a scale model of the earth. This culminated in astronomer Charles Piazzi Smyth’s Our Inheritance in the Great Pyramid (1864), in which he not only agreed but also determined that the measurements used, the so-called pyramid inch, were inspired by God and could predict the future. The idea of a prehistoric, quasi-divine unit of measurement took hold from here, given a boost by early twentieth century speculation (later refuted) that ancient cultures like Egypt and Mesopotamia shared a single prehistoric unit of measurement. The Italian historian Livio Stecchini, a defender of Velikovsky, assumed all measurements were related and proceeded to “prove” it by concluding that all measurements derive from an exceedingly accurate Egyptian knowledge of the earth’s circumference. His system was so complex that it involved four different feet, in a ratio of 15:16:17:18, with each foot having two variants based on the cube root of 24 and the cube root of 25. He never provided hard evidence that any of these measurements were actually used in archaeological sites, but his work inspired claims in numerous New Age and fringe books, not least of which was Hamlet’s Mill.

This was the same time that the Megalithic Yard sprang into existence, emerging from the same milieu of speculation about precision measurements and ancient wisdom, a reflection of the Cold War emphasis on scientific advancement projected back into an imaginary past. The MY is an imaginary measurement developed by Alexander Thom based on incorrect mathematical computations of the measurements of megalithic European sites. Even though megalithic sites are made from irregular blocks and many sites are heavily damaged, Thom concluded that the original measurements used by more than 100 megalithic sites favored a basic unit of measurement of 2.72 feet, give or take a smidge, and this implied a central prehistoric bureau of weights and measures. Critics noted that Thom’s measurements based on damaged sites and were, in places, off by as much as a foot, drastically affecting his statistical analysis used to compute his yard.

Today, most archaeologists believe that there was some effort at standardized units, likely based on the human body, but that they were not applied as rigorously or as accurately as Thom believed. In short, he discovered that people tended to use their feet to measure things at a time when most of their feet were a bit smaller than ours.

Nevertheless, because Thom was working in the age of the counterculture and Gerald Hawkins’s claims about Stonehenge as a “prehistoric computer,” New Agers adopted his ideas as proof of a lost civilization, perhaps even Atlantis, that pre-planned prehistory. Knight and Butler decided that the MY could be determined to the ten-thousandth of a millimeter, giving that measurement as 82.96656 cm, based on a conversion of a slight variant of the MY’s imperial measurement into metric, without consideration for the fact that a converted measurement cannot be more accurate than the original unit of measurement. (They generally round it to 82.3 in Civilization One.)

They also decided that the MY wasn’t just a unit derived from the human body. Instead, adopting Stecchini’s ideas (influenced in turn by Piazzi Smyth’s), they proposed that the MY was a fractional measurement of the earth’s circumference as calculated from an assumed prehistoric 366-degree circle. Butler provided no archaeological evidence of a 366-degree circle but claims to have derived the number from the Phaistos Disk because that possibly Minoan artifact contained 30 divisions on the obverse and 31 on the reverse, suggesting 366-day calendar on a cycle of 40 years (with a 40-day intercalary month). For Butler, a Minoan 366-day calendar implied a 366-degree division of the cosmos, especially since the 40-year cycle echoed Thom’s suggestion that 40 megalithic inches made up the MY. I trust it is obvious to you that that there is absolutely no reason to suggest any connections between these numbers. Indeed, our 360-degree circle is no corruption of an older 366-degree circle; the convention of assigning 360 degrees to circle derives from Babylon’s use of a base-60 system. There is no evidence for any 366-degree system or circle. The coincidences Butler sees in support of it derive from the fact that 360 and 366 are both divisible by 2, 3, and 6, and produce fractional values that can be computed with 4, 9, and 12.

Butler claims that in a 366-degree earth where each degree contains 60 minutes made up of 6 arc seconds each, that each arc second is exactly 366 MY wide.

Let’s crunch the numbers using Thom’s 2.72 feet: 366 X 60 X 6 X 366 X 2.72 divided by 5,280 gives us 24,843 miles, about 60 miles too small for the earth’s equatorial circumference. Let’s try a different way: The earth’s circumference is 24,901 miles at the equator. So, dividing it out, we get 2.726 feet to the “yard,” which, to two significant figures, gives us 2.73. It’s close, but no cigar. Using the metric figures yields a calculation of 83.10 cm to the “yard,” which does not agree with Butler’s own 82.97. Running the numbers the other way from Butler’s figures out gives us 40,010 km, which does not match the 40,090 km of the earth’s circumference.

Using the polar circumference gives us a better fit, since the 40,010 km more closely matches the polar circumference of 40,007 km. Running the numbers the other way, it gives us a megalithic yard of 82.960 cm. In imperial units, 24,860 miles gives us a “yard” of 2.722 feet, and Thom’s 2.72-foot MY yields a circumference of 24,843 miles.

It’s cute, but it depends entirely on asserting a sixty degree arc minute and six arc seconds, a fudge factor for which there is no archaeological support. Working backward, we can see that to achieve his results, Butler simply divided the polar circumference (and why polar except that’s what the metric creators did?) by the length of the MY and then by 366 twice. He then rationalized the inconvenient remainder of 360. But many different numbers could be rationalized as some combination of the key numbers of 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12 since there are so many possibilities. It’s a neat coincidence that this works out to 60 and 6, but 366 divided by 6 yields 61, not 60, which should be the more logical number of minutes to aim for.

Butler and Knight use these same numbers to propose whole sets of relationships related to mass, weight, volume, and even temperature—they say that if absolute zero is negative 1000 degrees, then water boils at 366 degrees. “Remarkable!” they proclaimed in Before the Pyramids (2009), oblivious apparently to the fact that temperature scales are arbitrary and the size of a degree differs between Fahrenheit and Celsius and can’t be said to be inherent in the universe.

Butler has previously attached the Megalithic Yard to Washington, DC in Before the Pyramids and on the Washington DC’s Chamber of Secrets website—which despite its name is not an American remake of Harry Potter. Instead, it’s a crackpot assemblage of bizarre claims about Washington, including (and I am not making this up) the “fact” that the Ark of the Covenant is buried in front of the White House and the “fact” that Washington, DC and Teotihuacan in Mexico share a mathematical relationship to the moon (which he believes was built by time traveling Freemasons from the future, or at least people who shared the same cult beliefs) as well as the asteroid Ceres (which he also believes is artificial):

The makers of the Moon created Ceres and left it in the Asteroid Belt to show that they had taken most of the material for Earth's Moon from the Asteroid Belt. They gave Ceres a quite remarkable relationship with the Moon in terms of its size and mass and they also replicated its circumference on Earth, between Washington DC (which is the most Megalithic city ever created) and another Megalithic city from the past, Teotihuacan. And to make certain there could be absolutely no mistake, this measurement of 27.322 Megalithic degrees or 2.986 km ran from the Megalithic hub of Washington DC - the middle of the Ellipse, to the Pyramid of the Moon in Teotihuacan. It is extremely hard to fathom how such point specific evidence could possibly be ignored.

Ceres’ equatorial circumference is generally given as 3,061 km (pi times twice the equatorial radius of approximately 487 km), which is not the same as the distance from Washington’s Ellipse to Teotihuacan’s Pyramid of the Moon—and why would you choose that pyramid, neither the largest nor most elaborate? Ceres’ polar circumference is about 2,857 km, based on a polar radius of approximately 455 km.

But Butler has never been good at math. I previously discussed how his moon measurements, lynchpin of his MY-future-Freemason conspiracy, are also disastrously wrong.

In terms of Washington, DC, his claims rest on a series of Google Earth measurements that allegedly show distances between DC monuments are multiples of megalithic yards and the number 366. Could this be for real? Well, no. You see, when you multiply a megalithic yard by 366, you get just about 1,000 U.S. (imperial) feet (997 by Butler’s numbers), give or take, depending on the exact decimal used. The error of one yard every thousand feet is negligible across the miles of distance Butler measures. Now what would you say are the chances that distances in a city planned out in imperial measurements would, within the margin of error for covering uneven terrain, use even multiples of 10, 100, or 1,000 feet? The metric system hides this fact, but the original imperial measures used in laying out Washington, DC shows that that “system” Butler “uncovered” was not a secret prehistoric plot but rather a conventional grid planned by Pierre L’Enfant in the 1790s using standard imperial measures, just like the public records of the time always maintained.

As for the goddess-worship? That’s another figment of Alan Butler’s imagination, albeit one based on a common misconception about Masonry derived from Albert Pike, who used the trappings of the Victorian occult in describing Masonry in Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry in 1871, rationalizing Masonry with appeals to Isis and the Greco-Roman goddess of the Mysteries that did not exist before he invented them. (Around the same time, the Grange also adopted nearly-identical Classical trappings, part of the Classical and occult revival that found equal expression in Theosophy.) It is from this book that claims about Masons worshiping Isis (or any other goddess figure) emerge.

For Butler, his time traveling Freemason moon-builders travel through space and time at the behest of the ancient Virgin Goddess, whom they worship as the constellation Virgo. He therefore looks around Washington and sees images of the “goddess” Columbia and reads them as Freemasonic idols of the Goddess. There is no evidence that the Freemasons worship a goddess; rather such goddess references were intended as symbolic and as justification for preexisting Masonic rituals. Columbia was the Uncle Sam of her day, a symbol. Would you take seriously the claim that a secret cabal of Illuminati secretly worship Saturn under the guise of Uncle Sam? Well, this is the same thing.

Columbia was a bit of symbolism created on the order of the British national symbol Britannia (created in the 1600s), herself imitating the Roman goddess of the city, Roma. No one actually worshiped either Britannia or Columbia, or any of their analogues: Germania (Germany), Marianne (France), Italia Turrita (Italy), etc. Indeed, Columbia isn’t even a Freemason invention! Columbia was invented by an African-American poet named Phyllis Wheatley in 1776. The DC statue most frequently identified with her, the Capitol dome’s Statue of Freedom, is allegorical, and was designed as a bit of classicizing allegory—from a concept by future Confederate president Jefferson Davis! Davis, despite frequent claims to the contrary, was not a Freemason. Indeed, after the Civil War, Davis specifically denied any involvement in Masonry (confirmed by the Masons) during an anti-Masonic propaganda blitz attempting to assign blame for the war to the Masons.

Scott Wolter, however, adopted Alan Butler’s ideas in their entirety. In the Hooked X (2009), for example, he describes at length how he and his wife see Washington as a giant sexual fetish, with the Washington monument as a giant Freemason penis penetrating two overlapping circular paths (identified as a vesica piscis) that surround the monument to form the city’s vagina. “Could the towering phallic (sic) have been erected as a beacon to the Goddess above to release her divine powers to the earth?”

Note that the supposed vagina did not exist until a recent re-landscaping of the monument grounds:

The Washington Monument, seen from above in 1919.

The Washington Monument in 2003 (Wikipedia)

The Washington Monument as depicted in Wolter's Hooked X, after the mid-2000s landscaping

This, of course, leads us into tonight’s episode, equally fantastic. Before we begin, let me remind you again that Alan Butler believes time traveling Freemasons built the moon.

The Episode
(In the style of Dan Brown's Lost Symbol)

Prologue

Somewhere in Minnesota
7:59 PM CT

The secret is how anyone could take this stuff seriously.

But someone did. Someone always does.

The forensic geologist gazed at the Nielsen ratings he cradled in his palms. The numbers were good, almost too good.

Make another one, he told himself. You have nothing to fear.

As was tradition, he had begun his journey toward tonight’s episode by donning the garb of a truth-telling exposer of Masonic truths, his earth-toned shirt and rugged Duluth Trading Company Bulldozer backpack selected to recall a movie archaeologist from those Spielberg films. Tonight, however, he was going to go for a different franchise. A Dan Brown franchise.

As he prepared to loose the daunting truth on the world, the forensic geologist wondered who on the outside would ever believe so much truth could be assembled in one our-long show. Stranger still a show airing on the same channel as Ancient Aliens.

“It’s time,” a voice whispered.

The forensic geologist let his gaze drift over to the television. A pleasant warmth began to stream through his body. He exhaled, smiling inwardly as he once again realized that he had gotten one over on the unsuspecting academics who had refused him entry into their most sacred ranks.

The history we’ve all been told is wrong.

Chapter 1
Some believe Washington has hidden messages. Messages only George Washington knew. It is colonial times. Sitting at his desk in the flickering light of an oil lamp, a man carefully scrawls on paper as the staccato rap of George Washington’s fist shakes his door. The men look at one another silently and the plans. Masonic symbols in all the streets. The plan is a good one. Washington is pleased.

Chapter 2
History is wrong. The words echoed in his ears as the forensic geologist got ready to expose the truth. He was in the heart of Washington getting ready to find evidence of something “huge.” The man claimed to be a friend, but can anyone truly be a friend when dealing with “DC,” what the geologist called “The District of Columbia”?

Rotund and jovial, Alan Butler was flush with the proceeds of two decades of books exposing and re-exposing the Freemasons as pagans. He knew the Freemasons would someday time travel to the past to build the moon, but the public wasn’t ready to know this yet. The time would be right. But only after the geologist paved the way.

“Do I have something to show you,” Butler said, jarring Scott Wolter from his complacency. Wolter struggled to pretend that he was not aware that Butler had written the book on the Masons secret symbols fifteen years ago, or that Wolter had himself written a book with a chapter on the same just five years ago.

Butler removed a marker and drew four uneven lines on a map of Washington. It’s a symbol of the goddess, Wolter realized. Five points in the star must be the symbol of Venus, even though there was no evidence of Venus having a five-pointed star. Ancient goddesses used six-pointed stars, but that was just another layer of the conspiracy.

Drawing lines reveals many mysterious symbols.

Butler knew better. This was all a conspiracy based on the megalithic yard (MY). Sure, academics and archaeologists have never found evidence that this yard existed, but that only meant that the time traveling moon builders were too clever for them. 366 megalithic yards might just about equal 1,000 feet, but Butler knew this wasn’t the secret. Obvious ideas never were. Instead it must be a cryptic hint of prehistoric ancient cults.

“Fancy a pint?” Butler asked.

“Now you’re talking my language,” Wolter replied.

In an upscale bar whose wood was dark and shiny, Butler played measurement games. He showed the geologist that the megalithic yard, divided by 10 could be used to make a cubic unit the size of a pint. This is proof of magic goddess powers, Butler thought. You’re all too blind to see it.

Wolter struggled to pretend that this information was new to him. The public needs to know, but they can’t know I know, he thought. I’ll pretend this is all Alan’s idea. No one will ever check my book, The Hooked X, to see that I’ve already written about this goddess worship or think Washington is a giant vagina with a huge penis in it.

“It’s the pubic triangle!” Wolter exclaimed. Diamonds, triangles, angles—all are vaginas. Washington is a 100 square mile diamond. Don’t listen to the people who tell you that Washington has three straight lines and the irregular Potomac River since 1846. Or that the District of Columbia, before the 1846 retrocession, was what was square, and not at the time synonymous with the city of Washington, then only a small part of the district. Those are stupid details that the Masons use to hide the truth. It’s a vagina-diamond.

My God. The city is a vagina and I get to tell everyone in America on national TV. Vagina!

Chapter 3
Wolter drove past monuments at the center of Washington, the marble temples serving as backdrop to a voice over that repeated what the audience had already heard. It was good to repeat things. It kept the mind sharp and made sure no one missed the subtleties and nuances.

Beneath the interplay of light and shadow on the grassy lawn of a park, Wolter and an older, professorial man walked. They discussed the origins of Washington, DC and the rancorous colonial debate that led to the nation’s capital landing on this humid piece of rural real estate. George Washington laid out a square of 100 square miles to define the federal district, even though parts of it would not end up in the final district.

But that wasn’t important.

The important thing is that the first boundary stone—that sandstone monument to sacred geometry—had been laid by the Freemasons. The Freemasons may have been secret practitioners of goddess worship, Wolter thought aloud, recording his thoughts in voice over. Sure, there wasn’t any evidence of this. But what was evidence against the weight of belief in the holy vagina and the penetrating power of the penis?

Wolter scowled when his hand-picked expert on early Washington told him that there was no Masonic symbolism in the city’s layout, no sacred geometry. He’d show him.

“I think it’s obvious,” he said. He continued talking, minute after minute, not letting anyone else speak. This was his time. He had the floor, and he wasn’t going to let some academic tell him what was true and what wasn’t. He ranted about secret agendas, goddess worship, and ideology that no one but him and Alan Butler recognized. They knew. They could see.

It was the kind of thing that could blow the lid off the mysteries of the vagina. All these people in the world. They had to be worshiping goddesses. Why else would men be interested in women if it wasn’t about begging goddesses for fertility and magic powers?

He’d show them all.

