JASON COLAVITO
  • Home
  • Blog
  • Books
    • Legends of the Pyramids
    • The Mound Builder Myth
    • Jason and the Argonauts
    • Cult of Alien Gods >
      • Contents
      • Excerpt
      • Image Gallery
    • Foundations of Atlantis
    • Knowing Fear >
      • Contents
      • Excerpt
      • Image Gallery
    • Hideous Bit of Morbidity >
      • Contents
      • Excerpt
      • Image Gallery
    • Cthulhu in World Mythology >
      • Excerpt
      • Image Gallery
      • Necronomicon Fragments
      • Oral Histories
    • Fiction >
      • Short Stories
      • Free Fiction
    • JasonColavito.com Books >
      • Faking History
      • Unearthing the Truth
      • Critical Companion to Ancient Aliens
      • Studies in Ancient Astronautics (Series) >
        • Theosophy on Ancient Astronauts
        • Pyramidiots!
        • Edison's Conquest of Mars
      • Fiction Anthologies >
        • Unseen Horror >
          • Contents
          • Excerpt
        • Moon Men! >
          • Contents
      • The Orphic Argonautica >
        • Contents
        • Excerpt
      • The Faust Book >
        • Contents
        • Excerpt
      • Classic Reprints
      • eBook Minis
    • Free eBooks >
      • Origin of the Space Gods
      • Ancient Atom Bombs
      • Golden Fleeced
      • Ancient America
      • Horror & Science
  • Articles
    • Skeptical Xenoarchaeologist Newsletter >
      • Volumes 1-10 Archive >
        • Volume 1 Archive
        • Volume 2 Archive
        • Volume 3 Archive
        • Volume 4 Archive
        • Volume 5 Archive
        • Volume 6 Archive
        • Volume 7 Archive
        • Volume 8 Archive
        • Volume 9 Archive
        • Volume 10 Archive
      • Volumes 11-20 Archive >
        • Volume 11 Archive
        • Volume 12 Archive
        • Volume 13 Archive
        • Volume 14 Archive
        • Volume 15 Archive
        • Volume 16 Archive
        • Volume 17 Archive
        • Volume 18 Archive
        • Volume 19 Archive
        • Volume 20 Archive
      • Volumes 21-30 Archive >
        • Volume 21 Archive
        • Volume 22 Archive
    • Television Reviews >
      • Ancient Aliens Reviews
      • In Search of Aliens Reviews
      • America Unearthed
      • Pirate Treasure of the Knights Templar
      • Search for the Lost Giants
      • Forbidden History Reviews
      • Expedition Unknown Reviews
      • Legends of the Lost
      • Unexplained + Unexplored
      • Rob Riggle: Global Investigator
    • Book Reviews
    • Galleries >
      • Bad Archaeology
      • Ancient Civilizations >
        • Ancient Egypt
        • Ancient Greece
        • Ancient Near East
        • Ancient Americas
      • Supernatural History
      • Book Image Galleries
    • Videos
    • Collection: Ancient Alien Fraud >
      • Chariots of the Gods at 50
      • Secret History of Ancient Astronauts
      • Of Atlantis and Aliens
      • Aliens and Ancient Texts
      • Profiles in Ancient Astronautics >
        • Erich von Däniken
        • Robert Temple
        • Giorgio Tsoukalos
        • David Childress
      • Blunders in the Sky
      • The Case of the False Quotes
      • Alternative Authors' Quote Fraud
      • David Childress & the Aliens
      • Faking Ancient Art in Uzbekistan
      • Intimations of Persecution
      • Zecharia Sitchin's World
      • Jesus' Alien Ancestors?
      • Extraterrestrial Evolution?
    • Collection: Skeptic Magazine >
      • America Before Review
      • Native American Discovery of Europe
      • Interview: Scott Sigler
      • Golden Fleeced
      • Oh the Horror
      • Discovery of America
      • Supernatural Television
      • Review of Civilization One
      • Who Lost the Middle Ages
      • Charioteer of the Gods
    • Collection: Ancient History >
      • Prehistoric Nuclear War
      • The China Syndrome
      • Atlantis, Mu, and the Maya
      • Easter Island Exposed
      • Who Built the Sphinx?
      • Who Built the Great Pyramid?
      • Archaeological Cover Up?
    • Collection: The Lovecraft Legacy >
      • Pauwels, Bergier, and Lovecraft
      • Lovecraft in Bergier
      • Lovecraft and Scientology
    • Collection: UFOs >
      • Alien Abduction at the Outer Limits
      • Aliens and Anal Probes
      • Ultra-Terrestrials and UFOs
      • Rebels, Queers, and Aliens
    • Scholomance: The Devil's School
    • Prehistory of Chupacabra
    • The Templars, the Holy Grail, & Henry Sinclair
    • Magicians of the Gods Review
    • The Curse of the Pharaohs
    • The Antediluvian Pyramid Myth
    • Whitewashing American Prehistory
    • James Dean's Cursed Porsche
  • The Library
    • Ancient Mysteries >
      • Ancient Texts >
        • Mesopotamian Texts >
          • Atrahasis Epic
          • Epic of Gilgamesh
          • Kutha Creation Legend
          • Babylonian Creation Myth
          • Descent of Ishtar
          • Berossus
          • Comparison of Antediluvian Histories
        • Egyptian Texts >
          • The Shipwrecked Sailor
          • Dream Stela of Thutmose IV
          • The Papyrus of Ani
          • Classical Accounts of the Pyramids
          • Inventory Stela
          • Manetho
          • Eratosthenes' King List
          • The Story of Setna
          • Leon of Pella
          • Diodorus on Egyptian History
          • On Isis and Osiris
          • Famine Stela
          • Old Egyptian Chronicle
          • The Book of Sothis
          • Horapollo
          • Al-Maqrizi's King List
        • Teshub and the Dragon
        • Hermetica >
          • The Three Hermeses
          • Kore Kosmou
          • Corpus Hermeticum
          • The Asclepius
          • The Emerald Tablet
          • Hermetic Fragments
          • Prologue to the Kyranides
          • The Secret of Creation
          • Ancient Alphabets Explained
          • Prologue to Ibn Umayl's Silvery Water
          • Book of the 24 Philosophers
          • Aurora of the Philosophers
        • Hesiod's Theogony
        • Periplus of Hanno
        • Ctesias' Indica
        • Sanchuniathon
        • Sima Qian
        • Syncellus's Enoch Fragments
        • The Book of Enoch
        • Slavonic Enoch
        • Sepher Yetzirah
        • Tacitus' Germania
        • De Dea Syria
        • Aelian's Various Histories
        • Julius Africanus' Chronography
        • Eusebius' Chronicle
        • Chinese Accounts of Rome
        • Ancient Chinese Automaton
        • The Orphic Argonautica
        • Fragments of Panodorus
        • Annianus on the Watchers
        • The Watchers and Antediluvian Wisdom
      • Medieval Texts >
        • Medieval Legends of Ancient Egypt >
          • Medieval Pyramid Lore
          • John Malalas on Ancient Egypt
          • Fragments of Abenephius
          • Akhbar al-zaman
          • Ibrahim ibn Wasif Shah
          • Murtada ibn al-‘Afif
          • Al-Maqrizi on the Pyramids
          • Al-Suyuti on the Pyramids
        • The Hunt for Noah's Ark
        • Isidore of Seville
        • Book of Liang: Fusang
        • Agobard on Magonia
        • Book of Thousands
        • Voyage of Saint Brendan
        • Power of Art and of Nature
        • Travels of Sir John Mandeville
        • Yazidi Revelation and Black Book
        • Al-Biruni on the Great Flood
        • Voyage of the Zeno Brothers
        • The Kensington Runestone (Hoax)
        • Islamic Discovery of America
        • The Aztec Creation Myth
      • Lost Civilizations >
        • Atlantis >
          • Plato's Atlantis Dialogues >
            • Timaeus
            • Critias
          • Fragments on Atlantis
          • Panchaea: The Other Atlantis
          • Eumalos on Atlantis (Hoax)
          • Gómara on Atlantis
          • Sardinia and Atlantis
          • Santorini and Atlantis
          • The Mound Builders and Atlantis
          • Donnelly's Atlantis
          • Atlantis in Morocco
          • Atlantis and the Sea Peoples
          • W. Scott-Elliot >
            • The Story of Atlantis
            • The Lost Lemuria
          • The Lost Atlantis
          • Atlantis in Africa
          • How I Found Atlantis (Hoax)
          • Termier on Atlantis
          • The Critias and Minoan Crete
          • Rebuttal to Termier
          • Further Responses to Termier
          • Flinders Petrie on Atlantis
        • Lost Cities >
          • Miscellaneous Lost Cities
          • The Seven Cities
          • The Lost City of Paititi
          • Manuscript 512
          • The Idolatrous City of Iximaya (Hoax)
          • The 1885 Moberly Lost City Hoax
          • The Elephants of Paredon (Hoax)
        • OOPARTs
        • Oronteus Finaeus Antarctica Map
        • Caucasians in Panama
        • Jefferson's Excavation
        • Fictitious Discoveries in America
        • Against Diffusionism
        • Tunnels Under Peru
        • The Parahyba Inscription (Hoax)
        • Mound Builders
        • Gunung Padang
        • Tales of Enchanted Islands
        • The 1907 Ancient World Map Hoax
        • The 1909 Grand Canyon Hoax
        • The Interglacial Period
        • Solving Oak Island
      • Religious Conspiracies >
        • Pantera, Father of Jesus?
        • Toledot Yeshu
        • Peter of les Vaux-de-Cernay on Cathars
        • Testimony of Jean de Châlons
        • Rosslyn Chapel and the 'Prentice's Pillar
        • The Many Wives of Jesus
        • Templar Infiltration of Labor
        • Louis Martin & the Holy Bloodline
        • The Life of St. Issa (Hoax)
        • On the Person of Jesus Christ
      • Giants in the Earth >
        • Fossil Origins of Myths >
          • Fossil Teeth and Bones of Elephants
          • Fossil Elephants
          • Fossil Bones of Teutobochus
          • Fossil Mammoths and Giants
          • Giants' Bones Dug Out of the Earth
          • Fossils and the Supernatural
          • Fossils, Myth, and Pseudo-History
          • Man During the Stone Age
          • Fossil Bones and Giants
          • American Elephant Myths
          • The Mammoth and the Flood
          • Fossils and Myth
          • Fossil Origin of the Cyclops
          • Mastodon, Mammoth, and Man
        • Fragments on Giants
        • Manichaean Book of Giants
        • Geoffrey on British Giants
        • Alfonso X's Hermetic History of Giants
        • Boccaccio and the Fossil 'Giant'
        • Book of Howth
        • Purchas His Pilgrimage
        • Edmond Temple's 1827 Giant Investigation
        • The Giants of Sardinia
        • Giants and the Sons of God
        • The Magnetism of Evil
        • Tertiary Giants
        • Smithsonian Giant Reports
        • Early American Giants
        • The Giant of Coahuila
        • Jewish Encyclopedia on Giants
        • Index of Giants
        • Newspaper Accounts of Giants
        • Lanier's A Book of Giants
      • Science and History >
        • Halley on Noah's Comet
        • The Newport Tower
        • Iron: The Stone from Heaven
        • Ararat and the Ark
        • Pyramid Facts and Fancies
        • Argonauts before Homer
        • The Deluge
        • Crown Prince Rudolf on the Pyramids
        • Old Mythology in New Apparel
        • Blavatsky on Dinosaurs
        • Teddy Roosevelt on Bigfoot
        • Devil Worship in France
        • Maspero's Review of Akhbar al-zaman
        • The Holy Grail as Lucifer's Crown Jewel
        • The Mutinous Sea
        • The Rock Wall of Rockwall
        • Fabulous Zoology
        • The Origins of Talos
        • Mexican Mythology
        • Chinese Pyramids
        • Maqrizi's Names of the Pharaohs
      • Extreme History >
        • Roman Empire Hoax
        • American Antiquities
        • American Cataclysms
        • England, the Remnant of Judah
        • Historical Chronology of the Mexicans
        • Maspero on the Predynastic Sphinx
        • Vestiges of the Mayas
        • Ragnarok: The Age of Fire and Gravel
        • Origins of the Egyptian People
        • The Secret Doctrine >
          • Volume 1: Cosmogenesis
          • Volume 2: Anthropogenesis
        • Phoenicians in America
        • The Electric Ark
        • Traces of European Influence
        • Prince Henry Sinclair
        • Pyramid Prophecies
        • Templars of Ancient Mexico
        • Chronology and the "Riddle of the Sphinx"
        • The Faith of Ancient Egypt
        • Spirit of the Hour in Archaeology
        • Book of the Damned
        • Great Pyramid As Noah's Ark
        • Richard Shaver's Proofs
    • Alien Encounters >
      • US Government Ancient Astronaut Files >
        • Fortean Society and Columbus
        • Inquiry into Shaver and Palmer
        • The Skyfort Document
        • Whirling Wheels
        • Denver Ancient Astronaut Lecture
        • Soviet Search for Lemuria
        • Visitors from Outer Space
        • Unidentified Flying Objects (Abstract)
        • "Flying Saucers"? They're a Myth
        • UFO Hypothesis Survival Questions
        • Air Force Academy UFO Textbook
        • The Condon Report on Ancient Astronauts
        • Atlantis Discovery Telegrams
        • Ancient Astronaut Society Telegram
        • Noah's Ark Cables
        • The Von Daniken Letter
        • CIA Psychic Probe of Ancient Mars
        • Scott Wolter Lawsuit
        • UFOs in Ancient China
        • CIA Report on Noah's Ark
        • CIA Noah's Ark Memos
        • Congressional Ancient Aliens Testimony
        • Ancient Astronaut and Nibiru Email
        • Congressional Ancient Mars Hearing
        • House UFO Hearing
      • Ancient Extraterrestrials >
        • Premodern UFO Sightings
        • The Moon Hoax
        • Inhabitants of Other Planets
        • Blavatsky on Ancient Astronauts
        • The Stanzas of Dzyan (Hoax)
        • Aerolites and Religion
        • What Is Theosophy?
        • Plane of Ether
        • The Adepts from Venus
      • A Message from Mars
      • Saucer Mystery Solved?
      • Orville Wright on UFOs
      • Interdimensional Flying Saucers
      • Flying Saucers Are Real
      • Report on UFOs
    • The Supernatural >
      • The Devils of Loudun
      • Sublime and Beautiful
      • Voltaire on Vampires
      • Demonology and Witchcraft
      • Thaumaturgia
      • Bulgarian Vampires
      • Religion and Evolution
      • Transylvanian Superstitions
      • Defining a Zombie
      • Dread of the Supernatural
      • Vampires
      • Werewolves and Vampires and Ghouls
      • Science and Fairy Stories
      • The Cursed Car
    • Classic Fiction >
      • Lucian's True History
      • Some Words with a Mummy
      • The Coming Race
      • King Solomon's Mines
      • An Inhabitant of Carcosa
      • The Xipéhuz
      • Lot No. 249
      • The Novel of the Black Seal
      • The Island of Doctor Moreau
      • Pharaoh's Curse
      • Edison's Conquest of Mars
      • The Lost Continent
      • Count Magnus
      • The Mysterious Stranger
      • The Wendigo
      • Sredni Vashtar
      • The Lost World
      • The Red One
      • H. P. Lovecraft >
        • Dagon
        • The Call of Cthulhu
        • History of the Necronomicon
        • At the Mountains of Madness
        • Lovecraft's Library in 1932
      • The Skeptical Poltergeist
      • The Corpse on the Grating
      • The Second Satellite
      • Queen of the Black Coast
      • A Martian Odyssey
    • Classic Genre Movies
    • Miscellaneous Documents >
      • The Balloon-Hoax
      • A Problem in Greek Ethics
      • The Migration of Symbols
      • The Gospel of Intensity
      • De Profundis
      • The Life and Death of Crown Prince Rudolf
      • The Bathtub Hoax
      • Crown Prince Rudolf's Letters
      • Position of Viking Women
      • Employment of Homosexuals
      • James Dean's Scrapbook
      • James Dean's Love Letters
      • The Amazing James Dean Hoax!
    • Free Classic Pseudohistory eBooks
  • About Jason
    • Biography
    • Jason in the Media
    • Contact Jason
    • About JasonColavito.com
    • Terms and Conditions
  • Search

Roberto Rodriguez and the Maps of "Aztec" America

1/20/2014

156 Comments

 
Yesterday a blogger posted a lengthy review of Saturday’s America Unearthed episode, and while I don’t agree with all of the points made in it, I did appreciate that it was harsher and meaner than anything I’ve written—going so far as to describe Wolter’s normal mode of operation as “belligerent.” Somehow, however, no fans of Scott Wolter have visited her blog to complain about her handling of the program or to insist that it’s only entertainment.