Chapter 4
The Washington Monument was covered in scaffolding, wooden frames encasing the old phallic tower. It had looked that way since the August 2011 earthquake. Maybe it was a symbol from the goddess that the city had lost her favor.

One cream paper Bulter and Wolter drew out the ellipses that overlap at the Washington Monument while crouching as close as security would let them to it. The ellipses created a vagina for the Monument to penetrate. Sure, those ellipses might only be a few years old, but Wolter felt confident that no one would notice if he just told them that DC architect Pierre L’Enfant designed it two hundred years old. Butler was happy not to tell the audience that the ellipses measured 366 megalithic yards because the ellipses were 1,000 feet across—but the audience would never know whether Butler was himself ignorant that 366 megalthic yards was just about 1,000 feet or if he simply hid the fact to create “amazing” coincidences that would fuel book sales and television appearances.

Wolter watched as computer graphics showed the audience again that Washington was a vagina. Vagina. Could it be any clearer that the people who designed the grounds in ancient times--almost TEN years ago—were secretly creating a symbol of holy sex?

Wolter took out his cell phone, white and shining in the hazy Washington sun. He showed Butler the square that bounded the old District of Columbia—which he again purposely conflated with the city of Washington—and told Butler that the square was the Masonic square and compass.

But this wasn’t enough.

The District must have been named for a goddess, Columbia. Never mind that she was invented only in late eighteenth century, by a woman and an African American no less, not a Mason. She was real. The goddess worshiped by the Freemasons.

Through the bustling streets of Washington Wolter sped, his SUV taking him the ornate Scottish Rite Masonic Temple, dripping in gold and encrusted with marble. A Mason, Akram Elias, wearing an American flag lapel pin and a pink tie, stared wistfully at Scott Wolter as Wolter demanded answers about goddess worship.

And he would have answers.

Chapter 5
Recapping what he learned brought comfort to Wolter. Seeing his truths splashed across the screen in white distressed type on a teal background reminded him that he was right. Saying them out loud every five to seven minutes only reconfirmed his beliefs. Goddess statues were everywhere. So were male statues, but no one cared much about them. Nobody liked looking at men. They did not have vaginas. Or boobs. But mostly vaginas.

Elias, an ex-Grand Master of the Freemasons, had ideas about the Masons’ secret symbols, but Wolter knew more. He knew Elias had appeared on Ancient Aliens and America’s Book of Secrets and a Dan Brown tie-in documentary—always using the mysteries of Freemasonry to build his career as a DC-based consultant for Capital Consulting and a onetime documentary producer. Every time he was on TV, it made him more famous and more likely to gain clients. He put these kind of things in his corporate biography.

Elias and Wolter knew a secret truth that neither mathematicians nor historians understood: geometry and freedom are “feminine” concepts. Math was a woman. Obviously. It wouldn’t be so hard to understand, like a typical woman, if it weren’t female.

“America is an idea,” Elias said. “Freedom.”

That is why the Masons were also engaged in a conspiracy to impose global population control and socialism, Wolter thought, until he realized he was thinking of a previous episode, a conspiracy thriller he had shot a few weeks back. This was the Dan Brown episode, he reminded himself.

The phone rings. Wolter jumps to answer. Butler found something. Something big. Something he “discovered” in 2011 and already wrote a book about but will pretend just happened anyway.

“The Pentagon,” Butler read loudly from a pre-written script.

“Whaaaaat?!?” Wolter half-shrieked, his voice rising like the constellation Virgo over a Masonic temple. He was secretly pleased with himself, confident that his line reading sounded completely natural. No one had the heart to tell him it did not.

Chapter 6
Wolter’s SUV sped through Washington’s sunny streets as he recapped his thoughts once again, hoping that the repetition would make his viewers believe that a secret elite was worshiping women somewhere in Washington. Not real women, of course. That would be silly.

Wolter remembered 9/11 and the shock and horror of seeing the Pentagon in flames and ruin. He showed pictures of the 9/11 attacks because exploiting 9/11 to lend emotional weight to a goddess worship theory while simultaneously making himself seem heroic was a two-for-one bonus. Who could doubt the word of a post-9/11 science hero?

Butler had another theory, and Wolter knew it was “earth-shattering.” The circle enclosing Stonehenge is five times smaller than the one enclosing the Pentagon. FDR, Butler said, put the Pentagon in Alexandria, Virginia to create a “megalithic triangle” with sites in DC that was 33 X 366 MY in length, even though this triangle—stretching from the Capitol to the Pentagon to the Ellipse—is irregular and obviously has no single “length” since it has three legs of different sizes. That did not matter so long as one leg met his megalithic assumptions.

“Alan,” Wolter said, “you continually amaze me.”

Butler smiled. He knew.

Wolter was sure that Washington must have been a “City of the Goddess,” and he was sure that the Freemasons keep the goddess hidden. He didn’t have to do anything so crass as prove that the megalithic yard existed by going to, say, a megalithic site in Europe to find it. He didn’t need to do anything so labor intensive as actually try to find evidence that the Masons—or anyone else in American history—worshipped a goddess.

He had Alan Butler.

And Alan Butler believed time travelers from the future built the moon.

And it was amazing.

220 Comments

An Over-Educated Grunt

1/11/2014 02:44:38 pm

You should do more reviews like this. This, and the America Unhinged episodes, are easily the most enjoyable things you've written. This one specifically looks like you're getting bored with the show itself and decided to start varying the theme.

What's astounding to me is that people assume that a centrally-planned city must be evidence of conspiracy of some kind. How are grids and a development plan evidence of perfidy? If that's the case, then DC's not even the first such city in the Americas; I know that New Orleans was laid down eighty years prior... also by a French military engineer.

For that matter, why are right angles evidence of the sacred feminine? I'm no ladies' man, but every woman I've ever known would be insulted if you told her she was all right angles and sharp corners. I would buy circles and ellipses, but sharp-cornered things seem like an incredibly silly association with femininity.

Steve

1/11/2014 02:59:15 pm

There you have it. We learn in the first paragraph that this episode is ALL ABOUT JASON:

"Alan Butler and Scott Wolter—have tried to sue me."

1/11/2014 03:04:27 pm

"Did Steve tell you that?

Steve. What kind of rap name is Steve, anyway?"

Harry (Not Hubbard)

1/11/2014 04:04:47 pm

Steve, as I recall, you thought it was important for Lynn Brant to reveal a tiff he had with Scott Wolter. Now, however, you object to Jason disclosing something similar - legal disputes he had with Butler and Wolter. I guess there is not pleasing you - except those who are willing to buy into your Sinclair-Templar belief system.

Only Me

1/11/2014 04:46:29 pm

And here I thought it was about the legendary V.A. Gina, a crafty man-eater that has been attributed to causing the downfall of more denizens of Washington, D.C. than corruption and tax evasion!

Gunn link

1/12/2014 04:15:43 am

The near-ending sounded a bit biased in this case, too:

"Who could doubt the word of a post-9/11 science hero?"

As usual, when Jason discusses Wolter, it comes across as intensely personal. Maybe Jason is simply flabbergasted that these people would try to shut him up.

Jason Colavito link

1/12/2014 04:26:07 am

No, Gunn. I was offended that America Unearthed was exploiting 9/11 to support a lunatic theory about goddess worship. It was the same disgust I felt when I read that Alan Butler believes 9/11 was an attack by the Islamic occult on Freemasonry and has exploited 9/11 imagery in support of his own (literally) lunatic theories about an "artificial" moon.

Gunn

1/12/2014 04:57:18 am

Okay, but well, it was a jab, dripping with something....

I was just pointing out how intensely personal this gig with Scott Wolter has become for you. But then, he is a fringe speculator and you are debunker of fringe speculation. I'm just saying that you come across as disliking him too much, as though with a lavish flavoring of vindictiveness. Just my take. Nothing personal. I just think you could do a review without the degree of sarcasm, and you would be better respected for it. Good luck in the future for both you and Wolter, as you seem to be intrinsically linked. (I'm purposely leaving a wide interpretation open.)

I'm hoping for a future Stonehole Heaven here in the near future....

1/12/2014 05:18:17 am

Gunn, do you read my reviews of Ancient Aliens? Do you think I have an "intensely personal" vendetta against Giorgio Tsoukalos and David Childress, too? I give the same coverage to their show that I do to this one, but since that show features six or more talking heads instead of just one, that one doesn't ever seem to receive the same degree of anger as my reviews of America Unearthed.

1/12/2014 06:46:35 am

Jason, that seems like a fairly good explanation...just for starters, though. I'm sorry to say I don't read your reviews of what I term "alien crap," and I'll admit to having a fairly narrow focus here to comment on. But I do like to read through the "good" comments to gain perspective, as I'm in no way close-minded.

If I may wax philosophical for a moment...it's difficult to equate or compare or even guess the knowledge in one person's head, with that in another's. But it does seem useful to pick and choose that which seems most truthful, or logical. (As I myself have done in determining the meaning of the KRS to my own satisfaction, from both its message and its archaeological setting).

I always try to base my speculations on logic, while trying to disperse any and all nonsense. You do the same thing, but with established history rather than speculation...you try to base your interpretation of "correct history" on logic (and evidence, of course), while trying to do away with nonsense.

I have said before that I can appreciate what you're doing, from a "dispelling nonsense" point of view, though it seems that you are overly harsh sometimes in your approach. There are many ways of saying just about the same thing, but without the attending sarcasm which can easily be interpreted as bitterness or malice, or however one might assess the confrontational approach you seem to be taking. Wolter can be checked without the attending degree of insult...which does set a certain tone here.

Unfortunately, there does seem to be a cadre of mischief-makers flitting about on this blog site, hoping for a suitable load to drop. Yes, I'm saying there are way too many loads being dropped here, as though from a "mean and nasty" beginning approach, perhaps. I'm saying in a long, round-about way that you could be more professional in your endeavors here, as you gracefully grow older in body and in your chosen field of "art."

Now that I've pumped you up towards a higher calling, or at least a higher road, how about a future blog heading to explore stoneholes? I can help you with the introduction, if you want. Just to say that probably the best case for pre-Columbus intrusions far inland in America are explained by stoneholes, of all things. (That makes a great introduction, in-and-of itself.)

Walt

1/12/2014 10:30:10 am

"...the same degree of anger as my reviews of America Unearthed."

It's clearly personal between you and Scott. You've resorted to mocking the guy's wardrobe! A bit childish and definitively personal. I'm a longtime reader so I know the background and have no problem with it being personal, but you should be able to admit it.

1/12/2014 10:32:09 am

The wardrobe line was a direct parody of Dan Brown's description of the clothing of his characters in "The Lost Symbol." There I was making fun of Brown's crappy writing, not Wolter's clothing.

1/11/2014 04:49:52 pm

Jason,

I humbly ask you a question that occurred to me tonight when, once again, I was amazed by your speed in posting your "critique" of an episode of America Unearthed.

Before I ask my humble and completely respectful question, I want to clarify that I certainly mean nothing in anyway whatsoever denigrating to your blog post, and this is merely a question, not a statement. (I know how upsetting it is for your delicate acolytes when you are questioned in any way other than with the utmost respect, normally reserved for tenured academics).

My humble question began when I cut and pasted your entire blog into Microsoft Word and checked your word count - 4,948 words.

2,616 of those words in your blog post are entitled "Background."

It occurred to me that you might be preparing some of your material in advance. After all, AU runs previews a week in advance of the next show. Next week's show has Scott going in a mini-sub underwater in a lake.

Here's the precise question so you don't think I've asked something else - Did you prepare any of your 4,948 words of this blog post, or have you prepared any of your other blog posts in advance.

The reason I ask is that I think some of your readers might not fully understand how the "production" of your blog posts occurs. For instance, that clever "HOAX" graphic that you added into this blog post. Was it created before the show aired tonight?

Such advanced production of your blog posts might change the way they're perceived by your readers. It would seem somewhat reminiscent of, say, getting a script in advance of a film production. Not at all "off the cuff" or "real" like one would expect, say, a documentary film to be created…or even a blog post that's supposedly written in reaction to a television show airing.

Tara Jordan link

1/11/2014 06:02:48 pm

Bed-wetting Alarm!

Drew

1/12/2014 12:22:29 am

I note you mention that you used Word before posting this question. Does that mean you prepared parts of it beforehand? If so, that might change the perception of readers who would expect that you would count each word by hand like a real "off the cuff" question would be formatted.

Matt Mc

1/12/2014 01:46:22 am

Or perhaps, just perhaps. The show in questions was so poorly scripted and had so little information in it that someone could write a 4000 plus word review during its airing.

There is a difference between having a script and outline for a documentary that is subject to changed as people are interviewed and research is done that to having a program that is scripted from beginning to end including interview sections and those interviews that are not scripted are edited in a way that alters what the interview subject is saying to meet the script of the show One is exploratory by nature the other is dramatic by nature. AU chooses the later and while noticeable in dialogue exchanges there is nothing wrong with pointing out that the show and outcomes are completely scripted before hand unlike other documentaries which make changes based on what is discovered during the production. I understand why AU would be completely scripted from beginning to end it enables them to have a fast production schedule and meet the expected goals of 26 episode per year if it was done the other way it would take about 3 or 4 months of production and research to complete an episode. AU is nothing but scripted TV posing as a Reality based documentary, nothing wrong with that at all, the only thing wrong is that it is made and executed in a way that it tries to deceive the viewer, a simple disclaimer would solve everything.

Thank you Steve for your great insights as always it is interesting to see someone take such pleasure in being a troll, have a good day and enjoy

1/12/2014 02:18:35 am

I'm afraid I don't quite understand how the facts of my reviews would change by gauging the speed with which I write them. Do your YouTube viewers not full understand how the "production" of your YouTube videos occurs? Clearly, you need to post a video documenting how you shoot and edit your videos to make sure nothing nefarious has occurred in their production.

But since you are so curious, I'll tell you that like any journalist, I research material ahead of time. H2 posts episode descriptions, so I have a good idea what the topic of the show is going to be. America Unearthed is not very adventurous, so they almost always choose the most well-worn subjects for the hour. A brief look at Alan Butler's and Scott Wolter's books was more than enough to suggest the likely topics for the show.

Having a good understanding of the subject matter--knowing the material cold--makes it easy to review claims as they are made.

I wrote the section labeled "background" around 6:00 PM, a little bit before the show aired. Then I had a snack and spent some time playing with my cats. I decided at 8:30 PM to do the review in the voice of Dan Brown, so I spent half an hour reading "The Lost Symbol" to get the voice down. I wrote everything labeled "The Episode" during the course of the hour the show aired (it's a VERY slow show now), and I took the time from 10:00 PM ET to 10:15 PM ET to re-edit the background material in light of the episode and copyedit the episode review.

I'm glad you liked the graphic, but it literally took me 90 seconds to produce. If I had more time, I could have made the lines glow and put the map on a suitably ominous background.

I don't suppose it shocks you to realize that I am not literally typing my blog posts as they run. I often plan out my subjects for the week in advance, and I adjust them as news happens. You might note that newspapers, magazines, and television all do the same thing.

Mark

1/12/2014 04:41:01 am

Are you implying that a documentary should be "off the cuff"? I would expect exactly the opposite. In my opinion there is a major difference between a documentary style interview, discussion, or re-enactment and the staging that is AU.

On a side note perhaps we can ask Scott to lead an investigation into the number of words Jason used in his review. Could be a hidden sign that he is being mind controlled by the time traveling, evil race of academics bent on work domination...

1/12/2014 05:18:39 am

You mean this blog isn't off the cuff? He didn't write it in the requisite arbitrary time window you've set for him? Well damn, we've all been defrauded.
What pointless criticism. I could care less if he wrote this ten minutes ago or ten years ago when a head injury gave him brief powers of prognostication through which he vividly foresaw this episode. I come to this blog because it's thorough, factual, insightful and entertaining- something America Unearthed fails to be.

1/12/2014 05:43:44 am

You left out a word, W.

This blog is also completely biased. Jason writes part of his review in advance. He neglects to mention this to readers. He's so biased that he know the show will be full of lies before it even comes out. Only on MSNBC does that hateful approach pass as journalism.

Why write part of it in advance? Jason claims it's because journalists do it that way. I claim it's because he wants it out quickly after the show airs so that he can intercept Google searches for the show. Certainly nothing wrong with that.

But there is something wrong with pretending to "review" a show when a large percentage of your review (52.8% in this case) was written in advance and reveals that Jason is not an unbiased reviewer. His "About" section says Jason "examine[s] the way human beings create and employ the supernatural to alter and understand our reality and our world." I don't think that's even close to what you do, Jason. I'm with Gunn. I think you're here to simply bash people.

The fact that you start bashing a show before it airs speaks volumes about you.