The blogger rightly focused, as did I, on Dr. Roberto Rodriguez, and his bizarre claims about maps. I find his claims fascinating—not because they’re true but because they are so designed to twist history in order to further a Mexican immigration-reform agenda. I’d like to explore Dr. Rodriguez’s ideas a bit more.

Rodriguez earned a PhD in Mass Communication from the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 2008, but before this he spent several decades as a journalist and a newspaper columnist. He is not a trained Aztec migration expert as America Unearthed asserted. His wife Patrisia Gonzalez was also a newspaper columnist, and together they published a collection of their writings on race and immigration issues called Gonzales/Rodriguez Uncut & Uncensored (1997). Rodriguez must also be the same Roberto Rodriguez who wrote Justice: A Question of Race that same year, detailing his two-decade struggle to understand white anti-Mexican racism following his beating by (white) sheriff’s deputies in Los Angeles while serving as a journalist in 1979, and the subsequent civil suit he attempted to bring against the officers involved.

Following this event, Rodriguez devoted his life to advocating for the rights of Mexican and Latino immigrants to the United States. This took a turn into fringe history in 1998 when Rodriguez accepted fringe historical ideas in order to promote the political idea that the United States was the natural and original homeland of the Mexicans and therefore should not restrict immigration from Latin America, particularly Mexico.

In 1998, Rodriguez and his wife learned about an 1847 map made in conjunction with the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo (it be viewed at large size here), which would end the Mexican-American War with the cession of a large area of Mexican territory to the United States in 1848. Under the terms of the treaty, Mexicans living in newly-American territory could become U.S. citizens, and 90% did.

Rodriguez claimed that the map “indisputably” shows the ancient homeland of the Aztecs, the “Antigua Residencia de los Aztecas,” in the Four Corners region of what is now the U.S. The map does indeed show this, but it shows it in 1847, which is more than three decades after Baron Alexander von Humboldt popularized the Aztec myth (known in scholarly literature long before) that the Aztec had come from the north. The map applies the name to what is very likely the ruins of Chaco Canyon or Mesa Verde, which had then been known for at least twenty years. (Chaco Canyon was officially discovered in 1823.) I would consider it more than likely that the mapmaker was applying the Aztec myth to the Anasazi (Ancestral Pueblo) cliff dwellings in an attempt to explain the brick ruins in terms of a known high culture rather than attributing them to the Native Americans, whom America had just removed from their lands under the theory that they were culturally backward and benighted savages who lacked the rudiments of high culture.

A second supposed Aztec homeland (“Ruinas de las Casas 2das de los Aztecas”) is also marked on the map along the Gila River, correlating very closely with the Casa Grande ruins, known since 1687 and explored by the Spanish in 1694 and the 1700s and by the United States in 1846. This correlation helps to prove that the U.S. mapmaker was attempting to name Anasazi ruins in terms of the Aztec migration myth. Additional Aztec sites are listed further down in Mexico.

Rodriguez, however, points to a 1771 Spanish map by Nicholas de Lafora, which depicts the “Casas de Montezuma” in the same location on the Gila River. He claims this proves that the U.S. mapmaker wasn’t making up an Aztec connection to America, but given that this site correlates very closely to the known ruins of Casa Grande, described in Spanish literature back to the 1600s, this doesn’t really prove what he thinks it does. It only shows that the Spanish assumed that the ruins had belonged to the Aztecs when they first stumbled across them.

Indeed, when we review the relevant literature, we find that indeed the Spanish historians of the 1700s had wrongly attributed the Gila ruins to the Aztecs, as the U.S. Department of the Interior reported in its official report on the Gila Ruins in 1913. The confusion occurred because the Spanish missionary who found Casa Grande in 1687, Father Eusebio Francisco Kino, mistakenly believed Casas Grande was Chichilticalli, a semi-mythical city seen by Coronado and wrongly though to be the northern stronghold of the Aztecs (not their homeland). Later historians followed Kino and associated the Aztecs with Casas Grande, and thus also with similar Pueblo ruins across what was then the Mexican northwest, now the U.S. southwest. The U.S. government itself published what Rodriguez claims as his own “discovery,” that old Spanish and Mexican maps assigned the “Aztecs” to various Pueblo sites. By the time of the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo, there was apparently a wrongheaded idea that the Anasazi and Pueblo sites were the successive occupations of the Aztecs on their mythical southern journey from Aztlán.

This was an artifact of the colonial period, not a genuine Aztec belief. We know this because we have the documentation of who first saw each ruin and what they called them. The Aztecs themselves said nothing of the Pueblo, though there was obviously influence from Mesoamerica in the desert southwest, such as the Mexican-style ball court at Hohokam. It was this cultural diffusion that helped cement the idea that the “Aztecs” had once ruled the southwest. Later, as knowledge grew, scholars recognized that the Aztecs were too recent to have been associated with these pueblos and instead assigned them to the Toltecs, from which we find the fringe history idea that the Jews who cast the Tucson Lead Artifacts battled the Toltecs!

The idea of a more distant migration for the Aztecs than the (current) Mexican-U.S. border derives from Alexander von Humboldt, who in 1810 wrongly calculated mathematically from a literal reading of the Aztec origin myth that they had walked from the forty-second parallel; from Josiah Priest, who popularized the claim; and from Joseph Smith, who made it part of the teachings of the Mormon church in his “Traits of the Mosaic History Found among the Aztaeca Nations.” As mentioned, when the U.S. began surveying the Pueblo ruins in the 1840s, officials recognized they were not culturally connected to the Aztec and the Aztec name dropped off the maps. It wasn’t a conspiracy but science; it is only the failure of Rodriguez to connect the older map sites to Anasazi or Pueblo ruins that makes it look like one.

Rodriguez, however, admitted in his 2008 PhD dissertation, whose subject was trans-continental indigenous corn myth communication over the past 7,000 years, that the site of Casas Grande was likely the site identified as an Aztec habitation on the maps, but he denied that this had anything to do with Spanish exploration or historiography. Instead, he asserts that the idea came from “pre-Columbian codices (and oral traditions) and chronicles that recorded these oral traditions.” He can’t name any, however, and instead points to a map made in 1940 (!) as showing the Olmec migrating to Mexico from Michigan, which I have not seen and cannot evaluate on its merits. Perhaps it was attempting to show very early migrations from Asia and the peoples who much later arose from their descendants.

Rodriguez concluded that Eurocentric bias prevented Western scholars from recognizing indigenous maps, many of which were destroyed. What remains, in the form of picture-writing, looks to Westerners like art. Therefore, he explains, indigenous maps can only be understood in terms of myth, specifically corn myths, allowing him to follow Humboldt in assigning geographic correlates to each aspect of the Aztec migration myth based on what I can only describe as “looks like, therefore is.” But even Humboldt recognized this didn’t work very well since there are no palm trees in the northern lands where he wanted to put Aztlán despite the appearance of palm trees on indigenous “maps” of the mythic location.

All of this, though, received a preview in 1998, when Rodriguez and his wife reported on the 1847 map: “To us, it’s as if the map has lifted an oppressive aura of ‘suspicion’ from the psyche of Mexicans/Central Americans—populations that have been deemed to be illegitimate by some in U.S. society.” For them, identifying the Aztecs with the United States legitimized Latino presence in America as natural and sanctioned by history.

But there was more.

The two authors took inspiration from Cecilio Orozco, a professor of education at Cal State, who used what he called “archaeo-astronomy” and a photograph of four rivers in Utah to determine that the Great Salt Lake must be the original Aztec homeland. He had based his work on that of the Mexican scholar Alfonso Rivas-Salmón. The short version is that for him the Aztec words Nahuatl (four waters) and Huehuetlapallan (place of many colors) meant the four rivers that cut across the “colorful” rocks of Utah. (Remember: “looks like, therefore is.”) He further asserted that Quetzalcoatl was the “Egyptian” phoenix, and that all of this was encoded in “mathematical formulae” in Utah petroglyphs—despite the phoenix being a Greek myth, possibly distorting the Egyptian solar benu bird. He turned this into a one-hour course he provided, for a fee, to those interested in learning about the “greatness” of Native Americans. Orozco died in 2012.

Here’s how Rodriguez and Gonzales discussed Orozco and the 1847 map in 1998:

The moral argument used against Mexicans in the immigration debate -- that they are invading aliens -- has been rendered completely baseless by Orozco's research and the [1847] map. It ends the debate. He [Orozco] related that he spends lots of time presenting this information to children so that they know that "our roots are absolutely here in the United States." […] No child should ever be made to feel like an alien anywhere in the world. This map, to the chagrin of xenophobes, moves our society in a better direction.

In short, Rodriguez and Gonzales wanted the map to serve as proof that Mexicans were indigenous to the United States and therefore were rightful occupants of the land.

In his PhD dissertation, Rodriguez took this still further, directly asserting that the maps he claimed to be evidence of Aztec occupation of America serve as inspiration for Chicano/a people and “proclaimed Indigeneity to lands in which Mexicans had traditionally been framed by the U.S. master-narrative as aliens and unwanted strangers.” Further, these maps have “created a new narrative and a new identity for peoples who, a generation ago, still accepted the imposed alien frames of mainstream society” and declared the story of the Aztec and Toltec origins of America “an ancient one.”

That’s a lot of weight to place on a Spanish map mix-up, and it’s also vaguely imperialistic in a new direction, creating a modern myth to situate Latinos in a modern American context while, again, denying the Native Americans their own heritage since in this reading they are simply adjacent to the superior cultures of Mexico. It also shows that mass communication programs have no concept of history and let all sorts of unjustifiable fringe history nonsense pass through under the guise of “communication” studies. Such claims have largely escaped the notice of archaeology because they are sequestered in the morass of communication and ethnic studies.

How does one get a PhD in Mass Communication writing about Aztec origin theories and prehistoric, trans-continental corn myths? This research really ought to be anthropology, not communication (mass or otherwise), but I suppose if he tried to do so, anthropologists would be unlikely to accept it, not least for the reasons outlined above.
156 Comments
Fantasy History Watcher
1/20/2014 07:09:38 am

Having a PhD doesn't mean anything. A long list of pseudohistorians, believers in the paranormal, believers in ancient astronauts holding PhDs can easily be developed

Reply
Jason Colavito link
1/20/2014 07:11:22 am

Certainly; I was more shocked that he slipped so much fringe history into his dissertation.

Reply
A Lydia Necochea
4/27/2020 02:53:10 pm

All of you have who have commented negatively on Roberto Rodriguez writings are university educated, and so what! That doesn't change the fact that you all are descendants of the real immigrants, squatters who arrived to North America and committed genocide on my ancestors, destroyed, looted and burnt most of our knowledge, all in the name of the Crown and/or Church. Forced Christianity and everything else upon us, your power is an illusion, that has gotten in our minds, your manifest destiny, racist laws, reservations and borders, dismantled daily
You're so quick to call our beliefs myth. And claim yours are truth. Sounds pretty pathetic to me.You put up man made fascist borders, and feel you are the only ones who can say who says or who goes. Your 400 years on Indigenous land doesnt make you the forever law of the land, the genocide committed by your ancestors is still being committed today, but now it has new names ICE FACILITIES, CHURCH, GOVERNMENT, THE RICH, MEDIA Your opinions are nothing but racist and pathetic. we are living in times of prophecy, grand rising for the People of the sun, (my people) while your race is being extinct as we speak, faster than any other. your white supremacy will be dismantled.
Pay close attention the biggest awakening in the history of the world is taking place, no PhD's needed, only heart.

spookyparadigm
1/20/2014 09:45:32 am

Getting one from a real department at a serious school is more than the usual correspondence course PhD you see some pseudoscientists display. That's a different problem than what is described here.

Reply
Steve
1/20/2014 03:57:13 pm



I just looked over http://ofsinitiate.blogspot.com

Jason claimed, "it was harsher and meaner than anything I’ve written—going so far as to describe Wolter’s normal mode of operation as “belligerent.”

Really? I don't even come close to agreeing, Jason. For starters, you review each and every episode of AU. She is nowhere near as obsessive. You critique his wardrobe, his manliness for driving earth movers, and his scripted lines. You claim he's racist or, SQUIRMY ALERT, that Scott and AU are "FUNCTIONALLY RACIST." (caps my own)

Jason then said, "The blogger rightly focused, as did I, on Dr. Roberto Rodriguez, and his bizarre claims about maps."

Reeeeaaaaaly ???

'Cause it sure looks like you also focused on -

1. A blog post you put up 'almost a year ago'.

2. The distance of Aztalan from the Aztec heartland.

3. Your pre-written "Background" in which you critiqued the show before the show aired.

4. …"bizarrely, the class segregation of the Aztec capital, an aspect of Aztec civilization of particular interest to conservative historians."

5. "Wolter, acting macho, promises that he won’t get “creeped out” by the monster and plans to use a submarine to penetrate the water." His machismo just really burns you, doesn't it Jason?

6. "on-screen recap of the nothing that has happened so far, and Wolter then repeats the same information verbally." It's important to point that out. But we're not done yet, are we Jason. You focused on soooooooo much more than "...as did I, on Dr. Roberto Rodriguez, and his bizarre claims about maps."

7. Another bitter hateful, and useless point about "the first twenty minutes contained nothing we needed to see."

8. A critique of "Rodriguez’s claims in his dissertation from 2008 on maize wisdom"

9. A critique of Wolter trying "to legitimize cryptozoology (!) by telling us that kangaroos used to be cryptids before they were found"

10. Another complaint about "a verbal recap for those of you who missed the two or three facts in this hour."

11. Another racist jab - "He explains that the Mississippians built the site, but since they are Native Americans and not sexy foreigners, this is squeezed into the last few seconds of the show."

12. And, finally, thank God, Jason slams in a final race-baiting claim, "because the United States is better than Mexico the Aztecs had to come from here. Your civilization belongs to us."

Keep in mind, Jason wrote that the other blogger '…rightly focused, as did [Jason, our host], on Dr. Roberto Rodriguez, and his bizarre claims about maps." and that the other blogger was 'harsher and meaner than anything I’ve written.'

Ya, right.

Reply
Walt
1/20/2014 04:32:59 pm

You left out "This might have made a good episode of America Unearthed, but it would have meant exploring real science rather than seeing Scott Wolter in a submarine."

Besides the fact that exploring real science and seeing Scott Wolter in a submarine are not mutually exclusive as the sentence incorrectly indicates, that's just another superfluous cheap shot that we didn't need to see.

Rev. Phil Gotsch
1/20/2014 04:49:19 pm

Okay, but … other than THAT … ???

LOL ...

Steve
1/20/2014 05:00:14 pm

Exactly, Rev. Phil,

In typical fashion, watch Jason pick one part of 1 of my 12 points and cry foul.

Clint Knapp
1/20/2014 05:15:47 pm

To which you'll pick one word out of and cry fouler, and the cycle will continue.

Jason Colavito link
1/20/2014 11:49:04 pm

If I read you correctly, Steve, you have taken issue with a subjective point about whether one review was harsher than another, on which we apparently have a difference of opinion. You then state that unless I respond to each of your 12 self-selected points, any response is illegitimate.

Approximately half of my comments on the content of the episode itself were devoted to Rodriguez's claims about maps, more than any other aspect of the show. This makes this facet the "focus" of my review by dint of being the part I wrote about more than any other. Both the other blogger and I found that to be the most interesting claim in the show.

The rest of your points are cherry-picked single lines or minor points, none constituting a "focus," and you have consistently identified every attempt at humor in the review as an attack.

You also seem to want to conflate the program with Scott Wolter himself. So now disliking the repetition and poor production decisions made by the producers is to hate Wolter himself? I thought Phil made the point that Wolter isn't responsible for the show! If it helps, I also hate when they do the endless repetition on Master Chef or Kitchen Nightmares.

Scott Wolter's wardrobe (as well as his backpack) is now provided by clothing companies in return for promotional consideration (read the credits). Labels are clearly visible on his shirt in several episodes. Are you suggesting it is illegitimate to criticize the show's production design, or are you again conflating Scott Wolter, human being, with Scott Wolter, television character?

Steve
1/21/2014 12:41:59 am

Let's review why your website exists, shall we Jason?

As you, yourself, said, to 'examine the way human beings create and employ the supernatural to alter and understand our reality and our world.'

Seems you've gone a little far afield, Jason.

Jason then wrote, 'Are you suggesting it is illegitimate to criticize the show's production design, or are you again conflating Scott Wolter, human being, with Scott Wolter, television character?'

Are you intending to narrow my options to just those two points, Jason? You use that technique often.

My suggestion is simple: Focus on what you say you do and this might be something more than the very obvious hate forum you and your acolytes have turned it into.

1. Pointing out how much you're burnt by Wolter's machismo does not support your stated goal for this website.

2. Your continued editorializing, 'because the United States is better than Mexico the Aztecs had to come from here. Your civilization belongs to us' does not support your stated goal.

3. Stop with the race baiting. 'He explains that the Mississippians built the site, but since they are Native Americans and not sexy foreigners, this is squeezed into the last few seconds of the show.'

Jason Colavito link
1/21/2014 01:26:42 am

Scott Wolter appeals to "dualism," "the sacred feminine," and other supernatural concepts as the driving force behind the Templars, and in this episode he discussed a mythic sea monster. Since he is exploring how his chosen groups have allegedly employed the supernatural, I don't see how this goes beyond my general mission statement.

I'm not sure I understand what you're driving at with this talk of "machismo." The program made a conscious decision to tell its story with Wolter playing the part of the he-man adventurer. You are suggesting it's wrong to note the ways the producers emphasize this meta-narrative? I've made similar complaints about the aggressive emphasis on masculine behaviors in werewolf fiction, to which you have raised no objection. Or are you attempting to impugn my masculinity? If so: Really? I thought you were against personal attacks and name calling. Oh, right: That only applies to me.

The premise of America Unearthed is to look for evidence of contact with cultures outside the United States. My comments about the minimization of American groups in favor of non-American groups are therefore appropriate and on topic. The show clearly considers non-Native cultures "sexy" in that they are the explicit and stated topic of the episode. Also: How is it "race-baiting" to advocate Mississippians over the equally-indigenous Aztecs?

Lastly: I'm not the one who had a Mexican irredentist as a guest on his show.

Shane Sullivan
1/20/2014 07:40:30 am

Does this mean that people of mixed Aztec-European ancestry are only half welcome in the United States?

Reply
RLewis
1/20/2014 08:42:40 am

So, if you can trace your ancestors back to another country - then you are actually native to that country. I guess that makes all of the white people in the US aliens. Damn foreigners.

Reply
Coridan
1/20/2014 10:48:16 pm

I demand to be considered a citizen in my family's homeland(s)! Lenape nation, England, Scotland, Ireland, Netherlands, Germany and Slovakia. I rserve the right to pay taxes to only one of them (my choice).

Reply
RLewis
1/21/2014 12:38:03 am

I also want all of the Mexicans to go back where the came from - Spain. I mean, they speak nearly the same language so they must have originated from there - right?

Reply
J.A. Dickey
1/21/2014 07:56:27 am

Curiously enough, FDR is thought to have begun an address to
the D.A.R with the phrase "MY FELLOW IMMIGRANTS..."

http://www.fdrfourfreedomspark.org/news/entry/veterans-day-for-new-americans

Reply
Dave Lewis
1/20/2014 10:32:12 am

I posted a link to the Slate article about the charter school in Lewisville Texas using the right wing history book to a neighborhood web page yesterday and already received hate mail accusing me of having a religious and political agenda! I never thought of myself as smart enough to have any kind of agenda! Please excuse me if I come off as a pseudo-intellectual for a few days.

My goal is to eventually be hated as much as Jason Colavito. I know those are difficult shoes to fill but everyone needs a purpose in life. I guess I'll need to get a concealed carry permit so I can protect myself from the inevitable assassins.

Jason Colavito, what kind of a security detail do you have when you go to McDonalds or Walmart?

I think Tara Jordan lives in Japan so she probably doesn't have much to fear unless she also posts on Nissei blogs.

Dave L

Reply
Jason Colavito link
1/20/2014 12:33:19 pm

Obviously, I need as many bodyguards as Steven Greer and David Wilcock!

Reply
Prone
1/20/2014 04:24:10 pm

If fringe types like Greer and Wilcock genuinely believe everything they say, then there is a big gap in the market for personal security services which guard against hostile aliens, the illuminati, Smithsonian black bag operations and the like.

It would be just like being a regular bodyguard, but you would carry around a lot more EMF meters and dowsing crystals and probably some Ghostbusters-type contraptions.

Rev. Phil Gotsch
1/20/2014 04:39:37 pm

"Don't cross the streams … It would be bad … "
-- Dr. Egon Spengler

Scott David Hamilton
1/20/2014 10:42:41 am

The underlying assumption in Rodriguez's work is really interesting. Basically, he's assuming maps reflect reality, rather than the mapmaker's perception of reality. It a bit like the Sovereign Citizens movement with its treatment of certain passages of law like they're magic able to mold reality, though I suppose with the completely opposite political agenda.

Reply
Jason Colavito link
1/20/2014 12:35:26 pm

It's kind of like the ancient astronaut theorists, who want us to read ancient texts literally. Rodriguez doesn't seem to allow for speculation, imagination, or even misperception. If a map says something, than gosh-darn-it, it was really there.

Reply
Rev. Phil Gotsch
1/20/2014 04:13:16 pm

For sure, infamously, "the map is not the territory" …

However … having spent some fair amount of "back-country" time, I know from personal experience that relying on a RELIABLE map is a good idea … Not ALL maps are reliable, but those that ARE reliable are near indispensable ...

Rev. Phil Gotsch
1/20/2014 02:55:40 pm

I don't understand why it is a PROBLEM to acknowledge some widely accepted facts, e.g., that some Native American peoples DID migrate to "new" areas …

These migrations show up in well-studied linguistic relationships … E.g., the "Dine" ("Navajo") are relative late-comers to the (now American) "South West," having come from much farther north …

The linguistic affinities of The Aztecs also indicate that they originated in what is now "The United States" ...

Reply
Only Me
1/20/2014 03:45:33 pm

Native American migrations aren't the problem.

The problem is, Mr. Rodriguez uses old maps reflecting the misidentification of Anasazi and Pueblo ruins as belonging to the Aztecs, and using them to argue for immigration reform. Later maps correcting the misidentifications, he states are proof of a conspiracy.

If I showed you older U.S. maps showing Route 666, and compared them to newer maps listing the highway under its new designation Route 491, according to Mr. Rodriguez's logic, that is proof positive of a conspiracy.

Reply
Rev. Phil Gotsch
1/20/2014 04:00:54 pm

Exactly …

While a given particular "map" may or may not be entirely accurate … and a person who produces or shows that map may or may not be ideologically motivated … the FACTS of geography and ethnic history are what they are …

That is MY point ...

J.A. Dickey
1/21/2014 08:02:23 am

also, on the old maps... i do believe there is a
point where ROUTE 66 intersects Route 666.

Tara Jordan link
1/20/2014 05:00:09 pm

Yesterday I raised a legitimate question about Scott Wolter`s ( a certified geologist) methodology,since,while investigating the so called "Rock Lake Aztec underwater pyramids",Scott Wolter never even approached the issue related to Wisconsin geology & the formation/creation of Rock Lake.

I suggested to compare the period of Aztec pre-migrational period to the "South",their ability to build artificial structures in Rock Lake,with the date of the formation of Rock Lake basin.
I also recommended the following read:"The Precambrian Wisconsin, by regions" from Wisconsin`s foundations, a review of state geology and its influence on geography and human activity,by Gwen Schultz.

In response,the good Rev Phil Gotsch (professional colleague of Scott Wolter & State Director of the Midwest federation of Mineralogical & Geological Societies) accused the "whoever you are,Tara Jordan" of "ad hominem snark".

Dear Rev Phil Gotsch,you are entitled to consider me as a "snarky armchair critic & wannabe academic" but I also have the right to question your professional expertise & your ethics.Everything that Scott Wolter does,violates the most basic principles of scientific methodology/inquiry.
If The Minnesota educational system is not a farce,I have no idea how Scott Wolter & yourself made it so far.

Reply
Tara Jordan link
1/20/2014 09:16:18 pm

Rev Phil Gotsch.
There is an easy way to determine if Aztecs or any other Natives could have built artificial structures into what is now,the bottom of Rock Lake Wisconsin.This is precisely the reason I raised the issue over the date of the formation of the Rock Lake basin & the accumulation of water into Rock Lake itself.
Wolter is a certified geologist,he should have asked this very specific question before venturing into any form of "alternative enquiry".
This a blatant demonstration of Wolter incompetence & (or) charlatanism.

Reply
Rev. Phil Gotsch
1/21/2014 01:58:38 am

Scott Wolter does NOT "'pretend' to be a geologist" …

He IS a geologist ...

Reply
Tara Jordan
1/21/2014 03:31:25 am

Yes indeed,this is why it is unacceptable & disgraceful for someone who qualifies as certified geologist,to be engaged in such floppy pseudo scientific investigation.

I directed the question related to the Rock Lake basin water accumulation process,to the Department of Earth & Planetary Science at University of California,Berkeley.
Contrary to Scott Wolter,I don't pull things out of my hat,when I am ignorant or doubtful about something specific,I ask for professional expertise.

Good Rev Gotsch,if the Rock Lake basin water accumulation process predates 1000 years ago (at least,because the formation of the Rock Lake basin itself occurred around 25000 years ago,when the Wisconsian Glacial advance was at its maximum) your certified geologist`s fancy theory on Aztec pyramids,is in serious jeopardy.Even worst,as a certified geologist,he should have raised the issue & (or) known the answer.

Reply
Rev. Phil Gotsch
1/21/2014 04:07:10 am

Tara …

Patiently … not for the first time ...

Scott Wolter is my personal friend and professional colleague for 25+ years … I can and will defend HIM -- as a PERSON -- when HE is attacked, demeaned in public, denounced as a "charlatan," etc. … when someone thinks it's a really good idea to rally a cyber mob of a hundred fellow students to effectively disable his blog …

I HAVE NO PROBLEM AT ALL with calm thoughtful informed respectful professional public discussion of ANY and ALL of the CONTENT of "America Unearthed" TV shows in whatever level of detail …

But when the "discussion" devolves into personal attacks, sneering snarky ad hominem remarks ("'pretends' to be a geologist") … the attacker only makes him/herself look bad and ironically DERAILS what ought to be a fruitful and interesting discussion of North American history and pre-history …

THAT is where I am at in these blogs ...

The Other J.
1/21/2014 09:54:48 am

He's a geologist who claims authority based on his credentials, then discards the best practices of that discipline in favor of unproven and nonsensical methods, and then demands his claims be accepted based on his credentials.

Analogy: A person goes to med school, does a residency, becomes an oncologist, then tries to treat cancer with Santeria chicken sacrifices and appeals to Papa Legba. Then demands that those methods be accepted as legitimate, because, y'know, doctor.

I still don't know why they wouldn't have just consulted the sonar maps done in the 1990's so they would have had some idea where to drop the sub. Oh yeah, you got angry when I asked that question before -- somehow that's my problem, not Scott Wolter's or the production team's. Just like it's my problem that Wolter claims scratches on a wall in Oklahoma are ogham despite the lack of any evidence to prove it, and experts who say it isn't anything like ogham.

Because if we believe anything Scott Wolter says on television, we're just idiots because, y'know, television -- it's all lies. But then if we accept your point and concede Wolter is lying to us, then you get angry because Scott Wolter is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being you've ever known in your life.