1/12/2014 05:52:13 am

Steve, I said I compiled the background research a couple of hours ahead of time. I also said I revised and adapted it in light of what the episode showed. Describing the history of an idea is not "bias," but if you'd like to defend the idea that time traveling Freemasons from the future built the moon, go right ahead. Should the show present a compelling case for something, I would of course note it in my review and revise whatever background material was needed to understand it. It's not my fault that they're recycling old material from 5, 10, or 100 years ago. Place the blame where it belongs: On the people who are recycling old claims that are so familiar that anyone can guess ahead of time what they'll be.

Also: I post the review on Saturday night because due to a change in my schedule, I don't have time on Sunday to review the show.

1/12/2014 07:11:56 am

"I'm with Gunn. I think you're here to simply bash people."

Sorry, Steve, but that's not quite what I think. I think Jason "overly-bashes" Wolter, but I see benefits to some of what else he does.

And my own prime motivation is to seek truth, not validation. Having said this, I still think it possible that Templars, or post-Templars and Cistercian Monks, perhaps--and indeed, possibly St. Clairs--had their fingers into medieval America, somewhere along the way in influencing history, if not directly affecting it.

As Phil would say, "We all need to just lighten up."

RLewis

1/12/2014 07:42:31 am

So next week the episode seems to be about the Aztalan State park. Through a few minutes of searching on the internet I found a site noting: "But Aztalan, first discovered by settlers in 1836, received its name because of the largely discredited idea that it was somehow connected to the Aztecs" Hmmm. Guess what this episode is about? I'm also guessing we're going to to see a skeleton of an "Aztec high priestess". And probably some reference to the Codex Borturini (spoiler alert - it says they came from an island. Wisconsin is not an island).

DAN D

1/12/2014 08:53:59 am

Now you did it, let the pussy cat out of the bag. Now Jason can't write any background material until the episode airs in real time so as not to mislead any of his minions.

The Other J.

1/12/2014 09:54:02 am

RLewis --

There's a body of a woman at Aztalan -- it's in the museum. She's a local, though, not an Aztec. And I think the island they're talking about is out in Rock Lake. There IS a stone pyramid at the bottom of the lake -- more of a peaked barrow-shape than a traditional pyramid. That's not a secret. And I think there are some old megalithic artifacts on an island out there.

The problem is, if I have this right (I'm from there -- so is Sean in these comments), is that the native population claims the artifacts were already there when they arrived, and they built on top of that. If that's the case, it leaves a wide-open gap for Wolter to fill in whatever the hell he wants.

I'm dreading the episode.

Harry

1/12/2014 10:26:05 am

Oh, Steve, Steve, Steve!

So what you are saying is that writing even part of a review before the episode airs - even a part that is limited to information Jason did not need to see the episode to know, i.e., background on the topics the show would cover - is proof of bias and shoddy practices. Then you really need to Harry Hubbard's first response to Jason's questions:

Q "Several readers are interested in your appearance on America Unearthed. Did producers instruct you about what you could or could not discuss?"

A "No, they didn't have to. We all had copies of the script. They knew I was going to give my claim which I wanted to get to any National TV audience. Everything follows a script at the end of editing and all the good footage ends up on the floor. They shot enough scenes and dialog to make several shows if they wanted to."

To review, everyone had copies of the script of America Unearthed before the show was filmed. Take a look for yourself if you don't believe me.

Now that you know, are you going to hold Scott Wolter to the same standard as Jason and dismiss America Unearthed as not worthy of your defense, or will you apply a double standard, as you always do? If you want to see bias, look in the mirror.

1/12/2014 10:31:18 am

P.S. Just so there is no confusion, I am the poster named Harry who is not named Hubbard.

1/12/2014 10:38:17 am

Harry I think Steve's comment was based on the fact that Jason and others (myself included) have criticized Wolter and Committee films about how heavily scripted the show is. Scripted to the point that if any information that is counter or counter productive to the theory of the day. The edit around it and when they do so someone disagreeing with Wolter they edit the show so Wolter has a grand speech and the final word on the subject not letting the opposing side be heard. They have also (in the case of Rockwall) have created a whole episode around something the Wolter said he knew was natural the second he laid his eyes on it. So evidence or presented facts are not factored in to the preplanned preconceived script.

Jason has pointed this out several times and Steve is just being a smart ass, try to use the same criticisms against Jason. This happens a lot with Steve's comments, he thinks he is being so smart trying I guess to turn the tables on Jason. For as much as he accuses Jason of having an agenda against Wolter, the only real noticeable agenda is Steve really wants to try to get Jason goat.

Shane Sullivan

1/12/2014 01:53:18 pm

"The problem is, if I have this right (I'm from there -- so is Sean in these comments), is that the native population claims the artifacts were already there when they arrived, and they built on top of that."

Well, there's no island on Rock Lake right now, but I've heard that the water levels were lower before the mills were built on the lake, and that some of the pyramids penetrated the surface before that. Unfortunately, I don't know enough about logging to explain, or understand, how a saw mill would cause the water levels to rise; consequently, I don't know if there ever was such a change in recent history.

As for Aztalan, Ho-Chunk oral tradition says that they and other Wisconsin tribes drove the Mississippians out of the area because they (the Mississippians) had some rather brutal ceremonial practices, including human sacrifice. A Ho-Chunk fella told that story to my dad (I think in the past I misattributed it to the Potawatomi), but at least part of it is substantiated here: http://ioway.nativeweb.org/history/hochunk.htm

How Scott Wolter is going treat--or ignore--all that, I shudder to think.

1/12/2014 02:56:58 pm

Why are we even arguing with a man who is delusional enough to believe,he is genetically related to Jesus Christ?

1/12/2014 03:20:35 pm

Tara Jordan wrote, "Why are we even arguing with a man who is delusional enough to believe,he is genetically related to Jesus Christ?"

Show me one place where I say that, fetish girl. Just one. Don't duck the challenge tough girl. Back up your claim that I think I'm "genetically related to Jesus Christ." Man up.

1/12/2014 03:35:13 pm

Steve.
I am confused.You are not Steve St Clair Aka his secret bloodline majesty?.

Man up.yourself.Why are you posting anonymously?.

Byron DeLear link

1/17/2014 07:38:10 am

Quick note to say I thought the Washington D.C. episode of America Unearthed was the best one yet --- and I thought Jason's excellent Dan Brown-ism was his best review. I thought Scott’s soliloquy in front of the conventional D.C. historian was inspired. Gunn in an earlier comment had mentioned the clear Masonic implications of many of the design symbolism, etc. embedded into our capital, etc. I have studied for years the semiotics surrounding the foundation of the United States, generally, in connection to esoteric symbolism within Masonry, and specifically, concerning the first flag of America, the Grand Union. As many here may realize, vexilollogy deals with symbols and the import of semiotics, etc. and the reasons why certain symbols are used often times have been lost to history, as is the case with the Grand Union. I recently spoke in Boston regarding the important national icon as part of a commemoration concerning the hoisting of the first flag of America, and have a book covering my research. Here is the NPR WGBH story on the topic with a link to on-air story as well: http://wgbhnews.org/post/somerville-still-raises-grand-union-flag-238-years-later
What I have found in my research metabolizing reams of revolutionary era primary sources is that there could very well have been specific intent with regard to the incorporation of symbols and allegory woven through the fabric of the craft, into the designs of our nation—as builders in a metaphorical sense, the Freemasons, building a new age and a new republic undoubtedly imbued their creation, as it were, with these symbols. Speaking for my own experience as a Mason, I can tell you that there is a very concrete perception that these symbols and allegory have a very real impact on the world around us. There are varying interpretations of the degree and level of influence (viz. psychological, spiritual, etc.). Although conclusions about the Megalithic Yard etc. may be overreaching—or for that matter whether it even existed or not—the carefully worded contributions to the episode by the oft-appearing Akram Elias were 100% accurate by my lights. There is a context for the contemporary use of these symbols and those who study semiotics and what could be called “civil religion” understand that, for some, they embody “talismanic” properties.

Enon

1/17/2014 11:19:20 pm

Bro. Byron, I dare say that the vast majority of Freemasons, and especially Masonic scholars, disagree with your inference about the incorporation of Masonic symbols by the "Founding Fathers." Likewise, the views about this topic expressed by Akram Elias are pretty much considered "fringe Freemasonry" by most (S. Brent Morris and Art deHoyos have taken issue with them on several occasions.) Remember that Freemasons really made up a minority of the "Founders;" for example, only 16% of those who signed the Declaration of Independence and a third of those who signed the Constitution were known to be Freemasons. When it came to designing Washington DC, George Washington was the only Master Mason involved. (A related issue that I'm a bit surprised Scott Wolter didn't bring up is the Great Seal, particularly as it is seen on the Dollar Bill...) Unfortunately, some Masons seem to want to find far more Masonic influence than is warranted in these sort of things.

Jason gave a very good review of this episode, and I was impressed with the factual, evenhanded way he dealt with the Masonic issues involved. For the record, the regular Freemasonry has never involved goddess worship, dualism, nor the sacred feminine. The things Scott was apparently so fascinated by simply don't have any Masonic significance. But then again, the medieval Templars have no real connection to Freemasonry (nor to the Sinclairs -- how ever you spell it) either, apart from romantic tales spread decades later without the benefit of any supporting evidence. Alas, that sees to be exactly how this show works.

[NOTE: This note is cross posted in two threads to follow Byron's assertion which was also copied directly into two threads.]

1/18/2014 02:47:42 am

I appreciate you replying Enon, but you should do your homework a little more carefully before making counterfactual claims. To suggest that G. Washington was the only “Master Mason” involved with designing Washington D.C. betrays either a total ignorance of the subject or a willful agenda to spread falsehoods.

The designer of Washington D.C., Pierre L’Enfant, was initiated into Freemasonry on April 17, 1789 at Holland Lodge No. 8 in New York and although we don’t have documentary evidence of his further degree work to become a “Master Mason,” it thoroughly debunks Hodapp’s ‘Freemasons for Dummies’ assertion that, “out of the men primarily involved in the design [of Washington D.C.]—George Washington, Pierre Charles L'Enfant, and Andrew Ellicott—only Washington was Freemason.”

The lack of primary source records for this period is notorious and to fully understand history we must flesh-out surrounding circumstances to determine probabilities—if we examine L’ Enfant’s most influential mentors and individuals responsible for recruiting him toward the cause of America, we see well-known Masonic actors. Pierre-Augustin Caron de Beaumarchais—undoubtedly a polymath, as wiki reports, “a French playwright, watchmaker, inventor, musician, diplomat, fugitive, spy, publisher, horticulturalist, arms dealer, satirist, financier, and revolutionary (both French and American)”—was a staunch advocate for the cause of America and rallied L’ Enfant to the support the revolutionary enterprise. Beaumarchais, a Freemason, is probably most well-known for composing the enlightenment play The Marriage of Figaro, which, of course, was set to music by another member of the craft, Wolfgang Mozart.

When L’ Enfant arrived in America he served under another well-known French Mason, Marquis de Lafayette. Lafayette was also recruited by a famous Freemason Benjamin Franklin—the most famous American in the world at that time—and American agent Silas Deane, most likely a member of the craft, although no primary source records indicating as much survive. Lafayette and L’ Enfant were very close to Washington, whom the former considered to be a mentor and father-figure. During the war, Lafayette commissioned L’ Enfant to paint a portrait of Washington, who had L’ Enfant design the seal of the Society of the Cincinnati—devices sensitive to the needs of political semiotics. Point being, L’Enfant was being charged with significant symbolic and artistic designs at our nation’s birth in addition to the frank functionality demanded by an effective layout for Washington D.C. Col. Tobias Lear V, Washington’s secretary from 1784 until Washington’s death in 1799 was also a Freemason, as I recently discovered in primary source record research into my discovery of the first documentary evidence of the phrase “United States of America.” Lear handled many of Washington’s business dealings both private and presidential; he dealt with L’Enfant regularly as Washington’s representative. Many of the important icons and edifices built during the foundation of America were conducted by well-known Freemasons such as Irish immigrant James Hoban who designed the White House. As a historian, I think it’s important to separate myth from reality, but efforts at debunking fringe authors can also overreach. The symbols, patterns and designs within Masonry are used as educational devices representative of belief systems and a drive toward perfection. In laying the foundation stones of the new republic—both literal and metaphorical—individuals sensitive to the communicative power of semiotics and symbolism most assuredly incorporated their knowledge into their designs. Many of these designs have roots in the craft as many of the designers were in the craft. Sensational reports about satanic symbols, Satanism etc. are laughable and meant only to stir neurons in people’s heads to sell copy, etc. Enon, you “dare say” the “vast majority of Freemasons” disagree about “the incorporation of Masonic symbols by the “Founding Fathers.” This is hyperbole, and from my experience, not supported by any evidence.

1/18/2014 04:31:56 pm

Bro. Byron, I assure you that I have "done my homework." There is no evidence that either L’ Enfant was a Master Mason and to assert otherwise, unless you have very recently found new evidence, appears to show "either a total ignorance of the subject or a willful agenda to spread falsehoods," as you have so unkindly put it.

The records of Holland Lodge No. 8 lodge indicate that someone with a similar name, who may or may not have been Pierre Charles L’Enfant (it is given as both "Major [Francis, crossed out] L’Enfant" and as “Enfant, T. L.,” but not as "Pierre L'Enfant"), was entered into Freemasonry, but may not have advanced any further. The records of that Lodge appear to be complete for this time period and those men who were entered with him are recorded as advancing, but L'Enfant is not. (By the way, those records were not known when Chris Hodapp published his claim that L’ Enfant was not a Mason, and other scholars, including S. Brent Morris, were also making the same claim.) He may have completed his degrees later elsewhere, we don't know. But, this lack of evidence does not lend credence to the idea that Masonic symbolism was so important to L’ Enfant that it was embedded into his plan for the District of Columbia. Who his associates were also proves nothing in regards to his being a Master Mason or his intentions in the design of the City. (I would also like to note that other than a brief mention in an unattributed posting – which has apparently been copied verbatim on several web pages, including the message board on David Icke's site – I can find no evidence that Beaumarchais was a Freemason. I did find that he is referred to several times in a paper printed in a volume of Ars Quatuor Coronatorum where I would have expected to see him listed as a member had there been a record of that fact. Such mention being missing is, of course, not proof that he wasn't a member, but it is somewhat as telling.)

As for the remaining Master Mason involved with the layout of Washington D.C., there is no evidence of George Washington being so inclined regarding the use of Masonic symbolism. Although he spoke well of the craft, the records we hove do not show him to have been overly active Masonically. He was twice named the WM of Alexandria Lodge No. 22, but records indicate that he never actually served as such.

The data on L’ Enfant may be incomplete and, as you imply, must be filled in by assumptions, but that is not fact. Likewise, although we can make many assumptions, there is really little to no factual evidence of Masonic symbolism in the design of the city; the case for it is simply not as strong as the case against. The fact that the White House and other structures designed by men known to be Freemasons do not incorporate Masonic symbolism either lends no additional support to belief in the use of such symbols in the overall layout of the District.

My assertion that the majority of Masons do not support the theories presented in the posting I replied to may be seen as hyperbole, but it is really any more of an assumption than that of hidden Masonic symbolism in the design of Washington. Asserting that many Masons are deeply affected by the symbols of the Craft does not confirm that George Washington, Pierre L'Enfant , or anyone else purposely put such symbols into the design of the city. It remains that the majority of Masonic writers who have weighed in on the topic, particularly those who are well respected in the field, oppose the idea of an intentional inclusion of much Masonic symbolism in the design of Washington D.C. Others, including Past Grand Master Elias may disagree, but they just don’t have the facts to prove it.

Finally, Brother, I would request that should you wish to refute my assertions further please do so in a manner befitting a member of the Craft. I am not perfect and do not know everything, but some of the language used above did not seem to be fitting with our promise "to remind him, in the most tender manner, of his failings, and aid his reformation."

Mandalore

1/11/2014 02:54:01 pm

Well somebody needs to 'blow the lid off the mysteries of the vagina.' I don't see you doing that, Jason. For shame. At least now I have a new battlecry: Vagina!

Joyce D

1/12/2014 10:20:41 am

I like a show dedicated to honoring women. The sacred feminine or whatever nonsense he calls it we know that men in that era worshipped us. That is good.

As far as the measuring stick--I don't get the significance. It could have been a cubit, or based on the kings pace. It is insignificant. There was no need for a standardized unit of measure until the industrial revolution.

I would say that the first standardization measurement in the world that is still with us today is the wagon wheel axle.

Our railroads have a standard gage of 56 and 1/2 inches. The episode was hyping nonsense.

jeanne

1/12/2014 11:03:12 am

holy cow ! I think if the founders (the Deists, Agnostics, Atheists too) REALLY idolized and worshipped women, they would have given us the vote and not waited more than 120 years to do it. I am getting sick and tired of the glorification of ignorance...the "I don't need research, facts...I know it in my gut" ...the current assault on reason is damaging our society. and yes, I am an old woman who has watched this BS unfurl for more than 35 years.

Clint Knapp

1/12/2014 03:33:54 pm

Ever notice that the only time the "sacred feminine" is brought up is when the vaguely vagina-shaped (really Scott? Anything oval? Can we back the season up for an anatomy lesson?) object of episodic obsession is being penetrated by an imagined or symbolic penis?

We have solar penises giving Newport Tower orgasms through an ovoid rock, and the Lincoln Monument penetrating... the elliptical paths in the lawn.

This isn't sacred feminine worship, it's just sex-obsession. If the [insert conspiracy group of the day here] were really a goddess cult honoring a sacred feminine, their goddess of choice would be represented by herself- not as something for a godly penis to penetrate. If not alone, then at least given equal footing, which is not seen in this narrative at all.

If anything, Wolter's version seems to acknowledge that there is a tradition that the Judeo-Christian god has a female counterpart in the Shekinah, but would rather construct a narrative of hero-Templar worshiping a vagina-shapes rather than any meaningful goddess cult activity.

Your average goddess cult imagery has very little to do with imagined vagina-shapes everywhere, and almost never are they accompanied by the act of penetration. Typical fertility goddesses are seen represented by figures of heavy-set women, usually with great emphasis on the breast- not the vagina.

The one exception I can think of right away is Isis- who we've seen mentioned in the show, incorrectly, as Greek. Some of the more commonly referenced images of Isis are engravings relating the story of Osiris being dismembered by his brother Set and reassembled by Isis. Isis impregnates herself with the dead god's phallus, and is seen perched atop it in bird form.

Thane

1/12/2014 04:03:36 pm

Actually, there were standards weights and measures prior to the Industrial Age. They were needed for trade which was very extensive both locally and further afar

The challenge was that each Prince / Lord / Regional or town authority usually had adopted local standards and so there was some variation from place to place. There were laws in place as well to prevent trade fraud that relied on those local standard wights and measures. A baker could get into real trouble by selling under weight bread, for example.

The Museums Association has a nice little doc about per-industrialization weights and measures.

http://www.museumsassociation.org/download?id=77607

Enjoy

1/12/2014 10:02:09 pm

Correction: for some reason I said Lincoln Monument, obviously I meant Washington.

1/13/2014 08:41:10 am

Yes, I'm glad that SW finally exposed that women hold all of the power in Washington.

Paul N. link

2/5/2014 08:16:26 am

Good Lord, not this piece of drek about Roman chariots and wagons. If general study of railroads prior to the Civil War would show that there was no standardization for railroad gages. Real gage standardization came about as result of Union forces needing a consistent means of transportation for supplies and troop movements without having to switch trains and rollingstock every time they went from one railroad company to another. Prior to the war each railroad company had its own roadbeds and rollingstock as well different types of rails. As such B&O rollingstock would not work on Illinois Central tracks because the wheelbases were different. The reason they have the wider bases now, was due to the introduction of the Pullman sleeping car, first used following the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, when it was used to carry his body back to Springfield Illinois for burial.

Laetitia

1/11/2014 03:11:52 pm

My favorite part occurred with the camera getting a close up of the book that Butler used as a straightedge to make his va-jay-jay lines. How convenient to get a free visual plug for his book about Washington!

Martin R

1/11/2014 04:20:31 pm

Didn't that immediately give you another big clue - that Wolter has given up the ghost. At first, he's told that he is about to learn something new and fantastic. Then, there is the book. He's now faking about the stuff he already knows.

1/11/2014 04:23:25 pm

And, yes, very entertaining review. You gave yourself a writing exercise and passed with flying colors.

Leslie Harris link

1/11/2014 03:12:18 pm

best review yet! A double-header slamming Wolter AND Dan Brown, two of the most annoying and pretentious guys currently foisting their convoluted claptrap on the public. Thanks, Jason!

1/12/2014 04:08:53 pm

At least Dan Brown admits it's fiction.

I haven't read the books as I've read the Holy Blood, Holy Grail claptrap and other related fantastical ...there was no need to read additional fiction.

How funny was it, btw, that the Holy Blood, Holy Grail folks lost their suit against Dan Brown because they claim what they wrote was real history and Dan Brown wrote a bit of fiction that merely used "history" as a plot device? I laughed.

BillUSA

1/11/2014 03:13:48 pm

I hate to say it, but at this point, "America Unearthed" has eroded to the point of making "Ancient Aliens" seem credible.

And curse that Dan Brown.

1/11/2014 03:36:53 pm

I laughed so hard, I think I cracked a rib! Have you never tried your hand at comedy?

Some actual history and entertainment rolled in one. Yes, it is possible.

CFC

1/11/2014 04:06:53 pm

Live, from New York, it's Saturday Night...... with Jason Colavito!!!

1/11/2014 03:47:37 pm

I think Mr. Butler may fancy more than a pint on occasion.

Varika

1/11/2014 04:03:08 pm

Oh dear.

It's finally happened.

An episode of America Unearthed so boring and mind-numbing that I fell asleep in the middle.

Really, I have NEVER heard two V's connected only at the point called a chevron. That has ALWAYS been described as stacked V's. I'm sure the US military will be scrambling to revamp their uniforms now.

Also, a quick Google search, Jason, indicates that the average length of the human foot is 26.3 cm (with a standard deviation of 1. 2 cm!). Converted to inches, that's about 10.4 inches. Multiplying that by 3 (for number of feet) and dividing by 36 (the length of an Imperial yard), and then multiplying the result by 12 (inches to an imperial foot) and you get....ta-dah! 2.6 feet. This would tend to suggest that people in the past didn't even have smaller feet, but rather that the recorded history--that the Imperial unit was an attempt at standardization in the late medieval or early Renaissance period--is why a "foot" is 12 inches when most people don't have 12-inch feet.

1/12/2014 01:09:57 am

Actually, they've been referred to as chevrons before. The Civil War-era uniforms featured chevrons in both directions, and I'm fairly certain (though willing to admit the possibility of error) that British enlisted rank badges, which are "stacked V" rather than point-upward, are also referred to as chevrons. Short version - it's not unheard-of, and as technical errors go, it's not even worth mentioning.

Your comment about feet does bring up something that I wish shows like this would touch. The reason that masons were ripe for a secret fraternity was that they did have carefully restricted trade secrets and tools, not least of which was a measuring tool (I'm posting with all my references packed for moving, so this is purely off memory). This measuring rod would vary rod to rod, but would be the same on any single construction campaign, where the same master mason remained in charge. The fact that we can measure different "foot units" on different construction sites, such as cathedrals, argues very strongly that there was no megalithic yard, because on sites where we know how they were built, we know that standard units of length could vary by measurable amounts. Suggesting that all of pre-recorded history was built to a single very precise unit of measure is ludicrous.

1/12/2014 06:16:48 am

I think that it's interesting to note that the actual measurement Thom found was not 2.7 feet, but 5.4 feet. I'm not sure why he cut it in half (probably had more "fits" that way). I can imagine 5.4 could be construed as an average man's height or arm span. It's probably just coincidence as (due to the measuring problems Jason noted above), the MY was quickly discredited as soon as it was published.
BTW - I also read that Thom was discouraged to see many fringe-scientists use the MY to support their outlandish claims.

Jackal

1/11/2014 04:29:53 pm

Are you sure that isn't supposed to be a Hooked X on the Washington DC map? Or that SEX wasn't hidden in the straight lines with all of that Washington Monument business going on? Really liked the before and after pictures of the Washington monument showing the recent changes to the landscaping - I was under the impression that it had been designed that way from the beginning. It's these kind of omissions that led me to your site in the first place. I kind of like the show but had suspicions since the first episode which led me here when I was looking up facts on one episode or another. Now my true enjoyment is watching the show quickly followed up by reading your reviews and all of the comments arguing the merits of the different perspectives. The funny thing is that I was given a copy of Wolter's book "The Kennsington Runestone" years ago and found myself questioning the interpretations within about the first 5 pages. It took me a few episodes before I realized the author was the host of the show and it was that same "gut instinct" that something doesn't seem quite accurate that helped me figure out it was the same person. This particular review was a little over my head (probably the math) but humorous and educational as always - Keep up the good work.

Ray ray

1/11/2014 04:42:15 pm

Ironic how much it matters that the calculations for the megalithic yard are a fraud, because they're less than .4% off, but you allow "one yard" every "thousand feet" (which is actually one yard every 300 ish or 3 feet every 100, way to do the EXACT same thing as these jackasses and use words to distort reality and lend credence to your point of view) for "hills". What a joke, man. No doubt, Scott Wolter is a fucking moron, but where's your TV show? You're a fucking hater, and that's all you'll ever be. You're sure as hell not an author or an editor.

Go ahead and delete this. The only person that NEEDS to have read this has

1/11/2014 04:53:26 pm

Personally, I think such a brilliant example of thoughtful critique, polite manner and sharp debating skill should be preserved for posterity. It should prove informative to younger, impressionable minds eager to learn.

1/11/2014 05:58:23 pm

"such a brilliant example of thoughtful critique, polite manner and sharp debating skill ".
Also known as a vagina monologue.......

1/11/2014 09:06:33 pm

Ah, Tara. It is so good to have you back. :)

1/12/2014 03:06:36 am

Thanks Only Me.
This episode was hilarious "Masonic symbolism in Washington DC,Secret Blueprint of a camel toe".
I wonder if Bill Clinton,Monica Lewinsky,"the cigar" & the blue dress were also accessories to the "hidden goddess" rituals?.

Dave Lewis

1/12/2014 07:52:47 am

"Profanity is the linguistic crutch of the inarticulate motherf--ker."

1/12/2014 09:53:20 am

I dunno, I find well-crafted profanity and obscenity to be an excellent means of converting certain points. I could say the best thing Ray Dawn Chong up there's parents could ever have done for him was say "let's just cuddle" the night of his conception. I could suggest that his manners are in line with the offspring of a gorilla and a donkey. However I doubt that would register near as well with him as telling him to shut his goddamn face hole before someone puts it to the only use it deserves and gang-sharts down his worthless throat.

Were I so inclined of course. I cannot abide unimaginative swearing. If you are going to do something do it well.

Scott Hamilton

1/11/2014 04:48:57 pm

I didn't really think that time-traveling masons built the moon, but then on the map with the marker lines drawn on it you found the Starfleet symbol, and now I believe.

1/11/2014 05:50:17 pm

Unfortunately I haven't seen the episode yet.(no active link to the full episode so far) but I wonder who is the source of inspiration for this vaginal delirium?

Jens

1/11/2014 06:50:00 pm

Doing it in the style of Browns writing was an inspired idea.

1/13/2014 01:02:37 am

Jason, if you are taking requests, can we get a "The Catcher in the Rye" review next week?

Dan

1/11/2014 06:54:25 pm

The Wolterians must feel so deeply foolish having defended this scam artist after this silly episode, that their only response to Jason's review is to attack Jason. Besides being sad and predictable, its also kind of ironic since this is Jason's best review so far. It manages to entertain and provide humor while completely eviscerating another ridiculous AU episode.

FANTASY HISTORY WATCHER

1/11/2014 10:24:20 pm

The Hooked X exists EVERYWHERE

It just hasn't been spotted (yet)

Sacqueboutier

1/11/2014 11:15:16 pm

Wow! I've been wearing vaginas on my sleeves for 23 years, and never knew. Thank you, Scott Wolter!

Titus pullo

1/12/2014 01:15:58 am

Go back to Hawaii and the babe in the bikini, I feel asleep when the number babble started. And mathematics feminine? Wow I missed that, my physics classes were about 90 percent men, I went to the wrong school.

Michael Haynes

1/12/2014 02:03:07 am

Thanks for publishing the before-and-after pictures of the grounds surrounding the Washington Monument, Jason; that in itself is all that's needed to disprove the stuff I heard on last night's episode. I did notice that when Scott and Alan Butler were looking at aerial photos of the monument that a tiny disclaimer appeared on the screen three times, but my tv screen is too small for me to have read it. Was this merely a disclaimer of ownership or did it have some pertinent information?

I have to admit that, after the previous episodes of America Unearthed where Scott disproved several fanciful theories, it was kind of pleasing to see him back in full crackpot-theory mode. I haven't seen anyone as loony as Alan Butler take on the nation's capital since Ashley Cowie and SyFy's Legend Quest, and that's saying a lot for a city inhabited by loons.

1/12/2014 02:05:51 am

The disclaimer was the was about the ownership of the images. They were provided by the US Geological Survey via Google. Obviously the government is suppressing the truth by documenting the conspiracy for use on cable TV shows.

1/12/2014 09:58:22 am

I suppose the rejoinder would be the landscaper who created the overlapping circles (ovals, really) is in on the "secrets in plain site" game.

1/12/2014 03:12:46 am

The wisdom of Scott Wolter:"If we go back far enough,they didn't understand procreation...".

1/12/2014 09:59:38 am

Did he actually say that in the episode?

Because no herders ever understood what procreation was, right?

1/12/2014 10:30:27 am

Oh, yes, he said it. After Butler established that ancient people built the megalithic sites using a precise unit of measurement.

Ancient people...great at math, lousy at sex.

1/12/2014 03:05:40 pm

Wolter used to infuriate me,now he makes me laugh.He has great entertaining value.He is a wonderful stand-up comedian,
"As psychotic as it gets outside, the comic can be more psychotic".
Lewis Black

Gunn Sinclair link

1/13/2014 03:49:57 am

Reminds me of Jonathan Winters. Off-balance part of the time, but a comic genius.

A few days ago on TV, I don't remember the source, a mental health expert claimed that based on brain imaging, he himself is a latent psychotic. He claims that only excellent nurturing kept him from going berserk.

This might help explain a few things here....

1/13/2014 04:17:54 am

Tara, I've found that you make a pretty good sounding board for gut reactions. So now, if one looks far enough back, she will find two inescapable quirks which could throw a monkey wench into previous comments here:

If we go far enough back, we're apparently all related, including Jesus Christ Almighty. Fully Man, fully God. We are all genetically linked, or related. (But I know what you mean.)

Then, too, if one believes in evolution, Wolter is correct that if one goes back far enough, she will find a sub-human prototype incapable of putting sex and offspring together as a concept. Lions, for example, have a baffling instinct for killing other lions' babies, but for one reason, or two? Then, if we go back even farther, we see a degradation of the concept of self-recognized procreation. Go figure...Wolter right about this?

1/13/2014 08:24:06 am

Procreation is an instinct. Higher understanding of the biology behind it is not required to know sex + fertility = babies. This is why animals go into heat. They become fertile, their bodies release hormones to make them receptive to intercourse and pheromones to attract a mate. They know that mating during this time will produce offspring.

It isn't possible to go far enough back to find something that didn't know what procreation is. Every living thing on Earth is a product of procreation, from man right down to single-cellular organisms. Given that man diverged from chimpanzees a couple million years ago, we know they had to understand procreation because they didn't all die off and you and I can sit here writing on Jason's comment thread because of it.

If one chooses to adopt a creationist view it's even easier to make this argument because one is accepting Adam and Eve as the first people and they certainly understood procreation because they had children.

The lion example is entirely irrelevant to the point. Male lions kill the cubs of other males to assert dominance over their pride. Female lions will reject a newcomer male and won't go into heat while they have cubs- meaning the new male cannot procreate with them. So he kills the cubs, the females then have no reason to reject him and the procreation instinct takes over again; she goes into heat, there is mating, and there are more cubs.

If anything, the lion example reinforces the idea that "lower" animals have plenty of understanding about procreation.

1/13/2014 01:36:36 pm

The lion example is a stepping stone downward, or upwards, depending on how you look at it. It was given as an example of transition for understanding the nature of sex, and partial recognition of its results.

You say: It isn't possible to go far enough back to find something that didn't know what procreation is.

Okay, you've just stated the opposite of what Wolter said, and you are clearly wrong, which means that he is clearly right. One can certainly go back far enough to find something that didn't know what created it.

Instinct is not an intellectual capability, in a thinking sense. You don't even have to go back. Look around you for nearly unlimited examples showing that intelligence is not necessary to procreate. Instinct alone is enough. Didn't we use to be, like, fish and birds at some point?

Part of understanding the birds and the bees is understanding that intellectual intelligence is not required for procreation...it comes naturally, and it came naturally, without much intelligence, for earliest mankind, too (whatever earliest means). Wolter is right, it's all about going back far enough.

He passes the exam...you fail, and miserably.