A person could get whiplash trying to follow your line of argument.

Reply
Dave Lewis
1/21/2014 05:46:05 am

When I was a kid I heard someone say that when you learn a new word you should use it ten times that day to help you remember it.

How the heck am I going to do that with irredentist?

I went to the irredentist today, but instead of cleaning my teeth he wanted to take back my country for Mexico.

Reply
Gunn
1/21/2014 05:49:36 am

Though I don't agree with Tara's style of communicating any more than I do Jason's, because of the harsh overtones, she brings up a valid point: a simple geologic survey (even online) would show how the lake water accumulated and probably even reveal a time-table, based on the water source. Is there a natural spring or springs? Is there a creek run-off, or more than one, or none? How much has the lake water levels see-sawed, according to available data? Was the basin ever empty enough to build pyramid -like structures?

I agree that there was not enough science in this program...again. My most vocal complaint not in favor of Wolter is that there is not enough science. He could and should try to focus more on good, valid information he can relay to the average TV viewer. For instance, he could have included some answers to some of the questions about the lake, above. Otherwise, we are left with the science of lake weeds and field corn.

The yellow subs, though cute, were presented a bit too obviously as items of advertising. It seems to be a nice invention, as it can bring that unique experience of being underwater and un-wet to more people of less means. Think of these being used in underwater archaeological hot-spots. Or, just to find old bottles and lost jewelry, etc. Nice yellow subs, but the advertising of them could have been more subtle. I think most viewers would prefer more subtlety...except for when it comes to providing more useful, intelligent history background, or geological background. The AU program could be more educational, since it already has entertainment value.

Not enough sexy foreigners? It looks to me like the Mississippians (mound builders) may have originated from the Gulf of Mexico. Where did they come from before traveling and settling up that north-reaching waterway? I would say to look at the artifacts presented along the way, artifacts recovered from these mounds. Many artifacts suggest very refined knapping, and of nicely-colored stones...of different shapes and styles not found before or after their habitation.

But we can't be confused by artifacts acquired from far-extending trade routes. I think we may be able to assume that the mound builders consisted of a culture neither originating from the Mississippi area, nor presenting their burials as anything usual before or after their occupation. As far as I can tell, the mound builders showed up as near-foreign, sexy invaders...yes, from the ocean and then up the big river-way north.

BTW, there is a small, clear creek springing up from the ground within walking distance of where I live in Bloomington, MN. I just noticed for the first time last summer that there is a huge mound about three stones-throw from the spring; these are along the MN River ridgeline. The mound builders, the Mississippians, made it way up here, even. There are other mounds around, too, closer to Ft. Snelling, I believe, where the MN and MS Rivers converge.

BTW, one may have reached "Gotaland" by hooking west, following the MN River to its source. Also, this ending route could be taken from Lake Superior after following the St. Croix River south. Then, also, this far inland waterway spot could be reached from Hudson Bay to the north. I don't know of any mounds in the Gotaland area (Whetstone River, SD), but some people besides the mound builders stayed in the area long enough to attempt to claim land...people from Scandinavia.

The Native American dynamics during this period of time (Fourteenth Century) made it an extremely dangerous place to come to. Mass scalping was commonplace, as evidenced in the "Crow Creek, SD" massacre of the early Fourteenth Century. Same thing in Illinois. Women weren't exempt from scalping, either, and some people survived scalping and went on to live their lives...just not the one's who had their heads cut off, of course.

Evidently, the scene the KRS party came upon was equally horrifying, as it was described as red and bloody...AVM! And, no, we're not talking disease. So, here we have a crude mix of Scandinavians and Native Americans coming to blows (or being surrounded and out-manned) during the middle-Fourteenth Century. Mississippians?

Here's the question: Did sexy Templars clash with sexy "non-Native Americans (not originating from the continental US, anyway), or, what was the reason the mound builders disappeared a more mundane reason? (Joking, of course.)

I'm guessing they were gradually pushed back south. Maybe they left and became the Aztec, right? Wrong. Actually, it doesn't make much sense, era-wise, from the Gulf side of the US, either, never mind the proposed more western migration south. Doesn't the known Aztec culture pre-date any "Four Corners" or possibly-related Wisconsin culture? Which archaeological evidence goes back farther? This is the true archaeological record giving us the correct answer, already, if I'm not mistaken--maps aside.

Reply
Tara Jordan
1/21/2014 06:48:21 am


Rev.Phil Gotsch.
I plead guilty for playing rough but I expect nothing less from the other side.I am also frequently subjected to personal attacks/hate mails/sexual slurs/threats etc..That doesn't bother me at all,as a matter of fact,anyone can send me messages through my Facebook page,I never blocked or reported anyone so far.


Gunn.
Unfortunately Scott Wolter has no intention on debating or even responding to legitimate questions.This is my issue with Scott Wolter.He refuses to adhere to scientific methods,academic investigation protocols,& submit himself to scientific peer reviewing.Wolter has adopted a very comfortable position,he can denounce academics & scientists as a corrupted bunch of corrupted lazy,lying conspirators,while systematically refusing to be confronted.

Reply
Rev. Phil Gotsch
1/21/2014 08:16:03 am

Tara --

I am degreed in both the natural sciences and in theology … I have been an ordained clergy for 35+ years … I am a member of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (biology section) for 40 years … I have done graduate study in paleontology and in theology and in counseling … I've been around for a while …

Spirited vigorous serious informed public discussion and open free wheeling debate of IDEAS and CLAIMS and POSSIBILITIES is always welcome and in order … It's a GOOD thing … It's civilized ...

The fact that you have unfortunately been subjected to "personal attacks, hate mail, sexual slurs, threats, etc." does not mean that such things are therefore acceptable conduct … The fact that you choose not to report persons who abuse you in that way is your unfortunate choice … but your choice cannot then be taken as permission for similar abuses to be hurled at others …

Again … Such misconduct only makes the attacker/abuser look bad, and ironically DERAILS serious engagement ...

Reply
Gunn
1/21/2014 12:18:11 pm

Phil, I think what she means is that she, herself, likes to be engaged in personal attacks, hate communications, sexual slurs, etc., and that she's a tough girl. She expects nothing less from the other side, and she says it doesn't bother her. At least she's being honest...I think.

But I think she's more sensitive than she's letting on, which may be a good sign. Now, if she can just manage to bite her tongue more often. (Not really, The Other J., just a metaphor.) I hate it when I bite my own tongue, and I wouldn't wish it on anyone.

Tara, you say: "Wolter has adopted a very comfortable position,he can denounce academics & scientists as a corrupted bunch of corrupted lazy,lying conspirators,while systematically refusing to be confronted."

Actually, I don't think Wolter's position is that comfortable, and he is often confronted...or at least, he has been in the past. Because he got involved with the KRS, he got tarnished by the "academics" right away because of his conclusion that it is real. You must realize that the official view MUST BE that the KRS is fake, and this is the origination, the beginning of Wolter's clash with mainstream historians--not to mention the fringe debunker, Jason, come a later time.

Tara, the premise of the show, AU, is flawed. Something new and valid and of a non-fringe nature cannot be showcased each and every week, week after week. Nothing likely has been showcased yet. Since this is the case, abstractions and illusions and fantasies must take place. Like in The Wizard of Oz, there is nothing behind the curtain...except for an old dude looking surprised, this one with a nice backpack. Ha! Ha!

Every week, people turn on the TV to watch AU and to watch Wolter find something significant, but it always crumbles away from us before the end of the show. Was that really popcorn I just ate, or Illinois field corn? Did we just learn anything for sure?

Yes, there are some "history mysteries" to possibly learn something about, and there are some not even worth exploring at all--like venturing into Grand Canyon, of all places!

Again, the premise of the show is flawed, but that is being tolerated and overlooked for the time being. Wolter needs to pull a Mandan Rabbit out of his backpack, or something. Entertainment is nice, but some educational and scientific renderings would leave a better aftertaste than now. Apparently, many viewers like the show, but they would like to see some concrete (no pun intended) results once in a while.

Tara, Scott Wolter is filling a niche, and it's working, just not the way each person wants it too. Maybe it'll evolve into a better show. Sooner or later, he's got to find something, or someone has got to bring something his way that turns out to be substantive, or people will lose interest. That's why he needs to be more professionally informative on the shows now, so at least something more substantive will be offered than what is currently being offered.

And then, too, the show probably needs to be somewhat controversial to draw ratings. Bottom Line: Wolter is playing a role. He is a caricature of himself. He is not entirely the person you think you see on TV, which I think Phil is saying. Everybody's got their good sides and bad sides, and Phil sees a good side to Wolter as a personal friend, while you, Tara, and others here only see the perceived bad side...the History Devil side.

We throw stones into glass houses from glass houses, and we hear glass breaking all around us. Why not live more peaceably, Tara? I once knew a drunk and a crazy person who would go at it all the time. It wasn't much fun, as a kid. The same objects would be thrown back and forth at one another while dodging back and forth and cussing up a storm. Unfortunately, this blog reminds me a little bit of my childhood.

Those old cars from the '50's were comfortable at night, down on the floor by the heater.

Life is a circle, from childhood to childhood. - Black Elk

Only Me
1/21/2014 01:16:19 pm

"My name is Scott Wolter, and I'm a forensic geologist."

Happy Gilmore: "Look who's on TV, Momma. It's the Devil."

XD

The Other J.
1/21/2014 01:26:43 pm

Gunn, you still don't have this down; "biting your tongue" is a figure of speech, not a metaphor.

Go back to that previous post where you tried to explain metaphor to me; I had some suggestions.

Tara Jordan link
1/21/2014 05:59:41 pm

Rev.Phil Gotsch
If I follow your line of argumentation,you consider it is OK to lie & defraud the general public,as long as it is on "a TV show produced and distributed for commercial purposes".You are a man of god,I have one question for you.What about moral principles?.
Having said that,I agree with you,personal attacks are irrelevant to the debates,but they come with the territory (& from both sides).
I am more than willing to have a "civilized debate" with Scott Wolter.Dear Rev.Phil Gotsch,do you honestly believe that Scott wants to take part in a debate?.

Gunn.
People often label me as a ""vengeful,mean spirited young lady",fair enough,but I am not as "mean spirited" as claimed,and you know it.On many occasions (& despite our differences) I defended you when you came under attack.I am who I am,but I value freedom of expression,integrity & intellectual honesty more than anything else.
People are more than welcome to argue & debate with me in a civil manner,because I am not "mean spirited" by nature.My reactions are more than often the result of actions.

Gunn link
1/22/2014 04:17:39 am

Tara, I suspect you don't wish to be mean-spirited or come across as mean-spirited. But, as with Jason, it's simple enough to make a point in a more respectful manner. People can still read in-between the lines if it's done right. I've known folks who swear all the time "for effect," but the effect wears down after a while, like in the way of The Boy Who Cried Wolf! You can come across as a nicer person, but it'll take some work.

The Other J: Go back to school, dude. Didn't you know that when describing a metaphor, "figure of speech" is given as an example...in the dictionary? How dare you question my audacity!

The Other J.
1/22/2014 06:30:11 am

So you consulted a dictionary but only came up with a category, not a definition -- and you wonder why some of us question your interpretive acumen? You need to read a little more carefully.

I'm trying not to embarrass you here, but you seem to really want to keep going with this. So: Metaphors can be a figures of speech, but not all figures of speech are metaphors. What you did is offer images, and creating an image is just that; it's not a metaphor. A metaphor is when two unlike images (or words, or statements -- some kind of rhetoric, visual or otherwise) are juxtaposed or substituted in a way that creates an interpretive conflict resulting in a third meaning that differs from the direct rhetorical interpretations of each individual image (or word, or statement).

Again, there's no substitution or juxtaposition of two unlike things to create a third interpretive space in your statement -- you're only offering suggestive images through idiomatic language or a creepy image that conveys how amused you'd be to see people who disagree with you grinding their teeth down to bloody stumps. (Which, by the way, tells us more about you than the others. Here's an Irish idiomatic phrase: Where the tongue slips, it speaks the truth.)

The examples I gave before: 'The Legion of Boom were a Hoover Dam against the flow of San Francisco's offense' (there's a few in there); 'The Other J's brow furrowed into ridges and canyons having to explain metaphor again, knowing he was writing down a black hole of comprehension.' Don't tell me I need to explain the unlike images being juxtaposed in those sentences, because unpacking a metaphor is like explaining a joke. (That last one's a simile, which IS figurative language, but NOT a metaphor.)

Check out Gerald Prince's Dictionary of Narratology; or Terry Eagleton's chapter on psychoanalytic criticism in his book Literary Theory; or Thomas McLaughlin's chapter "Figurative Language" in Frank Lentricchia's Critical Terms for Literary Study; or better yet, Roman Jakobson's essay "Metaphor and Metonymy." Or I could dig up my master's thesis, because it's about metaphor.

mike
1/21/2014 07:42:46 am

So if we accept Roberto's argument, then any Italians from the Tuscany region can immigrate to Israel or Turkey or that area since the Etrucians came from that area...

Reply
Jen
1/21/2014 01:59:53 pm

I was so excited about this show when I first discovered it. It has unfortunately gone from bad to really really bad. The set up scenes, SW feigning surprise at revelations, he already knows, the inconsistent and lack of detail... the fact he always seems to run out of tide, battery, light and foresight to follow through on getting conclusions... Best thing about this blog is finding out more information, debunking or getting a clearer picture of subject in the episodes. Thanks to you and your comments section. America Unearthed is a shocker! We watch it now, purely for a laugh, and to try and guess which bar he will end up in and which mode of transport/line of questioning will he follow to come to nothing. #ridic

Reply
Rev. Phil Gotsch
1/21/2014 02:53:52 pm

(IMHO) the H2 "America Unearthed" TV shows are NOT of the nature and quality of, say, "NOVA" or "Frontline," but they have genuine positive value in stimulating discussion of and interest in North American history and pre-history ...

Reply
Only Me
1/21/2014 03:20:31 pm

It doesn't matter how many times you repeat the same mantra, people will continue to express their opinions of the show. It doesn't matter if you agree with those opinions or not, at least be respectful enough to quit piggy-backing on them to continuously repeat the same weak excuses.

In other words, we've heard it before. We got it. Enough already.

jen
1/21/2014 03:32:20 pm

Hi Rev, not sure if I'm posting in the right place, as I've only been on here a few hours. Seems like AU has a big budget and resourses, there is no reason why it cant be more than what it is. It's very full of nothing. The continuous repeated updates of what? Nothing... I'd just like to reiterate, that I'm glad to have found this blog, its a lot more helpful than AU, in my thirst for historical context.

Rev. Phil Gotsch
1/21/2014 03:43:52 pm

For sure …

One of the necessary tasks in coming of age as a SERIOUS student (of history or of ANYTHING) is to learn when and how to question one's own revered teachers and received tradition … It CAN be done with BOTH respect AND vigor ...