1/13/2014 04:03:53 pm

Gunn
1) Wolter talks about human procreation.
2) "We are all genetically linked".
This is not true.The "Ganlea Megacanina" is the final nail in the "out of Africa" coffin.

A new primate from the Eocene Pondaung Formation of Myanmar and the monophyly of Burmese amphipithecids
http://tinyurl.com/mnynmg9

1/14/2014 04:27:28 am

So then, the improbability of "humanity" evolving in at least two separate lines is academically sound? Or, is there a debate still going on? Sounds like the Solutrean debate, which can put Europeans in America well before most other peoples.

Human? What is human? When was the switch to "understanding" first flipped? The key word is understanding, and at some point of convergence, understanding was sorely lacking, even as the intelligence of mankind was evolving. We need to define humanity and understanding to go any further in the discussion, sadly. But for the sake of an immediate argument, Wolter MAY be right. Definitions and abstractions are in order if "the mob" is going to hang this man by the neck until dead.

1/13/2014 04:59:26 am

Actually, Gunn, what Scott said was slightly devious. His statement was intended to imply a link between ancient goddess worship and the alleged same of the Freemasons.

He accepts that ancient man could create a unit of measurement, the MY, to explain the sites of Stonehenge, et al. On the other hand, these same people were somehow incapable of connecting sex with the birth of offspring. As the Other J. pointed out, these people were herders and quite familiar with the "birds and the bees".

Goddess worship was about fertility, be it crops, livestock or the faithful. The practice wasn't to explain procreation, really...it was to appeal to the divine for plentiful bounty.

And since Scott and Alan agree that the Freemasons were incorporating the MY in their construction work of Washington, D.C., it was a simple step, actually, to agree they also incorporated goddess worship...as a continuation of ancient knowledge and tradition.

1/13/2014 02:31:12 pm

Wolter was talking about going back far enough, but you are talking about stopping at a specific point. How far back was he talking about? I took it to mean, back far enough in the evolutionary process, so that he would be, technically, correct. Instinct doesn't count.

1/13/2014 03:51:14 pm

Take the statement within the context of their discussion. They allege the MY was passed down and kept in use by the Freemasons, as part of esoteric knowledge. They also frame the goddess symbolism/worship within the same context; esoteric knowledge preserved by the Freemasons, and enfolded into their belief of dualism. They were referring to a time when ancient people both practiced this form of worship and were capable of building sites, using the MY as a standard unit of measurement.

By this period in time, ancient people had to be aware of the purpose of procreation. If you go back to a time where procreation is a function of instinct, humanity is incapable of imagining gods or goddesses, as it would have only the crudest form of self-awareness. Architecture and measurements would be an impossibility. So, yes, there is a necessary, specific stopping point.

The goddess worship and MY Scott and Alan are alleging were passed on to the Freemasons, could only exist/co-exist at a time when ancient people were forming cultures, practiced husbandry and looked to the divine for guidance. I'm sure they had a firm grasp on the sex = offspring concept by then.

1/14/2014 04:55:02 am

Only me, you still aren't going back far enough. Wolter was talking about a time earlier than you want to ascribe to the issue, to a time when there was not this understanding we're talking about.

However, you've helped me to see how the goddess worship and MY have been inappropriately linked together, since the measuring issue apparently has no basis for belief...assuming there was not such an early standardized measuring system. Goddess or feminine "recognition" might be more appropriate than "goddess worship," in this Washington DC connection.

It may be likewise with the Freemasons, that there was/is more of an historical recognition going on than actual worshipping. There IS female recognition going on in DC, with statuary, but I don't think this rises to the level of worship. In other words, it's no big deal.

I doubt whether Templars or Freemasons ever actually worshiped the "sacred feminine." However, it seems that they may have carried some esoteric knowledge about the subject forward, and this is what Wolter is hooking into.

1/14/2014 05:07:22 am

Gunn, have you ever been to DC? There are many many more statues of men in the city. I would say there are 10 statues of men in comparison to women. DC is a city of statues they are everywhere almost every other block has at least one statue. In fact I would be willing to say the statues of horses is about equal that the amount of statues of women. I would hardly say there is female worship in this city, maybe in the bars but not in the design and layout.

1/14/2014 05:55:42 am

True, there are many more statues of men then women. However, they seem to be counting anything shaped like a V, triangle, diamond, intersecting circle and anything else that could possibly hold a penis.

1/14/2014 06:19:17 am

Well a lot of the statues are of naked men, so there are tons of penis on display. Plus for some reason and I don't know if this is common in other major cities but there are tons of bad graffiti covering the city that are crude drawings of penises

Moses Lambert

1/12/2014 03:28:47 am

Absolutely hilarious! I have never seen that tv show and never will - won't need to, thanks to you, Jason. BTW, Amazon delivered "Faking History" yesterday; am REALLY looking forward to reading it!

Zoë Corsi

1/12/2014 04:39:29 am

Really great review, Jason! Laugh out loud funny!
Wolter gets more and more ludicrous with every new show.

Wolter's show is generously loaded with "weasel words".
His "facts" are spurious statements preceded by:
Could, may, allegedly, might, possibly, legendarily, said to have and
"some say". Big red signs pointing his lack of any scientific proof for his wild claims.
Inadvertently, one of the funniest shows on TV!

Dr. Troglodyte

1/12/2014 04:41:39 am

From the article: “In these same years, John Greaves, an Oxford don, launched modern pyramidology by publishing a tract called Pyramidographia (1647) discussing the measurements of the Great Pyramid.”

A minor point; “1647” should read 1646:

Pyramidographia, or, A description of the pyramids in Ægypt
Author: John Greaves
Publisher: London: Printed for George Badger, and are to be sold at his shop in St. Dunstans Churchyard in Fleet-street, 1646.

While there are later publications (1704, 1732, 1736, 1737, 1744, 1752...), there is a disputed claim by author Roger Herz-Fischler of a “Greaves (1641)” edition.

Dr. Troglodyte

1/12/2014 05:15:18 am

Thank you for catching the typo. It should indeed read 1646, and I type the wrong digit because my copy is a scan of the 1737 edition and I had 7's on the brain! I fixed it.

L Bean

1/12/2014 05:29:14 am

Why not further distill this mess? Old man shakes fist at cloud. Next up, how to read tea leaves and entrails.

What a great way to usher in the next dark age, passion plays that even the most sht-covered mushroom can understand. Prostrate thyself to thy maker and forever bask in the light of his rectangular glowing screen.

The critique is almost unnecessary.

1/12/2014 05:45:35 am

And call me crazy, but I'm not getting a "vagina" vibe from the third image of the Washington Monument...

http://www.apollopony.net/images/tootsie_pop.jpg

1/12/2014 05:49:00 am

Oh, and in honor of Alan Butler and his moon math, a bonus link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKihG1C6V5w

1/12/2014 10:01:33 am

Vaginamite!

Get ready for next week -- he's going to Rock Lake. Isn't that by you? (Mistakenly called you Sean above.)

1/12/2014 12:38:56 pm

Yessir, it's about 45 miles from here. I'm looking forward to/dreading next week's instalment. I anticipate something along the lines of, "we don't know if the pyramids are man-made, but we don't know that they aren't, therefore they are. And we don't know if they were built by Templars, but we don't know that they weren't, therefore they were."

And don't worry about the Sean thing; practically everyone I know has called me that at least once. =P

1/13/2014 10:41:34 am

Responding down here to the post you left up above about the Rock Lake stuff and the Ho-Chunk:

I'm not actually sure if the megalithic work was on Rock Lake or another nearby lake. I want to say it might have been Delavan Lake, or possibly Whitewater or Mill Lake. I just know I came across it last year when Wolter said Native Americans didn't build megalithic structures, and I thought "That's not right," because I knew about the structure in Rock Lake.

Maybe if I get ambitious enough I'll try to find it again. Really should start bookmarking these sorts of things.

And thanks for the link. My wife's part-Ojibwe, and I've been teasing her that if her people would have just taken credit for all the artifacts like a good colonizing people, Wolter probably wouldn't be snooping around. She actually doesn't know a lot about that part of her family (her grandfather died before she was born, so she was never exposed to anything growing up), so she'll be interested in this.

Fun Fact: She's part-Native American and part Welsh (dark Welsh at that), but she was NOT the product of medieval Templar Vikings invading the Upper Midwest.

1/13/2014 02:37:45 pm

Boy, do I feel stupid--there is an island on Rock Lake! I just took a look at a map, and I noticed there's an arm (thorax?) of the lake south of the main figure-8; sure enough, there's an island in the middle. I thought that whole area was just shallow marsh.

Can't say I've heard about any confirmed megaliths in the area, though. I WANT to believe that AU's underwater camera-work will at least provide us with the first clear glimpse of the submerged structures, but...well, I think I'm better off keeping my expectations low.

1/13/2014 05:24:29 pm

From what I read, they're "megalithic" only in the strictest sense in that they were stone structures, but weren't all that massive. I think they were stacked rocks, which might link them to the Rock Lake pyramid.

That's it, I'm digging that story up again.

It's too bad, because there's some fascinating archaeology in that area, and it's interesting enough without having to make up stories about European influence -- or apparently Aztec if the previews are to be believed.

Mark E.

1/12/2014 05:57:49 am

A forensic geologist and a symbologist walk into a bar and order a megalithic pint. The bartender hands the geologist a glass with a V etched on it and the geologist gives the glass a big kiss. The Symbologist stops him saying "You know you can't date that chalice!"

1/12/2014 07:47:29 am

Good one!

1/12/2014 06:25:55 am

The only thing I got from the episode is that every baseball stadium is a big vagina. Did I miss something?

RLewis8

1/12/2014 06:43:55 am

BTW - I remember a PBS special about the Pentagon explaining that it obtained its size (and shape) from the fact that it was the configuration that would FIT on the originally identified land plot. When the new site was determined, they simply kept the original plans.

Will

1/12/2014 06:47:37 am

Simply to subscribe

1/12/2014 08:05:18 am

Jason, why don't you try this sometime? Prepare two versions of a blog post: one as usual and a second version with no sarcasm, just totally factual like an encyclopedia article. Then let's have a poll to determine which is more popular.

1/12/2014 08:15:16 am

I vote that Jason does HIS blog anyway he wants to, then WE choose whether or not we want to read/post on it.

1/12/2014 10:55:48 am

That's what is going to happen anyway. It's Jason's blog. I would like to see what it is like without sarcasm.

Seeker

1/12/2014 09:07:33 am

Done in the style of Dan Brown--brilliant!

For the people upset about this blog: History Channel shows used to provide some type of counterpoint to alternative claims, thus creating a more balanced show. When I first watched Ancient Aliens, I kept waiting for someone to come in and give a different viewpoint. I guess counterpoint is now off the menu.

Since the network won't provide it, great blogs like this provide some type of forum to understand and discuss the other side of what's being presented as fact.

If you hear some type of "tone" in the comments, perhaps it's because many viewers are sick of a race to the bottom / a rising trend in airing and publishing alternative history and passing it off as fact without providing tangible or accurate evidence.

Final thought: Why can't a network put on a show that's more balanced? For example: Here's the mainstream version of how the Egyptian pyramids were built. Here are some unanswered questions about the accepted version(s). Here are some alternative theories / theorists. Next episode, replace pyramids with Easter Island moai, the Lost Colony of Roanoke, etc.

Since AA and AU don't fill even a half hour of actual content, there should be plenty of time to present the other side. And yes, this show would feature interviews with our favorites including Jason, SW, Tsoukalos, Childress, Z. Hawass, etc.

1/12/2014 11:04:13 am

I think more people know whom you're talking about if instead of "Tsoukalos" you say"that guy with the crazy hair"!

1/18/2014 05:25:30 pm

You're so right--I love that his hair has its own Facebook page!

1/12/2014 09:40:15 am

It's about Freedom. Liberty. The Goddess -- Liberty, and Freedom. September 11 is Meaningful. Don't you see? Freedom.

Liberty. Meaningful. Freedom.

1/12/2014 10:13:01 am

I won't have on opportunity to watch this until later this week so bear with me.

Did Wolter and Butler really reference all of this vagina/penis/sex/pubic triangle during the show?!?!

1/12/2014 10:15:07 am

Yes. Yes they did.

1/12/2014 10:15:34 am

Yes, that is all completely accurate. Anything in "quotation marks" is in fact verbatim from the show, and they couldn't stop talking about vaginal symbolism.

1/12/2014 10:41:53 am

That is so silly considering that these supposed shapes do not represent the vagina rather the vulva as far as I can tell.

1/13/2014 05:31:18 am

Well Wolter is a geologist and not a gynecologist. I guess he is just trying to prove his point that we as human only recently learned about women and their parts.

B L

1/13/2014 08:39:24 am

In season one Scott coined the term "archeopetrography". This season he opens another new frontier in science....."gynogeology".

1/12/2014 10:17:53 am

Looking at Akram Elias' corporate bio makes him look like the most high-powered ESL teacher in Washington, D.C.

I'm certified to teach ESL, and have also worked with people from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe. Maybe I should consult with him in how to turn that into a multi-million-dollar corporate concern. I wonder if it involves goddess worship, or freedom, or liberty.

1/12/2014 11:03:15 am

Jason, could you bring your newer readers up to speed concerning the enmity that "Steve" has for you. It borders on obsession.

Did he catch you having conjugal relations with his mother or what?

1/12/2014 11:19:28 am

I'm not sure I could summarize it without a lengthy rejoinder from Steve. Steve St. Clair appeared on an episode of America Unearthed (the season finale last year) where he appeared to endorse Wolter's claims about Henry Sinclair, the Knights Templar, and a secret bloodline of Jesus. He later claimed that he did not and that the appearance of endorsement was due to editing, but that he had no problem with this. After I discussed this on my website, he became upset and felt that I misrepresented the views he had expressed on his own website.

For example, he wrote on his website "We need to continue to identify living descendents of the Mi’kmaq tribe who we can test to prove/disprove a connection to Jarl Henry and his crew." I interpreted that to mean that he thought there was a possibility that Henry Sinclair (jarl is Norse for earl) crossed the Atlantic in 1398 and was investigating the same. He denied this.

He also wrote "My hypothesis is that, when enough myths persist, there may be a grain of truth in them. There may be some basis in reality to the legends of our association with the Templars, a Holy Bloodline, the Prince Henry St. Clair stories about early voyaging to the New World, and more." I interpreted this at face value, but Steve denied this as well, arguing at length that his words did not mean what they seemed to say.

I laid this out in a blog post last year: http://www.jasoncolavito.com/1/post/2013/03/on-steve-st-clair-and-henry-sinclair.html

He has spent nearly a full year coming to this blog to make disparaging comments because he felt I had treated him unfairly in my review of America Unearthed S01E13.

I have never met Steve St. Clair, nor have I ever spoken to him except in the comments on this blog.

I'm sure Steve has a much more elaborate version and won't be shy about sharing it.

1/12/2014 02:04:59 pm

Thanks for the explanation!

LynnBrant

1/13/2014 12:13:31 am

I'm curious whether Steve has ever written anything himself, or is he just a shill for Scott.

1/13/2014 10:00:43 am

Yes, LynnBrant,
http://www.StClairResearch.com
From there, you will see 2 links on the left to my Blogs

1/13/2014 10:05:44 am

Yes, Jason. Not shy at all -

In typical fashion, Jason likes to boil any disagreement down to just a few words. In our back and forth on the blog post in which he literally changed the words my website said regarding DNA of the Templars being among Native North Americans, Jason tried to boil it down to my being upset about the wording.

Jason wrote, 'He has spent nearly a full year coming to this blog to make disparaging comments because he felt I had treated him unfairly in my review of America Unearthed S01E13.'

Gross oversimplification. In fact, what upsets me so much and keeps me coming back here to represent another side of the story to your readers (trolls and non-trolls) is that this kind of flippant statement is fast and loose with the facts and I am absolutely certain that you do this to color the story your way. The evidence supports my statement, Jason.

I have been coming here for about 9 months to present the counter view to you and your mob. In part I do this because Scott is a good friend. In part I do it because I abhor arrogance, and your website and especially many who comment here reek of it.

Here are some typical examples of Jason being fast and loose with the facts -

Jason Colavito writes 'The question again is this: If it isn't important and isn't true, why is there so much about it on so many pages?' [referring to my DNA website - http://www.StClairResearch.com ]

My comment back, "1 page out of 52 pages of my website goes into some detail about the Mi'maq / Sinclair exploration. The methodology page has 1 small paragraph out of 53 in total devoted to it."

That's typical. And this kind of flippant statement [read lie] made by Jason is absolutely upsetting to me. He's fast and loose with the facts and does this to color the story his way. The evidence says otherwise, Jason. So don't get upset when I point out the facts.

Here's my personal favorite -

Jason's words - "I am only reporting exactly what you yourself write and say. No more and no less."

My return comment, 'Oh, you're definitely going beyond my words, Jason. That's my major complaint. On a previous blog post, you said "Despite his denials, his website states that he has had “no choice” but to investigate whether Native Americans intermarried with the Knights Templar and thus inherited Sinclair DNA."
'You added the Knights Templar into your post. Then you comment here 'I am only reporting exactly what you yourself write and say.' Bull !! You continually attribute things to what you read that were not stated. Then your comments attempt to squirm out of it and boil any complaint down to one of tone, not facts.'

Finally, I spend some time here because I find mob behavior fascinating. The comment threads here display that behavior. It's quite fascinating to observe; even to poke a stick at every now and again.

Further reading on Mob Behavior -
ListVerse has a great post about mob mentality.
http://listverse.com/2013/07/28/top-10-instances-of-mob-mentality/
Especially scroll down to #1 - The Internet

Here's a quote - "The Internet is a breeding ground for herd mentality. Not only is it easy for online users to find throngs of other individuals who share their brand of crazy, but it shields everyone under a cloak of anonymity, which gives people the freedom to let go of their social restraints.

"Roaming virtual gangs harass others in Internet forums while picking up supporters along the way. It leads to rude, sexist, racist, homophobic, and threatening comments that the harassers would never say in “real life.”

I'm actually exploring an algorithm to look for patterns of mob behavior on blog comment threads, one of the most dependable places this behavior is found. Jason's blog and all you fine folks will be one of the best cases. Of course, Jason's mob will find this hard to believe. After all, a sense of belonging to something important and righteous is a large part of the attraction of mobs to particular individuals. The nastier members of this group likely can't see their behavior, even when it's pointed out to them.

I won't be the first to study such behavior. Here's a researchers doing just that -
http://headoflettuce.wordpress.com/2010/09/23/swarm-herd-and-mob-behavior-in-social-media

Amazing article here on a mob incident. Wow, does this sound familiar -
http://www.annhandley.com/2013/12/21/justine-sacco-when-bad-gets-ugly

1/13/2014 12:17:10 pm

As you can see, Dave, Steve has given his rundown of complaints. On his website he appeared to have advocated testing the Micmac for evidence of intermarriage with Henry Sinclair's crew and speculated about a grain of truth to stories about Sinclair, the Templars, and the Holy Bloodline, but denied that the two claims could be read together via Henry Sinclair.

The trouble, of course, is that he appeared on the America Unearthed episode in which Scott Wolter claimed that the secret successors of the Templars, led by Henry Sinclair, came to America and implied they intermarried with the Micmac.

To say more, though, would risk Steve declaring it "flippant," biased, or dismissive. You're welcome to read through his comments on past blog posts, though I'm afraid it is not the most scintillating reading.

Silverfish

1/12/2014 11:19:02 am

Hey Jason, thanks for providing what is simultaneously one of the most informative (your reviews and posts) and entertaining (comments section..though I've also learned a lot from Varika, Tara, Only Me etc) blogs on the internet. I love that a fingernail paring like UA can spark such a vibrant exchange. I'm an tenured professor and a biologist and I come up against numbed thinking about important topics from vaccines (not my expertise) to warming oceans (tangential but critical to my expertise). The underlying bugbear is lazy thinking. It's almost epidemic at this point. Anyway man, I love reading your stuff and it's top notch. And yes, I do like it when Tara or Varika pipe in when they aren't just reacting. You both have also taught me a lot. Keep it up people. This is, when not hijacked, a very vigorous free forum of idea exchange.

1/12/2014 03:59:03 pm

Professor,Welcome to the Club & thank you for the feedback,

Marius

1/12/2014 12:36:49 pm

Their claims are literally insane. How are they not in padded rooms?

Jason D.

1/12/2014 03:39:59 pm

I certainly would like to know that myself.

titus pullo

1/13/2014 12:46:36 am

I find it very hard to comprehend that Mr. Wolter as a trained geologist can accept anything from Mr. Butler. Butler's hypothesis that the moon lacks metals and a core and hence is artificial is beyond reason. Thanks to the Apollo missions (and some Russian unmanned as well) we have hundreds of pounds of the moon. The moon has 3 times the % of iron, twice that of Al found on the earth. While it has a very week magnetic field, it does have a solid core (it is not hollow). The rocks we have have been dated to be billions of years old..the moon was not created by man..there is just no way mankind could fashion a small planet..especially given the fact that the moon was created in an impact event with the earth and a third body (the current view by geologists based on physical evidence). Were these future "superman" smart enough to go back billions of years and initiate the collision just right to form the moon and allow for life on earth. And you have causality theory anyway in terms of time travel.

When I was a physics major we had some weird guy who roamed the physics building and used to show up at various talks..he was into numbers..always sharing with anyone who would listen how if you took this number and did this or that you got some historical ratio or sum such to prove some fringe theory. I don't argue there are physical constants but "playing' with numbers to prove some theory outside of natural law is well..silly (see astrology).

Mr. Wolter needs to stop hanging out with these folks if he wants a to provide a rational approach to these "mysteries." We are all open minded..but AE is becoming a joke.

william smith

1/13/2014 01:56:48 am

I find reading this blog is more entertaining than watching the HC movies. Jason has done an excellent job in dissecting the movie and it does not make much difference if he does it before, during or after the public showing. Steve has done an excellent job in defending the HC movies and I respect his opinions. Not because I agree with him, but because of the Atlantic conference he organized and his support of the Sinclair theory. For those that may be interested I will be in the Boston area in July to present facts relating to The Newport Tower and The Lodestone compass (Mystery Stone of N.H.). This will include working models of each and show their specific function.
Keep up the great work Jason and Steve. Its better than the Friday night fights.
William

Kevin

1/13/2014 02:18:56 am

Jason, I really have to thank you for making "America Unearthed" watchable. Don't get me wrong, the show is very entertaining. But I quickly became leery of what I was hearing and began searching for more information. Then I found your reviews, and I realized just how flawed - an even dishonest - America Unearthed's postulations can be. I greatly appreciate the time and effort you put into each review, digging up multiple sources to present the facts. I almost stopped watching America Unearthed because I feel like I have to "uneducate" myself of what I had just seen after every episode. But your reviews are the perfect antidote. In fact, the greatest fun for me is now watching each episode, formulating the skeptical questions, and then reading your review to see if I picked up on the B.S. and to learn the truth compared to the show's claims. Even my girlfriend, who normally isn't interested in reading history like I am, looks forward to your articles. I think she's learning about some topics that I previously didn't find her all that intrigued by, so I thank you for giving us a great new avenue of conversation. lol

I will give America Unearthed credit for a couple of things, though. Wolter is a likable host, and it's also incredibly fun when he gets pissy about something or comes across a skeptic - which to its credit the show is happy to present. Mainly, though, America Unearthed DOES present many interesting topics, some of which I'm hearing about for the first time. For example, I had somehow never heard of the Dare Stones. While I think the actual story about one stone POSSIBLY being legitimate and the rest being an elaborate hoax would have made a more interesting program, I can thank America Unearthed for pointing me in the direction of an interesting topic. It does bother me that many people might watch this show without question, and that the History Channel has sunk to programs like this and Ancient Aliens to get ratings. So thankfully, Jason, there are reviewers like yourself who are putting out another side of the story, one based in respected sources, for those who want to find it.

1/13/2014 04:48:01 am

Jason:

In this episode Scott Wolter makes the direct statement that Columbia was a pagan goddess who originally represented the concept of liberty. He presents this as fact. He paused the show to devote a "bullet-point" screen dedicated to this subject.

My knowledge of pagan gods is nonexistent. Please clarify for me....was the Columbia figure completely made up in 1776, or was the concept based on an actual pagan goddess of liberty?

If the "Columbia" figurehead was an original idea created by Phyllis Wheatley in response to Britain's "Britannia" then Wolter lied to his audience. Up until this point I thought Wolter was getting his facts wrong by failing to research properly. I never thought he was completely making things up. Sad.

1/13/2014 05:09:41 am

The Roman goddess of liberty was, appropriately, Libertas. The name Columbia was coined in 1738, from Christopher Columbus' name, as a poetic name for America. The name was anthropomorphized in Phyllis Wheatley's poem and only later given the attributes of Libertas, mostly in the first half of the 19th century. Columbia does not exist prior to 1738, and not as a person, goddess, etc. before Wheatley's anthropomorphizing poem.

The Statue of Freedom atop the Capitol, with whom she is often (though not, strictly speaking, accurately) identified differs from Libertas in that she does not hold the felt cap of manumission because Jefferson Davis considered that to be an incendiary move against slavery.

1/13/2014 10:33:40 am

Phylis Wheatley story is incredible. She wrote poetry to George Washington who was so impressed by this former slave that he wrote to her and I believe met her. I first heard of her in the book a disease in the public mind by Tom Fleming, a good read.

2/5/2014 09:07:28 am

If you want to see a representation of the goddess Liberty, any numismatist would tell you to look at any U.S. coins minted between 1792 and 1948. All of them, except for a few examples ( silver .03 cent, copper .02 cent, first nickel .05 cent pieces) had the image of Liberty on them. Those minted before 1800 even carried the Phrygian cap on a pole. Only, in 1909 did they start replacing her with deceased presidents.

1/13/2014 12:36:20 pm

Tara said, "Secret Blueprint of a camel toe" and "Bigfoot droppings" and "Fecal Sandwiches" and "vaginal delirium" and "Bed-wetting" and "vagina monologue" and "the cigar" and ...

Who said this wasn't a fetish website? Oh, that's right - our host.

1/13/2014 12:50:56 pm

Your friend Scott Wolter dropped "Vaginas, birth canals and female pubic imagery" all over Washington DC.

Talk about fetish TV.

1/13/2014 07:01:38 pm

His Majesty Steve.
The "host" (Jason) is not responsible for my comments.
Obviously you have a very confused sexuality.There is nothing remotely sexual or fetishist about "Fecal Sandwiches","Bigfoot droppings" & "Bed-wetting" (unless you are into diaperism). According to the American Psychiatric Association,"Bed-wetting" is a psychological-medical condition.
Bill Clinton,Monica,the cigar,the blue dress episodes, Well,this American history...

William

1/13/2014 01:42:15 pm

Was Wolter really called to evaluate the pentagon after 911?
After all he is a " forensic geologist".....

1/13/2014 03:43:18 pm

Though I'm not that curious or interested in the "bloodline" or the "ancient feminine" doctrines, I can see many obvious Freemason influences in the formation of Washington, DC. This obvious influence was not gone into at a very great depth here...this time around.

It seems that skeptics may want to avoid recognizing the obvious because it makes them nervous. It's easier to downplay the role and influence Masonry had on America, even though MAJOR PLAYERS in our country's formation were practicing, influencing freemasons. The contributions of freemasonry to America, so far, are staggering, yet skeptics are nervous.

The Larsson Papers show a likely link between modern freemasonry and a medieval "secret style" of runes found on the KRS--and their use possibly attributable to the Knights Templar. Though skeptics also get nervous about connecting freemasonry with the Knights Templar, there is plenty of "fringe" evidence to show the two to be linked.

http://runicstudies.org/larrson-papers/

I think it is fairly reasonable to assume that the Knights Templar and monks may have penetrated far inland in medieval America well before the placing of the memorial KRS. Washington DC and the East Coast possibly weren't the first choice for European settlement. As powerful as they were, how could the Templars not have known about 'New Gotaland" in SD? (Click on the green Gunn.) Perhaps we can explore this in a future thread.

Suffice to say for now that the ghosts of the Templars hover thickly over our Nation's capitol, probably worried about her future..

Is attaching ancient feminine aspects to DC improper? I guess not, if liberty or something else can be shown. But beyond this, I thought Wolter explained the other possible feminine aspects of Washington DC better than his discussion about measuring...and it seemed a bit strange to unite the two issues within a single program.

freiday

1/13/2014 06:09:04 pm

I just caught the episode and found it interesting that the four legs of the W are exactly 366 MY. And the length of the ellipse at the Washington Monument is exactly 366 MY. Wolters asks him each time "Exactly 366 MY?" and he says "yeah." Too bad legs of the W are more like .95 - 1.15 miles long. However, the ellipse that was added in the 2000's is probably 1000 feet, and close to the mythical 366 MY. I nearly sharted when he claimed the ellipse was the same length as the obviously much longer, and not identical, chevron legs.

lurkster

1/13/2014 10:59:24 pm

In this post we see that Jason would make a far better script writer for AU than the actual writers who get paid to write the crap they air.

Well done Jason!

1/14/2014 02:05:48 pm

Jason wrote, "Oh, and both of tonight’s protagonists—Alan Butler and Scott Wolter—have tried to sue me."

That is not true. Scott Wolter never tried to sue you. Perhaps you can explain who exactly tried to sue you, Jason. Whose name was on the letter?

And then, once again, perhaps you can correct that factually incorrect statement you made on your blog.

1/14/2014 02:15:34 pm

Legal Question from Steve Aka Majestic weasel.Can I sue my own mother?.

1/14/2014 03:36:08 pm

I'm going to start a pool so we can all bet on your next melt down and disappearance, Tara. I'm betting within 1 month, and that's being generous. All the signs are there. (1) Gettin' yourself all spun up, (2) Increased use of filthy language and slurs, (3) Increasingly hostile.

As to my question, if you don't mind, I'll wait for an intelligent answer from an adult - the adult to whom the question was addressed.

1/14/2014 07:31:51 pm

His secret bloodline Majesty.
"next melt down and disappearance,Tara".
Your understanding & perception of a "melt down" reveals more about your psychology than it does about my own.

Last year,I violently criticized Jason & some debunkers for not addressing what I consider "real issues" (socio-political issues that are affecting us on daily base).I was told by Jason and others that this blog focuses on debunking & exposing pseudo scientific charlatans,alternative history snake oil peddlers.Guess what?, they have a point.

I then I witnessed this blog being gradually taken over by crackpots,semi idiotic & delusional individuals like yourself.This is the reason I came back.
Your sneers are inappropriate and wholly misplaced.

1/14/2014 10:30:02 pm

A+E Networks threatened legal action against me, and the lawyer stated that the action was taken at the behest of Scott Wolter, on whose behalf the network was acting as defender of their "talent." A+E did not hold the rights to the book they were attempting to defend, Wolter's Hooked X, which is owned entirely by him; and the A+E lawyer informed me that should I press the point that they did not have standing to sue over a property they did not own, they would refer the situation to Scott Wolter's personal attorney who would promptly file suit without negotiation. Is that clear enough for you, Steve? The impetus came directly from Wolter, whom A+E said was standing by to sue me should I refuse to deal with them.

If A+E Networks' lawyer was lying, then I am standing by to accept their or Scott Wolter's apology.

1/15/2014 12:34:09 am

Jason.You dont have to justify yourself to this buffoonish character.The man is obviously obsessed with you.

1/15/2014 01:39:59 am

It's not for Steve's benefit that I responded, Tara. While most of the people who post here know the story, tens of thousands of people read my blog posts, and I want to make sure that they are not falling victim to Steve's trolling.

I did not, incidentally, report publicly all of the details of my interaction with A+E Networks over the cease-and-desist order they sent, yet Steve speaks with such confidence about what "really" happened. It does make one wonder who is really the force behind Steve's trolling posts.

1/15/2014 02:07:11 am

It`s pretty obvious,behind the intimidation,the constant harassment,the intention is to shut you down.
Personally,I wonder about the nature of Steve`s hyper emotional attachment to Scott Wolter.

1/15/2014 02:15:34 am

Steve is obviously Scott's blood brother in the secret New World Order of the Knights Templar.

1/15/2014 02:38:01 am

I will take the minority position here that neither Steve or the Reverend are here at Wolter's request. They might of found out about this blog from Wolter but I just don't see Wolter asking them to come here. I also think Rev has a much different reason for being here then Steve.

I think Steve is just coming here to be a smart ass and troublemaker because he gets attention. He likes conflict as demonstrated by his little family/not family feud that spilled over here a few months ago. I think he just found a place that he feels comfortable being a pain in the ass and waits till he has a chance to do so.

The Rev I think really is a friend of Wolter and his intentions are good for the most part and while a bit snarky he is mostly respectful. Mostly that is.

I just don't see Wolter asking either of them to cause trouble here. Like I mentioned before the blog post about AU and Wolter do help promote the show even if they are critical of them. I do not see Wolter wanting to risk damaging promotion for himself and the show.

1/15/2014 02:56:01 am

Matt.
I have no problem with the Reverend.On the other hand,the congenital whiner known as "Steve" thinks he can release his sexual frustration on me just because I happen to be a girl.Wrong move Steve,I am Mike Tyson`s spiritual daughter,"I`ll fuck you till you love me".