After a while, one learns to take EVERYTHING with that infamous "grain of salt," to push and explore and doubt and affirm as one goes along … It's often an uncomfortable journey … There will be skeptics and critics and naysayers and acolytes and obsequious devotees …

But eventually one learns to THINK about stuff -- sometimes *outside*the*Box*and sometimes firmly WITHIN it … It's REALLY interesting …

Paul Cargile
1/22/2014 12:37:57 am

You know, if Acient Aliens and American Unearthed were on the SyFy Channel, no one would care about the content as much. People expect fiction on the SyFy Channel.

Using a search engine on the subject of "americans knowldge of history" or "american's knowledge of world history" leads to several websites that indicate we American's in general have a lack of interest or a poor education in History. So what is the genuine positive value in stimulating discussion of and interest in a subject the discussers have little or basic knowledge in? It's like having a 3rd grade class discuss algebra.

I think "Fringe History" is around today because it's filling that void left by people not understanding history. It wouldn't be popular if people were better educated in both history and the scientific method. And that makes fringe history a scam.

Gunn link
1/22/2014 04:57:12 am

I like the way you boiled this down, Phil. Remedial inclusions will do the trick, too, I think. I like this method, myself, in promoting an object of great affection.

Yes, the AU programs make good entertainment, at least, and I can certainly see that the shows can stimulate discussions about our history. Right now it is my favorite program on TV. I look forward to watching it every Saturday night. Popcorn time, for sure. Will there be belly-laughs, or will that have to wait until Jason's blog and the ensuring comments?

From Paul Cargile: "I think 'Fringe History' is around today because it's filling that void left by people not understanding history. It wouldn't be popular if people were better educated in both history and the scientific method. And that makes fringe history a scam."

Well, the problem for you, Paul, and Jason, even, is that some fringe history ultimately comes true. This is an inescapable fact, seen by the Vikings' visit to Newfoundland. In my opinion, Paul, you are relying way-heavily on the educated...meaning, you make it sound like fringe believers--enmass--are unpleasantly uneducated.

Though I would almost agree with you, this cannot be the case with no exceptions. Some educated people are fringe believers. A few search out esoteric matters with diligence, peering into the unknown with an open mind.

For example, I see people other people don't see...shadowy, medieval-European-appearing figures dipping paddles into murky creek water, pressing on in early-morning fog.

(Best to break camp early and be on one's way....)

The Other J.
1/22/2014 07:09:58 am

Gunn said: "Well, the problem for you, Paul, and Jason, even, is that some fringe history ultimately comes true. This is an inescapable fact, seen by the Vikings' visit to Newfoundland."

Which... was never fringe history in the first place, and was widely accepted as completely possible based on archaeological and literary evidence long before L'Anse Aux Meadows was discovered. L'Anse Aux Meadows was the definitive proof backing up the other archaeological and literary evidence. Jason's gone over this in the past, multiple times, if you bothered to read it and not just reject it because Jason wrote it.

But you keep telling yourself that it was fringe history before Scott Wolter discovered it, if that makes you feel better.

Gunn
1/23/2014 03:14:06 am

The OtherJ., I wish you would bite your tongue. Figurative or literal? We'll go with it as a degenerated metaphor. L'Anse Aux Meadows was on the fringes, Foul Man. It would've stayed undiscovered, perhaps, if a dedicated team hadn't taken the time to study, yes, fringe literature. I would venture to guess that even Jason sees the Sagas as fringe literature...at least in some respects.

You always want to pop up and split fine hairs. The KRS is on the fringes, too. Literature? How about the written and now well-understood message of the KRS? Yet, like in the Sagas, much of the information is a mystery...in this case, because people don't want to take the message for what it says, always preferring to add unwarranted speculation.

Wolter, I believe, is himself guilty of this over various issues, which I won't go into here on this thread.

I see the case of the KRS as very similar to L'Anse Aux Meadows. Everything is pointing to a particular spot (New Gotaland, SD), a natural spot for thinking of settlement, and, sure enough, the evidence is pointing to medieval Scandinavians. So far, the evidence--except for the KRS--has no acceptable provenance. The KRS has partial acceptable provenance. Now, we await more evidence being discovered within this New Gotaland/Whetstone River area.

Hang in there. Maybe you'll live long enough to see the KRS go from fringe history to a more sacred and acceptable true history. Is this a veiled threat? Only a jackass who likes to split fine hairs would venture to think so. No, it's not a threat...more like a metaphor dealing with old age. Having said this, I hope your prospective old age doesn't interfere with the near-future diagnosis concerning the absolute veracity of the "saga" mentioned on that old troublemaker, correctly dated 1362.

Walt
1/21/2014 05:07:03 pm

A great example in this episode is when he refused to surface in the submarine several times. What was the point? I expect an intelligent person to surface when the sub expert says it's time to surface, then go back down when the sub expert says to go back down. They actually seem to think viewers will be impressed, as if it takes bravado rather than stupidity.

But I love history and archaeology and I'm getting to see new places that somehow I didn't even know existed, so I'll keep watching. It could be worse, and I can ignore the noise. It's nice seeing any coverage at all of these sites.

Reply
Jen
1/21/2014 03:47:13 pm

Rev... are you patronising me? I'm not looking for confrontation here. Just like to say, I'm a grown up and a free thinker. Thanks.

Reply
Rev. Phil Gotsch
1/21/2014 03:53:54 pm

Jen --

No … I am simply taking note of how terribly INTERESTING all of these questions are -- and also the people who raise them ...

Reply
jen
1/21/2014 04:04:16 pm

LOL right ok Rev, I have noticed your other comments. I take that as a yes. You appear to have an agenda. I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say, without saying it with your 'caps and ... '

Rev. Phil Gotsch
1/21/2014 04:17:34 pm

Jen --

NO … I have no particular agenda here EXCEPT to rise up to defend the character of Scott Wolter, who has been my personal friend and professional colleague for 25+ years …

Any and all of the specific content of the "A.U." TV shows certainly is up for discussion ...

Matt Mc
1/22/2014 02:43:50 am

I like how Rev states on someone elses bog what is up for discussion.

What Rev really means is if something that does not fit into his "interpretation" of what a valid subject is for Jason's Blog he will post troll you.

relax Rev its just a blog after all, on the internet, you know the place that is full of opinions. So relax..

take a deep breath and exhale.. there you go

Gunn
1/22/2014 05:12:12 am

For Matt McNutt:

If I may, "(IMHO) the H2 'America Unearthed' TV shows are NOT of the nature and quality of, say, "NOVA" or "Frontline," but they have genuine positive value in stimulating discussion of and interest in North American history and pre-history...."

This is what's most important to realize, Matt. You always want to stir up trouble, like it's part of your mission here. How does being on this mission make you feel? "Like a... (insert your own negative word).

Only Me
1/21/2014 04:17:29 pm

Jen, for what it's worth, welcome to the blog. If you intend to stick around, you'll find Jason has a *lot* of interesting reads to enjoy.

Reply
jen
1/21/2014 04:25:58 pm

@Only Me, thank you : ) @ The Rev, ahhh ok, personal friend, I see. Well I would want to defend my friend also. However, I would also want to have a talk with them about substance and quality and misrepresentation. Lets leave it at that shall we Rev? Not wanting to have the last word, just dont want to do this any longer :)

Reply
Rev. Phil Gotsch
1/21/2014 04:32:08 pm

Scott Wolter is the host of a TV show produced and distributed for commercial purposes, i.e., to attract and hold an audience that will see the paid adverts …

It obviously is NOT of the nature and quality of "NOVA" or "Frontline" …

But the "America Unearthed" TV shows (IMHO) have a positive value in stimulating interest in and discussion of North American history and pre-history ...

Only Me
1/21/2014 06:25:08 pm

Who knew a continuous playback loop could double as an argument?

RLewis
1/22/2014 02:02:15 am

Rev, you must stop playing the "it's only entertainment" card. If SW began each show saying "These are controversial topics that we feel should be to explored further" - then OK (maybe). But instead he states that the history we were taught is wrong, that it has been manipulated by a conspiracy of academia and government officials , and that he is going to tell us the truth. He has written several books/articles and appeared on multiple media outlets making the same claims.
Fine. Prove it.
You can't defend him by saying "he's only reading from a script", or "you should understand it's just entertainment and not necessarily true". Nope. When he makes those types of accusations he forfeits the right to say "just kidding - don't take it so seriously".

Matt Mc
1/22/2014 02:04:22 am

Rev.

It is s NEW poster on a blog..

RELAX, it is JUST a blog.. People tend to post on them.

Relax, just a posting.

Have a cup of Coffee, enjoy a DONUT.

Just take a deep breathe and repeat..


ITS ONLY A BLOG... ITS ONLY A BLOG

Gunn
1/22/2014 05:21:23 am

Only Me, by now you should know that life is a circle...the continuous playback loop is working. It's repeat advertising, man. Get with the program....

Entertainment + $ = ensuing discussion. Result: overall, good.

Gunn Sinclair link
1/22/2014 05:47:31 am

RLewis says: "But instead he states that the history we were taught is wrong, that it has been manipulated by a conspiracy of academia and government officials , and that he is going to tell us the truth."

You know what's funny, RLewis? Here in Minnesota, what we are being taught IS WRONG. Here it is: the history up here has been manipulated by a conspiracy of academia and government officials. Luckily, Scott Wolter has been telling us the truth. Of course, we are once again referring to that crude lump of rock, out of necessity.

So then, yes, RLewis, the State Archaeologist and academia, too, I suppose, are loosely confederated to push this now-outdated view that the runic rock is a fraud, a hoax. Some faces are beginning to redden already, though. Apparently, yours will be one of them to redden at a much later time.

Bottom Line: Don't be so sure of yourself and the "officials'" steadfast viewpoints. The so-called experts can be, and in this case, ARE wrong, with a notable exception being Mr. Scott Wolter, acute geologist. He the man.

This is where some of the perceived manliness surrounding him no doubt stems from. He dared to keep telling the truth even after the experts tried to shut him up. His place as a "History Hero" is not far away, I think, even as the REAL EXPERTS (rune experts) are figuring out more of the truth even as I write this: that the aforementioned, un-named lump of rock with a medieval Scandinavian message on it is very real, indeed.

1362. Wow. I'm still awed...and thank you RLewis for the opportunity of saying so.

Only Me
1/22/2014 07:16:49 am

Sorry, Gunn, there's only so many times I can read the same response to the same point before it gets old. At this point, I'm just having fun.

RLewis
1/22/2014 01:06:17 pm

OK Rev, you got your theory (and profession of man-love for SW) in yet again. Of course it had nothing to do with the previous comments - but there you go.
I never said I was sure of anything. I never said SW is wrong. I never said there isn't a conspiracy. I said if you're going to make those claims your evidence will be held to high standards. Once challenged, you can't fall back on "it's just commercial TV and should not be expected to meet those standards":

Kevin
1/22/2014 12:34:34 am

Does this sound like people you have read here?

Arguing with some people is like playing chess with a pigeon.
No matter how good you are at chess, the pigeon will knock over the pieces, crap on the board, and strut around like it won.

Reply
Rev. Phil Gotsch
1/22/2014 02:14:16 am

I don't say, "It's only 'entertainment'" …

I DO say that the H2 "America Unearthed" TV shows have a positive value in stimulating interest in and discussion of North American history and re-history …

E.g., probably MANY if not MOST viewers of the latest program didn't know that the Aztec people originated in what is now the United States and migrated into central Mexico only relatively recently … Probably MANY if not MOST had never before heard anything about "Cahokia, either" …

The fact that the AU shows are not of the character and quality of "NOVA" or "Frontline" doesn't mean that they are therefore NO good at all …

And again … I will continue to raise these same objections as long as some visitors to these blogs continue to attack Scott Wolter as a PERSON, resorting to name calling and demeaning personal insults … I have NO PROBLEM AT ALL with spirited free wheeling open discussion of the ideas, claims, facts and interpretations presented in the AU shows …

Reply
Jason Colavito link
1/22/2014 02:17:54 am

The Aztec are not known for certain to have originated in the United States. The best consensus is that they migrated from what is now northwestern Mexico or, possibly, extremely southern California. The latter is considered less likely.

More to the point: Are you telling me that Scott Wolter the person is the same as the character he plays on TV, even though he is acting out someone else's script? Would you agree one could dislike the television character without reference to the non-TV person playing him? Should we distinguish the two with quotation marks: Scott Wolter vs. "Scott Wolter," and if so, how do his books fit into this?

RLewis
1/22/2014 02:41:08 am

To be clear, I am characterizing your following statements as equal to "just entertainment" :

1/19/2014 (Hate Blogger post)
The "America Unearthed" TV shows … are just that … They are TV shows, commercially produced and aired in order to attract a viewing audience long enough to induce them to view the paid adverts …
1/20/2014 (Underwater pyramids post)
They are commercial TV shows produced for mass consumption, with the intent of attracting and holding an audience so that they will look at the paid adverts …

If you think that is an unfair characterization, then I apologize. But whatever you call it - that's what I'm complaining about.

Rev. Phil Gotsch
1/22/2014 02:45:36 am

The Aztec language has ties to other groups including the Ute, Shoshone, Hopi, Pima, and others …

The point is that the Aztec people DID migrate south into central Mexico … Most viewers of the AU shows would never have heard that previously ...

RLewis
1/22/2014 02:54:30 am

If you go back far enough, everybody migrated from somewhere. Not really that educational or surprising (and not necessarily AMERICAN history).
To say the show may occasionally relay a possible nugget of real information, is a very thin argument.

Rev. Phil Gotsch
1/22/2014 03:15:53 am

Oh, yes, historic relationships between "The United States" and "Latin America" certainly DO figure in North American history and pre-history, and of course, as Scott Wolter correctly says in his standard intro to the AU shows, "Some of what we were taught … is WRONG …"

E.g., when The War of American Imperial Aggression Against Mexico (1846-48) ended with The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, Mexico didn't generously voluntarily "CEDE" 55% of its territory to The United States … We SEIZED it … ("Hey, Pancho … !!! Those Gringos are muy estupido, si … ??? We are getting rid of vast tracts of worthless land that nobody wants anyway … !!!") … ???

Probably many, if not most, Americans are still *stuck* with romantic notions of peaceful westward "expansion," brave peaceful harmless settlers in wagon trains … But it was much more complex than that …

So, YES, everybody ultimately comes from "immigrant" stock … and understanding that IS important ...

RLewis
1/22/2014 04:07:22 am

Seized? What are you talking about? How can a signed treaty - with a significant amount of money exchanged - be characterized as seized?

Steve
1/22/2014 04:08:18 am

Regarding Scott, above in this comment thread Jason wrote, '…even though he is acting out someone else's script?'

Is our squad of truth seekers gonna let that one slide by?

Jason, I've been on the show. I know for a fact that Scott is not 'acting out someone else's script.'
And, by your snide statement slid into you comment, I know for a fact that you don't have a clue how the show is run.