1/15/2014 03:33:23 am

I agree Tara, Steve's comment toward you are completely uncalled for and are true harassment. Like racism it is a perfect example of how far we still have to go before we can stop people from sexual discrimination. It really is sad that he feels the need to act that way and I am sorry you have to deal with that.

1/15/2014 03:50:08 am

Watch out, Steve...she's trying the ole "rope-a-dope" routine on you.

Here comes the swaggering ring girl now with the "sexist" sign held high over her head...while wearing a bikini? She tried this one on me a long time ago. Ha! Ha!

And I thought I taught you better, Tara.

Is it too late to say "just kidding?"

1/15/2014 04:36:33 am

How about we just say Tara is a person and not mention her sex at all.

This is a place to talk and debate ideas, what does one sex have to do with anything?

1/15/2014 04:54:07 am

Jason wrote, "…Steve speaks with such confidence about what "really" happened."

As far as events on the other side of this argument, yes. That is correct. I'm in direct contact with Scott and soon will be with Alan.

Order of events -
1.
Jason blustered at the bottom of his initial web posting, "Oh, and both of tonight’s protagonists—Alan Butler and Scott Wolter—have tried to sue me."

2.
Steve questioned it in the comments.

3.
After being challenged, Jason morphed his words, "A+E Networks threatened legal action against me, and the lawyer stated that the action was taken at the behest of Scott Wolter"

4.
Steve checked with Scott who clarified that Jason's version is not how it happened. Scott learned of these events after Jason had already backed off. Scott took no action to sue Jason.

You and your peers can call my actions trolling if you want. I've pointed out many different times in which you have been fast and loose with the "facts." Then you can attack me when I try to make the truth obvious. I would think a website that tries to debunk others would appreciate attempts to get at the truth. I guess only Jason's version is allowed here.

By the way, trying to re-define "troll" as anyone who disagrees with Jason's portrayal of the "facts" won't change the meaning of the word. Good luck with that. Your readers aren't all so willing to be swayed by your loose portrayals, Jason, and they deserve the truth.

As to Tara, I truly don't care how you spin my statements. Good luck with that.
Matt Mc, cutting and pasting Tara's comments here is harassment? Hahahahahahahaha. I've got an idea: Tara can stop posting them and I'll not have anything to cut and paste.

To be specific, this "trolling" began after Jason wrote, "Oh, and both of tonight’s protagonists—Alan Butler and Scott Wolter—have tried to sue me." Scott did not try to sue you. I'm currently checking with Alan Butler to get at the facts on that claim. I would hope we could instead rely on you to state the actual events as they transpired regarding Alan and save me the overseas phone call.

1/15/2014 05:06:04 am

Yes Steve cutting and pasting something and changing the context which they are presented could be seen by someone as sexist.

I read you cutting and pasting that way before Tara commented about it.

I can understand not getting along or liking someone, but why try to make comments about ones sex or sexual habits.

Debates can be done without name calling and junior high level comments.

1/15/2014 05:12:06 am

If you are telling me, Steve, that Wolter denies any involvement and that A+E Networks lied to me about his involvement, that is certainly news to me. A+E's lawyer specifically said that she undertook the action at Scott Wolter's request and on his behalf and made repeated reference to his intellectual property and his lawyer. I'd be very happy if it were the case that they lied to me since it's easier to blame a faceless corporation, but I can't see why a lawyer in a one-party consent state would make blatantly false claims.

I'm not sure how I "backed down" by getting A+E to state in writing that Scott Wolter does not own the Hooked X figure, as they claimed. As per our agreement, we reached a mutually agreeable decision.

I would guess Alan Butler doesn't remember the brief dustup of a decade ago since it lasted only a few days, though as a young writer at the time, it was deeply disturbing. It was my first-ever threatened lawsuit! Skeptic magazine's editor and their lawyer contacted the U.S. publisher, who told Butler he was wrong and sent me an apology.

1/15/2014 05:20:42 am

"I've pointed out many different times in which you have been fast and loose with the "facts.""

Wow, Steve St. Clare saying someone else is playing fast and loose with facts, call the kettle black much Steve?

I also like how you put quotes around 'facts' what's that supposed to mean.

Lastly, lets look at this logically, A&E has nothing to do with Wolter's book, they've made that clear. So why would they pursue a cease and desist on the basis of a book they aren't involved with and a copyright they don't own? The only link between A&E and the book in question is Wolter himself. Therefore, logic 101 would dictate that he had some hand in pursuing it. Otherwise A&E has gone rogue to go after people for intellectual property that they have nothing to do with.

While we will not likely ever know for sure what was said and whose version is right. Jason C.'s rendition has the benefit of prima facie being the most logical.

1/15/2014 05:20:59 am

1/15/2014 05:27:28 am

Matt Mc, show me where I made "comments about ones sex or sexual habits."

My comments are about the foul mouth. And I did so by cutting and pasting the specific nasty phrases which Tara typed into this public comment thread.

Tara is the one who posted on the 14th (yesterday) "Obviously you have a very confused sexuality." I haven't questioned anyone's sexuality at all, just their potty mouth.

How very noble of you Matt Mc to leap to Tara's defense. Judging from the rescent post Tara put up, "I am Mike Tyson`s spiritual daughter,"I`ll fuck you till you love me" that Tara doesn't require anyone's protection.

1/15/2014 05:31:15 am

If you want to get even more technical about it, the lawyer who communicated with me was an outside counsel hired by A+E's corporate counsel to handle intellectual property disputes. She was almost as much in the dark about the origins of the claim as I, knowing only that the complaint came to her from A+E corporate counsel after being passed on to them from Committee Films on behalf of the show's paid "talent," who, according to production documents, is only Scott Wolter. Anyone along this chain could, in theory, have lied, and I can't possibly know the truth. But, with the lawyer billing A+E something like $1,000 an hour, I kept her busy for as many hours as I could. It's not like it cost me anything.

1/15/2014 05:37:19 am

While I'm sure Jason appreciates the attempts by his acolytes to distract, I'll keep this on topic.

Jason posted, "Oh, and both of tonight’s protagonists—Alan Butler and Scott Wolter—have tried to sue me."

But the only evidence you have of Wolter's trying to sue you is a spoken conversation with a lawyer form A&E? Do you have it in writing from anyone?

Either way, "standing by to sue" is not the same as "have tried to sue me" which is what you told your tens of thousands of readers. You posted something that is not accurate, and there it sits at the bottom of paragraph 1.

1/15/2014 05:48:29 am

Would you like to debate the meaning of the word "try," Steve? One can try many things without succeeding, or even doing a very good job of it. A+E's lawyer told me that Wolter had asked, through intermediaries, that the network take action to stop publication of my book.

Are you suggesting that A+E Networks lied to me? Or wasted thousands of dollars pursuing claims about rights they did not own? Most of their complaints were related to, and I quote, "Mr. Wolter's book," which they do not own. The lawyer in question is Monica B. Richman of Dentons in New York City. You are welcome to ask her why A+E was doing this, but I assume attorney-client privilege will prevent her from answering.

1/15/2014 05:57:05 am

It's amazing that Steve is defending a man (Wolter) who can't keep straight whether he himself thinks the Holy Grail is a cup or a bloodline. And his defense is about others playing fast and loose with facts. I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning.

1/15/2014 08:40:06 am

So Steve, while fact checking Jason's blog the only point you take issue with is his claim that Scott Wolter tried to sue him? You don't take issue with any of the intrinsic facts of the blog such as Alan Butler's belief that the moon was man-made by time travelers, or that the Megalithic Yard that Scott Wolter was so fascinated with is a fantasy measurement?

Whether Jason was threatened with a lawsuit by Scott Wolter or by A+E on Wolter's behalf seems pretty small to argue over. Especially, when your friends, Steve, make the most insane claims about history anyone has ever heard.

1/15/2014 08:42:19 am

So Steve, while fact checking Jason's blog the only point you take issue with is his claim that Scott Wolter tried to sue him? And, you'll fight to the death until this atrocious wrong is righted. But, you don't take issue with any of the intrinsic facts of the blog such as Alan Butler's belief that the moon was man-made by time travelers, or that the Megalithic Yard that Scott Wolter was so fascinated with is a fantasy measurement?

Whether Jason was threatened with a lawsuit by Scott Wolter or by A+E on Wolter's behalf seems pretty small to argue over. Especially, when your friends, Steve, make the most insane claims about history anyone has ever heard then try to pass those claims off to the rubes in an attempt to line their own pockets.

Kaye Flagg (Lady Vivienne)

1/14/2014 11:56:00 pm

Okay do all the math you want, but remember this. Someone is talking about the Mother on National TV. It may not have been perfect but the point was made. Male and Female energies must and will be balanced and when they are the world will be a better place. The Masons are enfolding women. The Kaballah is being taught to women. A women may become President. 2014 is the year of the Goddess. Help us move forward. KFLV HPS WQ of the Olde Religion

1/15/2014 05:53:18 am

Steve I have no real inclination to protect Tara,

And I agree her comments are out of place also.

You have in the past accused her of fetishism, which in the context used had sexual undertones.

My statement about not talking about people sex, habits ect.. was more general, there is a post above it that had sexist remarks, you and Tara where using sexist remarks.

So while I do agree you are unfairly attacking Tara based on sex, I also feel Tara and others are using sexist commentary in addressing people.

I just don't understand why that is needed. Just like I do not understand why name calling is needed. I do understand the passion people here have and some of the snark. It is after the internet and people are not inclined to be nice on the internet and these discussions can be rather passionate.

1/15/2014 06:41:09 am

"But the only evidence you have of Wolter's trying to sue you is a spoken conversation with a lawyer form A&E? Do you have it in writing from anyone?"

Steve, how is this different from:

"Steve checked with Scott who clarified that Jason's version is not how it happened. Scott learned of these events after Jason had already backed off. Scott took no action to sue Jason."?

In your efforts to determine the facts, have you been privy to any documentation filed on Scott's behalf, or is that also protected by attorney-client privilege?

So far, the argument has been, "Well, I was told this" and "So, I was told this!". In other words, all legal documents concerning the case are under attorney-client privilege, not available to outside parties not directly involved and this verbal swordplay is moot.

1/15/2014 06:48:51 am

Too true. I do, though, have the original cease-and-desist letter (hard copy, with FedEx overnight tracking number) and about two dozen emails I exchanged with Monica B. Richmond, so I have the documentation of my end of the correspondence, which supports all of my claims save one. Richmond only verbally confirmed the origins of the effort and did not put it in writing because she did not have full documentation of it, though there is really no other person with the authority to request action on behalf of the property owned by Scott Wolter. Even the lawyers were kept in the dark, so it must be an even deeper conspiracy!

Note to Steve: The last line is a joke.

1/15/2014 11:53:54 am

Certainly none of my business at all; however, I think it is possible that the Hooked X played a bit of havoc and delight in all this.

For example, how firmly did "someone" on Wolter's behalf know about the legitimacy of his claim to copyright, or trademark...whatever it was? Perhaps, initially, the lawyers thought there was possibly more to the claim of Hooked X ownership than there ever was...until Jason brought it to their attention?

I remember being somewhat perturbed about this attempt to own the runic character Hooked X, and now I'm suggesting that this struggle between Jason and Wolter seems to have INCLUDED a struggle over the public freedom of the character "Hooked X," which in-and-of-itself seems strange: It's like the Hooked X became a skirmish line.

From my own selfish viewpoint, I'm glad the matter was at least cleared up, concerning private ownership versus the free public use of this special runic character...which seems to have been part of a secret style of writing, possibly back in medieval times...dare I say with ties to the KRS? Why not? It's a major part of the picture since Wolter is perceived by many as "Mr. Kensington Runestone," even still, as he continues his climb up the ladder of success.

Though part of this now-epic struggle was over the use of the Hooked X, in my view that only became the line of recognizable demarcation. The real struggle was over what Jason was saying and doing, and I'm guessing that Wolter's advocates agreed in principle that it would be overall better to shut him up, if conveniently possible.

Lawyers are used to performing this art of intimidation, and oftentimes that is all it takes to put adversaries in check. In this case, I'm glad Jason put them back in check, as it cleared up a potentially troublesome future for the runic character Hooked X...which, as most folks here know, is prominently featured on the KRS and several other runestones found in America.

I hope Jason is able to eventually get over his animus, and at least make an attempt to not take things so personal. Wolter and those representing him were, in my opinion, trying to protect their interest--yes, with some bluff, apparently, but that is what one would expect them to do. It's part of the game of trying to have or maintain control of what is being said, publicly, about their own public product.

They probably saw Jason as chipping away at their product, and probably for consumer gain too (in their minds). I'm not making a judgment here about exactly why Jason and Wolter seem to be linked in this struggle. It could be--and probably is--a combination of reasons, some of them more noble than others.

I would offer this to Jason as a future comfort: try not to take it so personally, and it will help you get over the perceived insult. I'm sure these powerful entities play this intricate dance all the time, and you were just another bread-crumb to brush away.

(Please take this last sentence the right way--as with a touch of humor, and not the wrong way, with you being a crumby nuisance.)

1/15/2014 03:56:02 pm

Well, Jason, I'm perplexed.

Call me crazy, but despite your explanation of your dealings in a "lawsuit" with Alan Butler, I thought I should write him anyway. As I said, call me crazy.

Alan wrote me back that he has never tried to sue you. He never heard of you until you began persecuting Scott and the show. In his own words, he has 'never tried to sue anyone in his life.'

"Jason D" might say, 'Jason C.'s rendition has the benefit of prima facie being the most logical.' But research outweighs the logic you bring to the discussion. You or any other following this list might have performed the same research I did in the last two days. Namely, contact the accused.

Jason Colavito wrote, '...both of tonight’s protagonists—Alan Butler and Scott Wolter—have tried to sue me.'

Both of the people you accused of this have said they did not "try to sue you."

As usual, Jason begins bending words, "If you are telling me, Steve, that Wolter denies any involvement and that A+E Networks lied to me about his involvement, that is certainly news to me."

That's not what I'm saying Jason. I'm repeating your exact posting, 'both of tonight’s protagonists—Alan Butler and Scott Wolter—have tried to sue me.' YOU POSTED THIS, JASON. You stated it as fact. A lawsuit is a matter of legal fact. In such a legal matter, there are records available. You have none.

According to your favorite source, Wikipedia, trying to sue someone is well-defined as - "…a civil action brought in a court of law in which a plaintiff, a party who claims to have incurred loss as a result of a defendant's actions, demands a legal or equitable remedy."

To be clear, and to prevent further squirming, Jason, neither Scott Wolter nor Alan Butler SOUGHT A LEGAL OR EQUITABLE REMEDY FROM YOU IN A COURT OF LAW. You clearly stated that they did when you said they 'tried to sue' you.

Strike two, Jason. To prevent you from appearing to be unreasonably biased against their AU show, I strongly suggest you go up to the bottom of paragraph 1 and change the following statement, 'both of tonight’s protagonists—Alan Butler and Scott Wolter—have tried to sue me.' Because it is, at best, NOT a statement of fact and, at worst, an outright lie meant to bias the tens of thousands of readers of your blog against the hosts of the show you wrote about.

And, now, two themes of response will occur:
(1) the acolytes weight in with their opinions
(2) Jason will try to define what the "meaning of the word 'is' is."

1/15/2014 04:36:18 pm

I'm an attorney, and a litigator at that. The "threat to sue" letter is a common legal maneuver used in anticipation of potential litigation or in some cases as a bluff. It seems that in both cases, Jason wasn't sued but was contacted by attorneys in anticipation of potential litigation. In these situations and those like them, there won't be any court proceedings and no court documents. But there is a paper trail of sorts, and Jason has volunteered information to indicate that a paper trail exists.
When he said "both of tonight’s protagonists—Alan Butler and Scott Wolter—have tried to sue me", based on the facts that he's set forth, he is absolutely correct. Both involved attorneys who pursued threats of lawsuits (ie colloquially "tried to sue"), but never filed suit. Jason didn't say he was "sued" or brought to court.
You can engage in semantics until you're blue in the face, but the reality is that legal threats were made to Jason from both of these people and he reported that correctly.

1/15/2014 04:44:01 pm

And.... acolyte #1 weighs in.

Jason said "both of tonight’s protagonists—Alan Butler and Scott Wolter—have tried to sue me" to discredit them. It's not an accurate statement and was delivered as such with a motive. How do I know this? Witness the squirming, "If you are telling me, Steve, that Wolter denies any involvement and that A+E Networks lied to me about his involvement, that is certainly news to me."

Further, Mr. Litigator, please advise your client Jason to show us The "threat to sue" letter.

1/15/2014 04:50:34 pm

Further still, Mr. Litigator / Acolyte #1, you said, 'the reality is that legal threats were made to Jason from both of these people and he reported that correctly.'

Reeeeeaaaallly? Then the burden of proof is on Jason to show us these 'threats to sue' by 'both of these people.' Jason SAID that he had a verbal conversation. I'd like to see the actual statements in writing.

Actual proof is very important to Jason in dismantling 'fringe' ideas. I'm sure he can provide the actual statements, as you say Mr. Litigator, by 'both of these people' meaning, of course, Wolter and Butler. The burden of proof lies with your client Mr. Litigator.

1/15/2014 05:04:26 pm

Further note to Acolyte #1, the Litigator,

You wrote, 'You can engage in semantics until you're blue in the face, but the reality is that legal threats were made to Jason from both of these people and he reported that correctly.'

Herein lies my central complaint on this blog. Jaosn and his acolytes can be fast and loose with the facts. Even a man who says he's litigator to add credibility to his comment says this, 'legal threats were made to Jason from both of these people'.

Even Jason does not agree with what you wrote Mr. Litigator. He made it quite clear that 'Richmond only verbally confirmed the origins of the effort and did not put it in writing because she did not have full documentation of it…"

That is quite different than your interpretation, Mr. Litigator - 'legal threats were made to Jason from both of these people'

Mr. Litigator, Acolyte #1, I suggest you take a good deal of time to study the squirming above before weighing in.

1/15/2014 05:19:57 pm

"Too true. I do, though, have the original cease-and-desist letter (hard copy, with FedEx overnight tracking number) and about two dozen emails I exchanged with Monica B. Richmond, so I have the documentation of my end of the correspondence, which supports all of my claims save one. Richmond only verbally confirmed the origins of the effort and did not put it in writing because she did not have full documentation of it, though there is really no other person with the authority to request action on behalf of the property owned by Scott Wolter."

Not sure how he can be any clearer. A+E threatened to sue on behalf of Committee Films and "the talent" (ie Scott Wolter). Jason has the letters, the envelopes and the email exchanges. I suspect he probably also has a copy of Butler threat to sue letter (although that one was 10 years ago).
You can argue about semantics all day long, but the point is lost. Jason doesn't need to lie to discredit these fools. They're doing just fine at that themselves.

1/15/2014 10:45:13 pm

Correspondence with the book's authors and Watkins Publishing is in storage now, since it's been 10 years and I've moved several times. But I went and got it out since you are all so interested. Christopher Knight wrote to me on behalf of him and Alan Butler. If Butler now claims he did not know what Knight was doing, that is his business. It isn't what Knight said.

But as I said, it was a brief flare-up that lasted a couple of days a decade ago. I included a mention only because, unlike Steve, I think it's important to note potential conflicts of interest.

However, if you'd like, here is part of the email sent by Knight and Butler to me on August 17, 2004:

"Your comments, however wild and ill-informed, appear to indicate that you seen some parts of the manuscript. Any contact you have had with the manuscript appears to be illegal and we require you to explain how you have come to view this confidential material.

"Only mathematicians and astrophysics have had the confidential opportunity of reviewing this ground-breaking material and we would like to know how a low level journalist has gained access."

The authors then went on to threaten a full legal investigation and action against me for, apparently, stealing their material.

Publicist Sharon Cook apologized for their behavior on August 18, 2004 and told Knight and Butler that the book had been provided to me as a review copy as part of the publishers' publicity efforts.

1/15/2014 04:45:10 pm

Steve;

Your research doesn't prove anything. At best it's a 'he said / he said' between Jason and Wolter/Butler.

In such a situation, we have to ask what makes sense and who has the most credibility. I'm gonna side with the guy that doesn't think the moon was made by time-traveling freemasons.

1/15/2014 04:51:40 pm

Well, Jason D.,
What's important here is who you side with.
Case closed.

1/15/2014 04:59:42 pm

Jason doesn't need to lie about something for which he's already provided much detail in order to discredit Wolter and Butler. They're doing just fine making fools of themselves on national television in the "Secret Blueprint of America" and the rest of their nonsense theories.
Both of these men threatened legal action against Jason. I believe Jason that happened based upon the many details he's already provided. I suppose that if you wanted to further damage the credibility of Wolter and Butler, Jason could probably scan and post some of these legal documents, but I suspect that since you're the only one who is expressing doubt about this one sentence of his review of the episode, its probably not worth Jason's time.

So Steve, what about the substantive aspects of Jason's review of the episode? Are you on board with Scott and Butler on these "secret blueprints" and the other Freemason conspiratorial aspects of the layout of Washington DC? How about the moon as a construction project of time-traveling freemasons?

1/15/2014 05:06:52 pm

Is this the same Dan, The Litigator?

1/15/2014 05:11:13 pm

Dan, who I assume is also The Litigator, said, 'you're the only one who is expressing doubt about this one sentence of his review of the episode, its probably not worth Jason's time.'

When one brick is out of place, you'd better check the entire wall.

1/16/2014 12:13:43 am

"Well, Jason D.,
What's important here is who you side with.
Case closed."

Well Steve you obviously side with Wolter, that's fine, just spare us the impartial researcher bit.

"When one brick is out of place, you'd better check the entire wall."

You'd better check the entire building that Wolter and Butler then, even if it was built by Time-traveling Welsh Indian Templars.

1/16/2014 02:37:36 am

Hey Steve:

W.W.J.D.?

Walk away, buddy. Walk away.

DrBB

1/18/2014 01:27:44 pm

"Alan wrote me back that he has never tried to sue you. He never heard of you until you began persecuting Scott and the show"

"Persecuting"? Seriously? Nifty little flame war you're having here guys, but as a more or less outsider I gotta say, that's a heckuva choice of words. If fact-checking is persecution, somebody's got a pretty thin hide.

As for "acolytes," um, projection much? Having watched the show once, or tried to, my b.s. detector went off so many times it was in danger of shorting out a whole region of my brain. I only stumbled on this site because I was curious as to where the torrent of nonsense on the episode I had started to watch was coming from. The only way to take these chains of illogic and supposition seriously is by turning off your critical reasoning, precisely the kind of thing that creates "acolytes" rather than genuinely independent thinkers. These programs employ the same techniques of treating association as argument and supposition as fact as outright propagandists like Glenn Beck. That their aims are "entertainment" rather than arousing and capitalizing on political anger doesn't change the fact that they use the same operating system.

1/18/2014 01:38:03 pm

…and I'm not altogether convinced the aims are all that benign, since the repeated pattern--as I see Jason has pointed out--is to supplant the accomplishments of indigenous cultures in the Americas with pre-Columbian (decidedly WHITE) European dispersionism. It's exceedingly telling that the emotional investment the defenders of this nonsense have seems highly inflammatory and excessive to the "provocation" or "persecution" (!!!) of pointing out basic errors of fact, logical missteps, and simpler explanations that require fewer assumptions, such as interstellar expeditions to the asteroid belt.

1/18/2014 02:44:26 pm

They did try to give credit to the Mayans for branching out into the United States that one time.

Tara Jordan

1/15/2014 06:13:04 pm

Steve,you sir are a liar.
Your comments are about the "fool mouth"?.
Fool mouth? While drawing correlations between my comments
And sexual paraphilias.Regularly labeling me as the "fetish girl"
In the context of expressions like "Bigfoot droppings" or
"fecal sandwiches".You have a confused sexuality but do not
Blame it on me.
As far as I am concerned,there is nothing remotely sexual or
Fetishist about big foot droppings and "fecal sandwiches".

1/16/2014 12:50:40 am

I think you mis-read my comment, Tara. I didn't say you have a "fool mouth," I said you have a "foul mouth."

1/16/2014 10:24:20 am

This is not a mistake from my part.I intentionally wrote "fool" as opposed to "foul".I am contesting your interpretation.Except from the Mike Tyson quotation,I never used profanity,curse word,obscenity,vulgar language with you.
Usually when I address you,I use words such as "crackpot,semi idiotic,delusional,intellectual simpleton etc...."offensive words?,yes indeed but nothing "foul".
Like I said,you may play the sexual undertone with me as long as you wish,I couldn't care less (as long as it makes you feel good),but at least stop positioning yourself as the victim.

1/15/2014 06:26:36 pm

Jason.For the last 24 hours I have been unable to post on this blog
through my computers,currently using my IPhone.
Thank you for not responding to my emails, you have been very
helpful.

1/15/2014 10:30:05 pm

I haven't received any email from you, Tara. Perhaps it was an internet issue?

1/16/2014 10:07:51 am

Then I suggest you to check your server settings because I used the online contact submission form on your blog.There is definitively something wrong.
This is not the first time I experienced difficulties.Frequently I am unable to post for a day or more.This is not an internet issue (I have fiber optic connection).On many occasions,I tried to post using 3 different computers from home,resulting in the same error message.If you care,you should check your Access logs.Based on my IP you know my Geo-location,I dont think there are many people accessing your site from my country.

1/16/2014 10:14:13 am

I wish I could help, but I really don't know what the issue is. You could try contacting Weebly technical support. They might have more ideas about why it isn't working. It's possible that there is some geographic-based connection problem.

1/16/2014 03:25:12 pm

Tara, maybe it's because you are using phrases like "Camel toe" or "Bill Clinton's Cigar" or "I am Mike Tyson`s spiritual daughter,"I`ll fuck you till you love me" OR "Secret Blueprint of a camel toe" OR "Bigfoot droppings" OR "Fecal Sandwiches" OR "vaginal delirium" OR "Bed-wetting" OR "vagina monologue"

I did not type these phrases into this public comment forum. You did. I simply cut and pasted them from your comments.

1/16/2014 03:27:48 pm

Wow, Tara. Your typical vocabulary words seem to have gotten through Weebly's filters when I cut and pasted them into a comment. Give it another try.

Maybe use new filthy vocabulary that you haven't yet exhausted.

1/16/2014 04:12:04 pm

How is it that you're any better than Tara for repeating that stuff Steve? Do you honestly think that because you posted it by cutting and pasting that absolves you of anything?

Speaking of name calling, I went back a bit in Jason's blog and was reading a post that you and a few other Sinclairs pretty much spammed with an argument over your own bloodline, with you calling another 'Sinclair' "Draco" over and over. You all came out looking like twits. I want a DNA test just to prove I'm not related to any of you!

1/16/2014 04:52:54 pm

"Maybe because you are using phrases......bla bla bla.....".
Go for it Steve,you may call me "the fetish girl" or even
"The slut",if that turns you on.personally that doesn't
bother me.You'll get dizzy before I am aroused.

1/16/2014 01:29:28 am

Steve, Jason's admitting (or lying, as you proposed) that they tried to sue him actually WEAKENS his position (because it could indicate that he has a bone to pick with them).
You seem to think either 1) Jason is aiming to improve his reputation by claiming important(?) people are trying to sue him, or 2) it makes them look bad because it implies they are pursuing frivolous lawsuits. I don't think you have provided support for either.

Colin Hunt

1/17/2014 04:18:31 am

You have to understand that Steve is in a very vulnerable situation. He has supported outrageous hypotheses presented by his friend. Does he support his friend or the outrageous theories to support his friend risking his own reputation? I guess he had made his choice so we can now put him in the same incredulous box as Wolter. It was his choice. Hope he can deal with no longer being a serious academic investigator, but now associated with the fringe alien culture. Poor Guy. Lost his way.

1/17/2014 02:24:24 am

Steve Sinclair appears to live in a grey world where he is anxious to justify his own existence by making suggestions, if’s, maybes, not yet proven, etc., etc. about many things but is scared of making definitive statements, which would be open to intellectual scrutiny and potential dismissal as true or untrue, he does not appear to want to take the risk. He is a master of innuendo and so careful not to make definitive statements about his beliefs. Whenever his ‘suggestions” are challenged, he attacks, often deviating from the real subject.

At least Jason “gets off the pot.” It’s time Steve did the same. His defence of Wolter is disappointing, it’s dragging him down into the same quagmire that Wolter has dug for himself and I suspect Sinclair is much better than that, and more intelligent than Wolter. If Steve believes everything Wolter proposes then may the academic community, not to mention heaven, help him, if he does not then he is being used and I just hope he is benefitting grandly from the income Wolter is getting from riding on his back.

From the blogs, I believe Steve is a sincere educated person on a real investigative case of his own. It’s time he made a choice, forever be labelled as a “fringe” commercialist, associated with the alien wierdos, or regain his credibility by dis-associating himself wacko culture like Wolterss. I believe he was credible before, now he appears to have destroyed his own credibility by association. It’s his choice, manifest by his comments on Jasons site and support for an incredible TV money grabber. By association, I fear his reputation and cause has been irreparably damaged and cast into the cesspit of the ridiculous. Can he recover?

1/17/2014 05:46:30 am

Steve- Most of the negative comments on this site prove that birds of the same feather seem to flock together. I met you at the NEARA conference a few years ago and followed your Atlantic conference you hosted which was very good. At that time you stood on your own feet and was respected for your organizational skills. It is sad to see you have followed the pide piper to the sea and got your feathers wet.

aaron l

1/17/2014 08:29:55 pm

I would like say I thoroughly enjoy this blog. However, I have continued to watch this show, which I admit I thought started out intriguing, has become an absolute joke. I now watch it just to enjoy the review afterwards. I do disagree with the bashing of Dan Brown, he is a fiction writer, who let's say he does stretch his ".true" details, I believe his work to be very entertaining. He shouldn't be grouped with this hack. As a side note, I wish you would have spent more time on the absolute refusal of the academic they had on the show and how Scott hilariously has his own theory and Mr. nose hair doesn't even get a chance to respond.

1/17/2014 10:35:06 pm

Parodying Dan Brown isn't bashing him; I chose to use his style to review this episode because Scott Wolter has been unabashed in riding the Dan Brown wave; his books and his TV show have made repeated reference to Brown's work. It was therefore an appropriate framework for revealing the underlying model America Unearthed uses to garner attention.

1/18/2014 08:01:24 pm

No, you did that in your comment about his crappy writing. Anyway, keep up the good work, don't try so hard to explain this dudes idiocy, he does it on his own. I have a 2 month old, so won't see the new episode for a few days, looking forward to the review.

1/18/2014 10:30:14 pm

As a published literary critic of genre fiction ("Knowing Fear," 2008), I have no trouble calling Brown's writing crappy.

1/18/2014 09:34:41 pm

I think we all owe Steve St. Clair a round of thanks as without his persistence (obsession) in pursuing a pedantic point in Jason’s blog we would never have learnt that Alan Butler and Christopher Knight are actually more paranoid, irrational and dangerous than we were originally led to believe. Thanks for helping get the record straight Steve, although I doubt the two gentlemen you were trying to protect have welcomed your interference on their behalf as it has only resulted in further damaging their reputation.
I think the lesson is that before anyone acts as ‘prosecuting council’ on someone else’s behalf they should first ensure they have all the relevant facts, otherwise they only end up discrediting themselves, as well as those they are trying to protect, and shooting themselves in the foot.

Jaco

1/20/2014 05:26:41 am

Good read. We will podcast soon

David H

6/9/2014 03:52:57 am

Just watched this episod last night. I find this series to be somewhat facsinating, although I've found some of Wolter's conclusions questionable. With this episode, I lost just about all respect for his "science". In the first 5 minutes, as Butler explains the Vs and the megolithic yard - he says the distance between the major intersections and the elispse are all the same and all 366 MY. I'm looking at the drawing, saying no they're not - I can see they are not the same length. I "rewound" several times to make sure he said what I thought he said. Then I went to Google Earth and measured myself. Not only are they not close to being equal, they are far more than 366 MY, and not even a multiple of 366 MY. It's completely bogus. Then Wolter's explains that the original DC was a square, and that Washington streched it into a diamond, supposedly to include his land in Alexandria. No, it's a perfect square. Again I went to Google Earth and measured. Perfect square. No elongation to make a diamond. They sit in the bar with a "pint" of beer. No waitress measures out exactly a pint. The glasses may be a pint, but it's not full to the brim, and there's no line on the glass marking a pint. There's no way a glass of beer is exactly a pint. Yet it fills Butler's cube exactly to the brim. Yeah right. I may be done with this series. I can't really take anything he says seriously after this epesode.

The Pict

11/9/2014 10:27:27 pm

A system of 12 pendulum lengths were used by prehistoric man from around 3000BC to measure both time and distance. They were calibrated using star pairs separated by hour angles of whole megalithic degrees and counting the required number of swings of the pendulum length for the Earth to rotate by that angle. The measurement system was developed by the people inhabiting Northern France 45N and Northern Scotland 60N.

Ginger

7/4/2015 08:39:35 am

You might be interested in this site. Check out the video and then find him on Facebook. http://www.secretsinplainsight.com/videos/

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.