But a lack of facts never stops our host from saying something as though it's factual, does it Jason?
You know that you lack the information to make such a statement. Yet you say it anyway.

Welcome to Jason's hate forum.

AU has very high production values, thanks to Committee Films. They film a lot more footage than they could ever fit into a final show. That said, like all productions, they are on a budget. When they go on location, they have to move quickly and cover a lot of ground. Unexpected things happen on location and can add to the cost.

The above is to point out that a plan is necessary. That plan has a flow and certain statements written down.
Do they put words into people's mouth? No.
Do they demand that guests memorize their notes? No.
Do they know the theme before they fly to a location? Yes.
Do they know all the details they will find? No.
Is Scott 'acting out someone else's script?' No. That, Jason, is an absolute lie.

Jason Colavito link
1/22/2014 04:18:17 am

Steve, I was making a rhetorical point based on Phil's comments. It was a rhetorical point that, pointedly, was meant purposely to be contrary to reality. I was trying to prompt Phil to either admit or deny that Wolter is responsible for his own statements. Such context escapes you. That said, the show has two credited scriptwriters on most episodes. Are you suggesting that the show is falsely crediting them with writing the show?

Steve
1/22/2014 04:48:54 am

Quite right, Jason. I did not read it as a rhetorical point. And I don't believe that you meant it that way, despite your explanation. Had you meant it rhetorically, you should have thought to put full quotation marks around it. Here's an example:

Jason maintains a hate forum. (I have the evidence to back up such a statement.)

This makes Jason a "Hate Blogger."

See the difference, Jason? I know the definition of the phrase "hate blogger" and, while you veer dangerously close to that based on what could be interpreted as obsession, you cannot accurately be called a "hate blogger."

But when I say - This makes Jason a "Hate Blogger" I'm referring back to others saying it and using that easily accessible statement to make a wider point.

That's using quotation marks to ensure meaning is transferred.

'… the show has two credited scriptwriters on most episodes. Are you suggesting that the show is falsely crediting them with writing the show?'

No. What I suspect is happening is that their professional titles are "Script Writer" or "Writer." They may even think that it is a script. It may even have the title of "Script" at the top of the page. But, unlike a TV show, the notes can be fully ignored. I'm sure they were by several people. I certainly didn't memorize a single line and was never asked to.

I can see why someone in your shoes would grasp at any straw to make such statements, Jason. You've got to pretend that you have more facts at your disposal than you actually have. That's why you squeeze any ounce of conspiracy you can out of studying things like the closing credits which reference two script writers.

Perhaps you should stick with stating what you know and not make comments like, '…even though he is acting out someone else's script?'

To keep you focused, Jason, I repeat -

Do they put words into people's mouth? No.
Do they demand that guests memorize their notes? No.
Do they know the theme before they fly to a location? Yes.
Do they know all the details they will find? No.
Is Scott 'acting out someone else's script?' No. That, Jason, is an absolute lie.

Which way will Jason squirm next, folks? Stand by.

Jason Colavito link
1/22/2014 04:55:50 am

I'm a bit confused, Steve. You're saying that there was a plan, that it was written down, and that it served as a guide for deciding what to film, what subjects to explore, and where to go, but that following this outline is not the same as acting out the script?

We know that Wolter doesn't choose the topics for the show (he complained that the producers made him do the NWO episode), and he had to go places that weren't of his choosing. He also admitted on his blog that he was reciting lines during staged portions of the show and, in self-deprecating fashion, noted that he is not a professional actor and that it sometimes shows.

So what is your point? Are you saying we should hold him responsible for his words and claims on the show or that we should absolve him of responsibility for what he says?

Steve
1/22/2014 05:35:43 am

'following this outline' is 'the same as acting out [a] script'

'We know that Wolter doesn't choose the topics for the show (he complained that the producers made him do the NWO episode)'

Because Scott complained about the NWO episode, you feel totally comfortable saying, 'We know that Wolter doesn't choose the topics for the show'
Jason, Do you see the blanket statements you make? Are you even capable of seeing how you think?

I know for a fact that Scott is involved in choosing areas that the show will cover. Does he choose them all? Well, we know he didn't choose the NWO episode.

Before your acolytes pile on, please look at what your leader wrote; look at how his mind works. The sheer arrogance, not to mention dishonesty, appalls me.

And… right on time, here's the squirm:

'So what is your point? Are you saying we should hold him responsible for his words and claims on the show or that we should absolve him of responsibility for what he says?'

My point has already been made, Jason. And in your squirming, you're trying to duck my point. Ready? Here comes my point again. Just like I wrote above:

A lack of facts never stops our host from saying something as though it's factual, does it Jason? You know that you lack the information to make such a statement. Yet you say it anyway.

By the way, which story are you going with, Jason?

1 - 'making a rhetorical point based on Phil's comments'

or

2 - 'following this outline' is 'the same as acting out [a] script'

Next on the Jason hate forum? More squirming.

Jason Colavito link
1/22/2014 05:44:22 am

It would be rather difficult to "squirm" out of a point you never made. What exactly is your point? I made a rhetorical statement designed to prompt Phil to offer some consistency in his views. You attacked that as dishonesty and lies, and then you accused me of various thought crimes. When I pointed to the fact that my rhetorical statement could be supported with reference to Wolter's own statements, you immediately declared this a hateful thought crime as well. Since you are the expert on all things Wolter, please enlighten us: Is he or is he not responsible for the material that goes out in his name?

Your failure to answer this question will, by your own rules, demonstrate that you "squirm" in the face of uncomfortable questions and instead come here only to vent your spleen. Perhaps, following your earlier suggestion to me, you might more profitably redirect these feelings by joining Wolter for some suitably manly recreation involving sticks or balls or whatever.

Steve
1/22/2014 08:36:28 am

"Since you are the expert on all things Wolter, please enlighten us: Is he or is he not responsible for the material that goes out in his name?"

I will happily answer your question, Jason.

The History Channel's H2 contracted Committee Films to produce a specific number of shows, last season, this season, and likely for many more given the popularity of the show. Committee Films contracted Scott to be the main on-air talent, the "host."

The show America Unearthed, goes out in many people's names:
1. History Channel
2. Committee Films (with lesser public visibility)
3. Scott Wolter
4. Each invited guest
5. The sponsors (advertisers)

Surely, as a mature and reasonable person, you don't really mean to say only Scott is 'responsible' for the entire "travesty" that you claim AU is. If you did, why would you and your more-vocal fans have attacked me so vehemently when I showed up here? You openly attempted to lay the blame at my feet saying that I should adhere to a sort of "moral" code, (as I recall). Your vocal comment squad also regularly attack H2, the guests, etc. So clearly everyone has already agreed that the show does not go out only in the name of Scott.

Jason Colavito link
1/22/2014 08:43:22 am

So, if I may borrow a phrase, Steve, you've chosen to "squirm" on the substance of the question and instead engage in a game of semantics. I ask you again, since you volunteered to answer: Is Scott Wolter responsible for the claims he voices on America Unearthed?

P.S. I never used the word "travesty" as a synonym for "America Unearthed." Your quotation marks are again misleading.

Steve
1/22/2014 10:34:37 am

First Jason wrote, "Since you are the expert on all things Wolter, please enlighten us: Is he or is he not responsible for the material that goes out in his name?"

Now Jason writes, "Is Scott Wolter responsible for the claims he voices on America Unearthed?"

That's a different question, isn't it, Jason?

Yes, Scott is responsible for the claims he voices on AU.

Steve
1/22/2014 09:40:02 am

While I'm sure which you'd say I am, this was LOL funny.

Reply
Will
1/22/2014 02:12:14 am

subscribe

Reply
CFC
1/22/2014 03:43:15 am

Mr. Wolter is NOT being supported and endorsed by respected geologists, archaeologists, linguists, runologists or historians regarding his bogus claims, so I’m not surprised that ONLY a few individuals with their own agendas are here supporting him.

Mr. Wolter is a man who has fraudulently made claims about his educational credentials, claims to be a scientist when he’s never written a scientific paper and gone through proper peer-review protocol, ridicules academics and respected institutions, and continues to misinform the public on a variety of topics through the American Unearthed program, his self-published books, on his radio interviews and during public presentations.

His ideas offer nothing of value unless you want to do a case study on pseudoscience.

Thanks to this blog, Mr. Wolter has been fully exposed.

Reply
Rev. Phil Gotsch
1/22/2014 03:45:20 am

More snarky personal insults and attacks, rather than discussion of the facts ...

Reply
Rev. Phil Gotsch
1/22/2014 03:47:41 am

But I DO agree that the relentless Scott Wolter bashers DO come here with some kind of agenda of their own ...

CFC
1/22/2014 03:56:56 am

I don't know any respected geologists, archaeologists, linguists, runologists or historians supporting his claims.
It is a fact that he has made fraudulent claims about his educational credentials.
It is a fact that he has not written a scientific paper.
It is a fact that he never prepared a paper and submitted it for peer review.
It is a fact that he ridicules academics.
It is a fact that he ridicules the Smithsonian Institution.
This blog has exposed dozens and dozens of examples of him misinforming the public.
Perhaps you are unwilling to face the facts.

Steve
1/22/2014 04:28:14 am

See how he worded this statement, Rev. Phil, 'I don't know any RESPECTED geologists, archaeologists, linguists, runologists or historians SUPPORTING his claims.' (caps are mine)

This leaves it open for CFC to then throw cold water on anyone we bring forward. Naturally, they would have to have several initials after their names. Those can be found. There are many. I have personally met three.

Then, CFC would be able to pick apart both their level of 'respect' (with him as sole arbiter) their level of 'support' and claim that while they support a part of Scott's work, they don't support others.

Alice Kehoe has the requisite initials after her name. She has a PhD in Anthropology, for Christ's sake. She said of the KRS, 'I was totally convinced.' But because she agrees even in part with Scott's work, people like CFC can now say she's a kook. I saw her getting beaten up on this hate forum in past comment threads. The logic path displayed by a large cadre on this hate forum goes something like this, "Because you like the person I hate, therefore you are a kook fringe idiot."

Here's the link to Ms. Kehoe's Forward in Scott & Richard Nielsen's book -
http://www.kensingtonrunestone.com/book/foreward.asp

A quote from that forward, 'Richard Nielsen and Scott Wolter are hard scientists. They understand the methodology of science, and Inference, from data, to the Best Explanation…'

Tara Jordan link
1/22/2014 04:56:47 am

Rev. Phil Gotsch
Understand that it is very difficult to dissociate Scott Wolter from the program since Wolter is the star of the show.Everything orbits around him,Wolter is the center of attraction.On top of it,he uses his credentials to give credibility to a program,which defining feature is totally laughable.

CFC
1/22/2014 04:34:27 am

Perhaps you missed what she has said on this blog about Mr. Wolter? She obviously has a very different opinion about Mr. Wolter these days.
Do you care to address the other facts that I've stated?

Reply
CFC
1/22/2014 05:02:59 am

Steve,
As I have said, I think you did some good work with the Atlantic Conference. You seemed to be attempting to build bridges with the academic community. Good for you.
Let me also clarify that my comments are all based on a standard that requires that if a person is claiming to "prove" something, they need to follow the scientific method. The scientific method is well defined and absent in Mr. Wolter's work.
Best Wishes!

Reply
Steve
1/22/2014 06:06:09 am

Thanks, CFC,

You wrote, 'The scientific method is well defined and absent in Mr. Wolter's work.'

That is a blanket statement. I know I'll get attacked here by others for 'semantics' but this is not 'semantics.'

CFC, the evidence that you have at hand is a show on TV. While I differ with Rev. Phil on the standards of such a show, I know the reality of it. There simply is not time to go into too much detail in about 48 minutes of programming (minus commercials). And there are realties in programming that are beyond both Scott's and Committee's control.

Would Scott like to do a complete investigation taking weeks and months? Absolutely he would. Would he bring in more outside experts like he did at Rock Wall in Texas? Definitely. Would he agree with the irrefutable science brought to bear by such experts as John W. Geissman, PhD? Yes, he would. Just like he did at Rock Wall.

I know for a fact that Scott brings hard science to his work. I've seen him turn down lots of objects after examination. I've also seen him tell people that he can make no conclusion based on the type of stone.

I've also seen Scott dismiss ideas about my own family history - the Westford "Knight" for instance. He studied the stone and decided that it's not a carving (or hole punch) of a knight. But the sword is clearly visible. Having seen the stone, I agree this. Not a knight, but definitely a sword.

I don't disagree that some of what you see on the AU show (not all cases, mind you - Rock Wall is a good example) supports your view, saying all of Scott's work lacks the scientific method is not accurate. Such a statement can be read to color the entirety of his life's work.

His exhaustive work on the KRS is another example.

Proof from a respected (and open-minded) academic:

Before whatever caused a break with Alice Kehoe, she wrote, 'Richard Nielsen and Scott Wolter are hard scientists. They understand the methodology of science, and Inference, from data, to the Best Explanation…' She also agreed, under certain conditions, to be on the show Holy Grail in North America. In that show, she enthusiastically said, "I was totally convinced." or something very near to those words.

I was privy to some of the split between Ms. Kehoe and Scott. I can tell you there is more to the story than what you've seen or heard. It's none of my business, but I only bring it up to point out the dangers of blanket statements with another example.

Reply
Gunn Sinclair link
1/22/2014 06:42:16 am

Yes, CFC caustically said: "I don't know any respected geologists, archaeologists, linguists, runologists or historians supporting his claims."

I beg to differ, too, along with Steve. Though Wolter and Nielsen later parted ways, the collective team of Nielsen/Williams have done, in my view, impressive work RECENTLY to show that the KRS is a viable candidate for authenticity. Read past threads, along with references given.

So, folks, we DO have experts who believe the establishment has it wrong, at least about the KRS. Aren't you going to believe them? Isn't this what you want, expert opinion? Yet the crowd here jeers as in a sports setting, not even caring that the match is uneven, because that guy on the other side, #7, is Wolter.

Joe
1/22/2014 06:53:38 am

Steve,

I think that we all understand that there is a limited time to each show and I am sure alot that was filmed that never makes it into the show. But I think this is part of the issue that people have with the show, there seems to be alot of dead time in the show, multiple times in the show they burn up time recapping the topic or what has already been covered. Or in some cases including time that does not appear productive to the topic (taking a helicopter ride to lead no where / drive a submarine into a murky lake ). These are some of my frustrations, for example they go to the grand canyon to look into a cave but are unable to actually look for it, or looking for a stone that can not be seen during high tide but that is when Scott is there. I am sure that all locations are scouted prior to first make sure they are allowed to film there and also to plan out the logistics of filming at that particular location. So since they are on a budget and time is limited you would think that these issues would be resolved prior to filming or film actual evidence. It also gives the appearance that there is really nothing of value to actually film or they would have planned things differently. Now I think these issues are more a critique of the show itself and less on Scott. We also know based on comments that Scott does not choose all of the topics. I am sure that there are some that he really believes in the topic and others that he does not have as much interest. But since he is the host of the show and is passionate about some of the topics it might be mistakenly assumed that he has a belief in all topics covered.

I am still not sure why everyone thinks that Jason is obsessed with Mr. Wolter, if you review the blog he covers every different fringe topic that comes across his screen. I just notice that there are alot more comments on the blogs about Wolter. So maybe it is not Jason who is obsessed but the commenters of this blog that are.

The Other J.
1/22/2014 07:58:30 am

Joe said: "I am still not sure why everyone thinks that Jason is obsessed with Mr. Wolter, if you review the blog he covers every different fringe topic that comes across his screen. I just notice that there are alot more comments on the blogs about Wolter. So maybe it is not Jason who is obsessed but the commenters of this blog that are."

I think Jason is obsessed with identifying bad arguments and where the truth of an inquiry can actually be found, based on proven or provable evidence. That's not such a bad obsession to have; it's better than my obsession with Candy Crush and Tiny Death Star. But I'm pretty sure most of us arrived here because we are similarly obsessed with the problem of bad argumentation couched as science in a popular medium. That's the kind of thing that leads to whooping cough outbreaks.

But you're right, the commenters here are more obsessed with Jason's posts on AU than much of his other work. I know that's how I found this site -- I saw something on the first or second AU episode that raised my BS detector, and I started looking. However, as for Jason running a hate forum, it'd be interesting to run a word count on who is throwing the hate words around the most, and an analysis of other hateful rhetoric on these pages and where it emerges from. Some people spackle these comments with hateful rhetoric towards Jason and anyone else who questions AU's methodologies, and then call this place a hate forum -- only because they made it so.

Nice run-down of the time-wasters on the show. I've been so baffled by their not consulting any previous sonar maps of Rock Lake that I forgot they basically did the same sort of thing by looking for the rune stone at high tide. I found (and posted here) a Chicago Tribune article about the Rock Lake pyramids that had an interview with the UW engineering professor who ran the towfish sonar. They could have contacted him and seen the map so they'd know where to drop their product placement sub. I also posted a link here earlier showing the times of the tides for Nomans Island (they were there at high tide and the water was just over the top of the stone). In both cases, it only took a little bit of searching -- I didn't have to fly to Ireland or anything.

If Wolter wants a half-decent researcher who won't embarrass him, I might be available.

Steve
1/22/2014 08:07:05 am

Joe, I agree with almost everything you wrote.

As to the production company scouting locations in advance, I didn't see that on the one I was a part of. It might depend on the location. I know Scott has been to the Newport Tower many times. He helped me do research on it one of those times. Nova Scotia is quite far away and I had the distinct impression that neither the crew, nor Scott had been there. For instance, the island with a carving on a big boulder at the start of the show I later joined, I'm certain they had not scouted in advance.

The lake episode, it's obvious they had not scouted. I wish they had. But then they'd be accused of not being authentic.

Joe
1/22/2014 08:21:26 am

Other J.

I have to agree with you Jason is more interested in debunking all questionable fringe theories. But it still amazes me that the defenders of Mr Wolter continue to ignore his total lack any scientific procedures and practices. Instead there seems to be a series of counter argument that cover the gambit of excuses. From telling us to relax that it is just a TV show, to attacking the semantics of each blog, to basic name calling. Now in no way do I think that Jason is perfect and at times his criticism can come off harsh. But he puts the time and does the work to make sound reviews that he backs up his points with source material and the historical research that I wish I could put the time into.

I think the defenders of Wolter are passionate with their defense because of their personal relationship with Wolter. They talk about what a great guy he is, I have no reason to disagree with their point. He might be a great guy, but that does not mean is correct in his ideas or statements. It is similar to the defenders of the former NFL QB Tim Tebow. Tim seems like a really good and nice person but that does not make him an effective QB. But when you ask them to defend the substantive points that Jason writes about they change the subject and go back to their defense posturing. I would like to see someone defend many of Scotts actual arguments concerning the several confusing arguments.

Joe
1/22/2014 08:29:48 am

C'mon Steve,

This is just making an unnecessary assumption “The lake episode, it's obvious they had not scouted. I wish they had. But then they'd be accused of not being authentic.” No one is looking for “authentic” adventures in Scott's efforts. He actively asks the audience to suggest locations for him to explore so it is not like we are expecting him to stumble into these locations. If they did do proper scouting and were able to properly explore the lake we would all appreciate the effort. Even if nothing was found it would have shown a more concerned effort. So again I think many of the people who are critical would point to not only Scott but the entire shows production teams efforts.

Rev. Phil Gotsch
1/22/2014 09:51:17 am

Scott Wolter's work on the Kensington Rune Stone indeed was VERY thorough … He was leader of a team that developed and followed SEVERAL lines of evidence, all of which indicate authenticity …

ANYONE who cares to do so can do the same hard work to either confirm the findings or not ...

CFC
1/22/2014 12:33:08 pm

Some good points Steve, but I respectfully differ with you regarding the KRS. It is unfortunate that Mr. Wolter has refused to write a scientific paper and submit it for peer-review verifying the results he claims he has. He would need to complete that process to meet the standards required. Self-proclaimed proof contributes nothing of any real value to the research.

I would like to see you get back to some of the good work you started. Given the little I know about your work, I would think the careful attention Jason pays to researching topics, providing sources and references, would be admired by you.

RLewis link
1/23/2014 08:20:06 am

So, here's what a few hard scientists had to say about Wolter’s claims (from http://explorermf.wordpress.com/2010/06/28/the-kensington-code-fact-or-fiction/):

Wolter’s zealous efforts to find evidence to prove his claims linking the stone to the Templars became too much for Nielsen and Kehoe to bear, and they have both since ceased working with him. They were particularly concerned that Wolter refused to submit his weathering study to a peer-reviewed journal. Larry Zimmerman, an archaeologist at Indiana University-Purdue University who knows both Nielsen and Wolter and has followed the KRS research, agrees the lack of peer review is a serious problem. “Good science demands peer review by practitioners with similar skill sets, and good scientists actually seek such review. When review seems to be avoided, the science becomes immediately suspicious.”

RLewis
1/23/2014 08:25:06 am


And this is what the collective team of Nielsen/Williams had to say (as reported at the same site):

University of Uppsala philologist Henrik Williams has worked closely with Nielsen since 2002. The emergence of a set of 19th century documents known as the Larsson Papers may have convinced him the KRS is a 19th century artifact.

Gunn
1/23/2014 01:31:46 pm

RLewis, you are misinforming people about Nielsen/Williams's most recent findings. Please update yourself. I have provided a valuable link a few threads back. Yes, I'm saying your info is outdated.

Also, there is peer review. Wolter isn't the only geologist who declared the KRS legit. Without looking it up, I believe the first was a geologist named Winchell. This should count as peer review. How many professional geologists do you want to verify it, or is it just that you want your own biased folks to do the job?

RLewis
1/24/2014 01:03:48 am

Sorry Gunn, but I don't see it (there are a lot of posts so I may have missed it). I see the link to the Hooked X foreword - but that was 2005 (the link I provided was supposedly from 2010). Can you please point me to the link to Nielsen/Williams's most recent findings?

The Other J.
1/22/2014 08:31:33 am

Ever play that Google game where you put in the first couple words of a search and see what Google predicts you're looking for? Google uses an algorithm that analyzes the most commonly-grouped search terms and offers those as autocomplete suggestions for your search, with the most commonly-grouped terms at the top of the list.

So if you go to Google and type in "star wars," the top autocomplete suggestion is "star wars posters original," which means most people are looking for the original Star Wars posters when they start to search for "star wars" on Google. If you type in "polar vor," you get "polar vortex," "polar vortex 2014," and "polar vortex collapse" as the top three terms.

If you type in "america unearthed," the top autocomplete suggestion is "america unearthed fake." That means that more people are searching about "American Unearthed" and "fake" than any other group of search terms regarding America Unearthed. The next three are "america unearthed ark of the covenant," "america unearthed new season," and "america unearthed new world order" -- so inquiries about the new season or titles of episodes. (I checked this on two freshly-opened browsers with the cache cleared, firefox and chrome -- got the same results both times.)

Here's a screengrab: http://postimg.org/image/to7au71y9/

That could be about faked artifacts on the show, or it could be about people wondering if the show itself is faking its finds. If you choose that autocomplete suggestion, not all of them are about stuff faked on the show -- the second hit is Jason's page for the America Unearthed category, and the third hit is the Wikipedia page for the show, neither of which have "fake" anywhere in the text. But many other hits are posts questioning the veracity of the show and its methods, including one at abovetopsecret.com, which is a site dedicated to fringe topics like aliens, new world order, exopolotics, and cryptozoology. Jim Marrs has used it for research and titled one of his books after the site. And even they aren't buying what AU's selling.

It doesn't have to be this way. There are some interesting opportunities being missed on the show, like investigating the Aztec artifact that made its way to Oklahoma, and there have been numerous suggestions in these pages of tacks the show could have taken that would have been more fruitful without the unnecessary conspiracy theorizing.

I know AU, like most shows, is more interested in cashing in than it is with the veracity of its own claims. But it should concern them that more people are looking at it as fake, or asking if it's fake, then asking about any of the other claims presented. If they really do want to cash in, that's no way to maintain an audience.

Reply
Steve
1/22/2014 09:30:10 am

"The Other J.", very interesting idea for a comment. Among the sizable group of Wolter haters on this blog, it will be well-received.

But this group also occasionally poses as "truth seekers." So I thought I'd provide some. See, "The Other J.", since you posted your "Google facts" I went out and did some serious research on another tool, also provided by Google. It's called Google Keyword Planner. And it gives you the facts about specific key phrase demand in their search engine. It's not a "Google game." It is a professional tool used by people who make a living working with key phrases.

You wrote, 'checked this on two freshly-opened browsers with the cache cleared, firefox and chrome'

While I appreciate you know to clear your cache and use other computers, what you must not know is that it's more complicated. People who really study Google key phrase demand know they have to use tools like proxy servers to mask their identities. However, even then the search can be corrupted. Google is also able to see the IP address doing the search through a proxy.

The Other J. wrote, 'But it should concern them that more people are looking at it as fake, or asking if it's fake, then asking about any of the other claims presented.'

I would agree, but your initial facts are not the true view of demand for phrases involving "America Unearthed".

All numbers below are 'Avg. Monthly Searches' (in the last 30 days) from Google.

12,100 - america unearthed
6,600 - scott wolter
2,900 - underwater pyramids
1,000 - america unearthed fake
390 - underwater pyramid (singular)
320 - america unearthed episodes
210 - scott wolter forensic geologist
170 - america unearthed h2
170 - history channel america unearthed
70 - america unearthed tv series
70 - forensic geologist scott wolter
50 - america unearthed full episodes
30 - forensic geology degree
20 - geologist scott wolter
20 - unearthed tv show
10 - history channel grand canyon
less than 10 - america unearthed maya
less than 10 - scott wolter Facebook
less than 10 - america unearthed episode 2

24,130 total monthly searches
23,130 total monthly searches without your 1,000

12,830 total monthly searches for "America Unearthed" related phrases without your 1,000

Reply
Steve
1/22/2014 09:33:13 am

By the way "The Other J.",

I'm only putting your name in quotes because I don't know your real name.

Jason Colavito link
1/22/2014 09:39:35 am

I wasn't able to reproduce your results in the Keyword Planner. According to the documentation, results are targeted to a specific location and AdWords budget. What geo-location were you using to obtain these results? When I tried, I received only 14,200 monthly searches for all America Unearthed related keywords. It would seem that this far too low for a show with 1.35 million viewers.

Steve
1/22/2014 10:50:21 am

I'm in the New York City metro.

The Other J wrote, "That means that more people are searching about "American Unearthed" and "fake" than any other group of search terms regarding America Unearthed."

There are many other search terms related to America Unearthed. For instance:
Scott Wolter
The episode names, like "underwater pyramids" etc.
I don't remember the other word combinations I explored which led to other "search terms regarding America Unearthed."

Just for fun, I ran Jason's name -
590 / mo.

Several searches for associated phrases like "H.P. Lovecraft".
Maybe this is a sign that you should focus more of your blog posts on Lovecraft.

Matt Mc
1/22/2014 11:35:07 am

Being a big Lovecraft fan I myself would love to see more posts about Lovecraft or Lovecraft themed items.

I recently myself have been helping a friend to try to compile a list of movies that use Lovecraftian themes and have been slightly overwhelmed. There are always so many that can be missed. I have to check in with my friend but the list is well over 1000 titles at this point.

RLewis
1/22/2014 02:08:02 pm

Maybe it's apples and oranges, but I think your list confirms TOJ's findings. He said if you start typing in "america unearthed", it automatically suggests "fake" as the next word. Since this shows up fourth on your list (the first entry has no third word and the 2nd and 3rd entries do not start with "america unearthed") - it seems plausible. Perhaps this is a somewhat slanted view, but note that after the series title and the host's name, it shows up third (I assume the recent episode in the 3rd entry will differ each month). Does this mean anything? I dunno.

The Other J.
1/22/2014 02:15:25 pm

Okay Steve, that was a bit of a weird swing and a miss. Good to see you can even play Tech Yoda in a patronizing way, but your strange analysis is for something else entirely, not what I was talking about.

If the average viewer of the show goes to their average browser and logs in to their Google Keyword Planner adwords frontend to look up information on America Unearthed, then you may be on to something. But the point wasn't an attack on AU being fake -- you just perceive it as an attack, because you're Steve and apparently the world's out to get you. The point was that when the average viewer of the show goes to their average browser, they're most likely using Google Search to look up info on the show, not an adwords planner. And the first suggestion they're getting when they first type "america unearthed" is "america unearthed fake."

People may be looking for other terms that you can dig out of the show, but if you're not a personal friend of Wolter's, you're most likely looking up the name of the show first if you're looking for information on the show, and as soon as you type "america unearthed" the first suggestion is "america unearthed fake." You don't have to be a critic or even a hater for that suggestion to come up -- anyone can do it, even an adword wizard who's friends with Wolter like yourself.

But I don't think you really understood what I was saying, because you jumped to the whole "hate" thing again. What I was saying is "america unearthed fake" as the top suggestion should be concerning to the producers and/or Wolter, because that can shape how those average viewers looking for info on the show come to perceive it. If I'm working on that show, I'd be fine with "america unearthed new season" or "america unearthed awesome subs" or even "america unearthed manful archaeoastrology hour." But I'd be concerned that the first associated term with the name of my show is "fake." And that's not a Google conspiracy -- that's just an algorithm averaging out what most people are searching for, which again should be concerning. Unless math is also a conspiracy.

Besides, "hate" is your word -- you're the only one throwing "hate" around. Don't know if you've ever been to the forums, but there was an early forum post about what people wished that show would cover. Many of us had hopes of the show really digging into some actual little-known history of the country that could be proved and demonstrated and shown to have material effects on America today. Instead we get things like non-existent Aztecs in Wisconsin not building an underwater pyramid that can't be found in a awesome fugusub ©.

Glad you can appreciate clearing the cache. You're not the only one who knows what a proxy is, and I'll just give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you know that clearing the cache helps to make sure your previous searches aren't considered when you do a new search (in case anyone assumed I'm regularly searching for "america unearthed fake," which I'm not). If you really want to know, I used a disposable profile so nothing of my normal searches would be considered when I typed in "america unearthed" and "america unearthed fake" was suggested.

As it happens, keyword planner shows the average monthly number searches for "america unearthed fake" as 610, reaching a peak of about 1,600 around the end of the first season. That would come in fifth on your list.

And by the way, "The Other J." is fine. I have an oddball first name and tend to go by my initial (here and professionally). There used to be someone else on here who did the same, so I just called myself The Other J. to avoid confusion. That's all you need to know about that.

Steve
1/22/2014 03:17:48 pm

Actually, I was pretty clear what you meant. And I was pretty certain that, while you are clearly aware of how Google Autocomplete works, you don't fully know what you're talking about on search. Case in point:

You wrote, "The point was that when the average viewer of the show goes to their average browser, they're most likely using Google Search to look up info on the show, not an adwords planner." One cannot use adwords planner to do a Google search. It is a tool that tells us completed searches and, thus, search demand in a 30-day window. But that it picking at nits.

The statistics provided by Google prove that your statement "you're most likely looking up the name of the show first" is accurate. But my point is this: the suggested phrases Google provides are not getting searched anywhere near as much - only 8.2%. This is proven by the number of completed searches - 12,100 vs. 1,000, so the vast majority of those who search with a phrase beginning in "America Unearthed" are not interested in clicking the suggested phrase "america unearthed fake" in Google Autocomplete.

The fact that it is suggested does not mean it should concern the folks who run the show. If such a search phrase is only completed 8.2% of the time, then folks like Jason and the Acolytes (sounds like a band) are the ones who should be concerned.

To summarize, what it really means is that people are so completely certain of what they are looking for that they, themselves, have not added more words to their search in sufficient numbers to trigger another 3-word phrase.

Another interesting way to look at this is using Google Trends. http://www.google.com/trends Once you're on that page, type in these words with the comma -
america unearthed, america unearthed fake

This shows a relative comparison of search interest over time.

Now, to put it all in perspective, do another Trends search -
america unearthed, america unearthed fake, holy grail

The Other J.
1/22/2014 03:38:51 pm

Alright Mr. Wizard, if the suggested autocomplete means nothing, how is it generated and why does Google suggest "america unearthed fake" when you type in "america unearthed"? Just happenstance? Another Wolter hater at Google?

Explain to me why "america unearthed fake" is the first suggested autocomplete, not what the most searched terms are according to adwords. Because until you can present that apologetic, there isn't any reason why that autocomplete suggestion -- as the first one, no less -- is insignificant. If it was, it "america unearthed fake" wouldn't be showing up as the first suggestion when anyone anywhere types "america unearthed" into Google.

Either explain the autocomplete suggestion as the first suggestion or admit that that's the case and that could be an issue -- which is all I claimed. Just saying it's meaningless doesn't make it go away.

Steve
1/22/2014 04:29:34 pm

I didn't say the "suggested autocomplete means nothing". Did I use the phrase "means nothing" or "meaningless"? I said it should not, as you suggest, be of concern to the producers and/or Wolter.

Here's what you said, "What I was saying is "america unearthed fake" as the top suggestion should be concerning to the producers and/or Wolter, because that can shape how those average viewers looking for info on the show come to perceive it."

The reason it should not be concerning is because searches for "America Unearthed Fake" represent only 8.2% of the the bigger number of completed searches for "America Unearthed" (statistics are supposed to be the stock in trade of skeptics).

Do you deny those statistics?

I am suggesting that those statistics - 12,100 vs 1,000 - prove that people are so completely certain of what they are looking for that they ignore the suggestion and click what they want. Meanwhile, they're not triggering any further 3-word phrases because they are finding precisely what they want with the search "america unearthed".

You should be happy that 1,000 people who agree with you about the show are finding what they want. It's just 8.2% of the more satisfied group.

By the way, you wrote, "…as the first one, no less -- is insignificant. If it was, it "america unearthed fake" wouldn't be showing up as the first suggestion when anyone anywhere types "america unearthed" into Google."

That part of your statement, "anyone anywhere" is a bit of a problem. Not everyone sees the same suggestions. This part of the algorithm probably won't effect a search for AU, but we're looking for accuracy on this blog, right?

You demanded, "Explain to me why "america unearthed fake" is the first suggested autocomplete."

Well, first, you're wrong. It is the second. Upon typing in "america un" the first suggested phrase was "america unearthed". The second one was "america unearthed fake".

Second, I already have explained why these things show up. It's based on what people type in. In my brief and incomplete search for demand on phrases on Google, I turned up a good mix of 12,830 total monthly searches for "America Unearthed" related phrases without your 1,000.

"america unearthed fake" turns up in position number 2 because it is the 2nd most-searched set of phrases including the first 2 words "America Unearthed". It is as simple at that. The 12,100 vs. 1,000 statistic means that people already know what they want and that they don't think the phrase "america unearthed fake" is relevant to their interests. To deny that is to deny statistics.

And, actually, I am a wizard at this. You may have stumbled into something like Crabby did when he tried to hammer me on DNA.

The Other J.
1/22/2014 06:29:40 pm

Handwavium sophistry. Fail.

If your adword study was more significant than the suggested autocomplete, why don't one of those statistically significant searches show up above "america unearthed fake?" They don't.

No matter what percentage of "america unearthed fake" is of the overall completed searches, it's still showing up as the top suggested search. Your suggestion that people are so completely sure of what they're searching for is wishful thinking. The rise in numbers of readers here alone suggest that people are looking for more than what they already know about the show. (And according to your Google Keyword Planner, there were over 1,600 searches for "america unearthed fake" last March after the last couple of first-season episodes, which would come in third on your list since the underwater pyramids show hadn't been done yet.)

Let's try something: You or anyone else reading this, go to Google and type in "america unearthed" and post a link to a screenshot showing what the top suggested autocomplete is. Let's see how unique my situation is. Don't just type it -- show the evidence; screenshots or don't bother.

And "america unearthed fake" is the first suggested autocomplete, not the second. If you want to play rhetorical games, at least get your facts straight and look at the screengrab I posted. There's what I typed -- "america unearthed" -- and directly below it the first autocomplete suggestion is "america unearthed fake." If you're typing "america un" first, then you're doing something different than what I did, which is dishonest. Remember, you already agreed that people searching knew what the name of the show is -- "Meanwhile they're not triggering any further 3-word phrases because they are finding precisely what they want with the search "america unearthed." So you agree that they'd be typing in "america unearthed." But that's not what you typed; "america un" could be "america undercover" or "america university." Don't be cute; you're not winning an argument by saying "it's second, not first, nya you lose" when you're not even dealing with the same terms, and you know it.

You still haven't explained why "america unearthed fake" is showing up first autocomplete suggestions if people are so completely certain of what they are looking for that they ignore the suggestion. If that were the case, the suggestion wouldn't be there. That's how the algorithm works -- it doesn't offer suggestions that people aren't clicking, because those aren't as useful. So those three terms are being searched for enough for it to be the first autocomplete suggestion.

I'm just going to accept that you don't have a good answer for this, and that's fine. I didn't ask for your opinion in the first place. No matter what you write after this, it won't change the fact that when people type "america unearthed" into Google, the first autocomplete suggestion is "america unearthed fake." It even shows up second on your machine when you just type "america un," which is telling, because someone could be looking for "america undercover" and then they see something about that show on H2 being fake. But that's no problem, because adwords. Right.

And really your highness, get over yourself. The only thing I stumbled into here is noticing the suggested autocomplete when I typed in the name of the show, and your enormous ego. That's all. Neither of them are that much of a problem for me, but one of them is plenty annoying.

Which is why I think we're done here. At this point I'm just going to post links to the Round And Round video or merry-go-rounds or some other nonsense, because you're evading the question, and by trying to score points with rhetorical games you've shown you're not even an honest debater.

The unfortunate thing is if the show was more informative and more honest with its methodologies this wouldn't even be a question. But you won't even admit that.

Gunn
1/23/2014 04:07:11 am

I expected nothing less from a person who wrote a thesis on "metaphor," but doesn't even know what it entails, or includes.

Steve, the lesson to learn here: splitting hairs with this fellow can go on indefinitely...like with me about stoneholes, I reckon. At least you didn't have Jason suggesting that you take the conversation to a suitable pigeon-hole! Ha!

Steve
1/23/2014 04:11:11 am

I've got the patience, Gunn. And I type very fast.

But I'll do you one batter than a screen capture, "The Other J.".

I'm creating a screen capture video to show you the error of your ways. It takes time, so will probably do it tonight.

Steve
1/23/2014 10:20:53 am

The Other J.,

You demanded a screen grab. I hereby provide you with a 7-1/2 minute screen capture video.

http://youtu.be/IAwlnH9WSYw

You wrote, "You still haven't explained why "america unearthed fake" is showing up first autocomplete suggestions if people are so completely certain of what they are looking for that they ignore the suggestion. If that were the case, the suggestion wouldn't be there."

Wrong on 2 counts. It is NOT the first suggestion, as the video shows. And also, you said, "If that were the case, the suggestion wouldn't be there."

That, dear "The Other J.", is why I showed the other stats from Google Keyword Planner. It shows actual search demand by phrase. As I pointed out to you, "America Unearthed" got 12.100 in the past 30 days and "America Unearthed Fake" got 1,000. The "fake" phrase got fewer searches which is why it is in position 2.

You wrote, "And "america unearthed fake" is the first suggested autocomplete, not the second. If you want to play rhetorical games, at least get your facts straight and look at the screengrab I posted."

See the video and keep your rhetorical games accusation over there.

That link again - http://youtu.be/IAwlnH9WSYw

Then you wrote, "If you're typing "america un" first, then you're doing something different than what I did, which is dishonest."

Dishonest? No. I'm just not being ignorant of how this all works. See the video below and get back to me.

You wrote, "So you agree that they'd be typing in "america unearthed." But that's not what you typed; "america un" could be "america undercover" or "america university." Don't be cute; you're not winning an argument by saying "it's second, not first, nya you lose" when you're not even dealing with the same terms, and you know it."

Thanks for having an opinion that is not based in fact. The facts are in the video at the link below. Keep your "cute," your "nya you lose" and your "Handwavium sophistry. Fail" slams over there. See the video at the link below and get back to me in some way that can

Until you present that apologetic, I'll be over here knowing I'm completely right and you are squirming.

The link, again - http://youtu.be/IAwlnH9WSYw

The Other J.
1/23/2014 11:25:41 am

Yeah, your highness, I guess you've argued me into believing that when you type "america unearthed" into Google, the first suggested autocomplete FOR "AMERICA UNEARTHED" isn't in fact "america unearthed fake." Even though it damn well does.

Maybe some people searching for "america unearthed" get stuck after the first syllable of the second word, and then it "america unearthed fake" shows up as the second autocomplete suggestion -- as if that makes a difference to my overall point. But maybe those people also believe ancient druids visited Oklahoma.

And even still, even if you get stuck on "america un" because you forgot the name of the show you were searching for, it still shows up second, which doesn't change the point that if you're really serious about the show, you wouldn't want that showing up at all.

You've shown me nothing I didn't already know. Maybe next you can convince me that my dogs are cats, or it's really balmy out during this polar vortex, but I'm done talking to a wall.

Steve
1/23/2014 12:11:54 pm

Gunn, Rev. Phil,

Please join me in pouring salt into The Other J's multiple wounds.
Statistics and expertise finally won out over stubbornness.

Gunn
1/23/2014 01:47:02 pm

Great metaphor, Steve!

Pour...pour...pour...pour...got to save some...pour...for the ICE...pour...up here!

I wonder if The Other J. was Crabby? No--not another metaphor, the real Crabby, you know, Opher? If so, maybe he'll disappear and change his name again. I used to think Varika and Tara were related--I mean, exchangeable as victims of circumstance. Of course, they are innocent, like the 3-Stooges, and now with The Other J. added in, they're all innocent, I say...victims of circumstances. (But of their own making.)

Only Me
1/22/2014 08:39:10 am

Actually, Steve, I think it would boost the show's credibility immensely if they scouted areas of investigation. It would show that Scott is taking the subject matter seriously enough to filter the relevant material he is investigating.

Take for example, Ghost Adventures. Whether you believe in ghosts or not, the cast films the historical research of their chosen locations and relates the tragic events that occurred in the past. They talk to town historians, search records and consult curators. The subject may be silly to some, but they show respect for the locations and the people that once lived/worked there.

I wouldn't have a problem with scouting. It only makes sense, as it has a direct impact on the investigation itself.

Reply
Tara Jordan link
1/22/2014 12:03:11 pm

America Unearthed: "the positivist" exaltation of sleaze?.

Reply
Gunn
1/22/2014 12:06:56 pm

Tara, just curious; were you unable to post the last few hours?

Rev. Phil Gotsch
1/22/2014 12:10:43 pm

"Earn more sessions by sleeving … " -- "Charlie," to "Roxanne"

Tara Jordan link
1/22/2014 12:12:48 pm

Gunn
Yes Indeed. My last successful post was on :01/22/2014 12:56pm (not my local time but Jason`s time) from my computer,then I had to use my Iphone

Tara Jordan
1/22/2014 12:22:18 pm

As a matter of fact,I am unable to post from my computer right now.
Using my IPhone....

Gunn
1/22/2014 12:25:00 pm

Jason wouldn't have any control over this, right?

Odd coincidence.

As Curly Howard would say, "We're victims of circumstance."

Jason Colavito link
1/22/2014 12:27:41 pm

No, I don't have any control over it. The blog platform is managed by a third party, Weebly, not me. If you go to Weebly.com you can contact tech support, and maybe they can figure out why some people can post and others can't. My end doesn't show any problems.

Gunn
1/22/2014 12:33:27 pm

Thanks for letting us know. I only had that problem once before, a few months ago. Just some kind of glitch, I guess. I noticed a message on my computer saying the firewall was off, and when I turned it back on, I was able to post. Probably just coincidence, then--not a victim of circumstances at all.

Gunn
1/22/2014 12:02:43 pm

The Other J., you can split all the hairs you want. I go by my trusty Oxford American Dictionary and Thesaurus, which does in fact say:



metaphor: 1 the application of a name or descriptive term or phrase to an object or action to which it is imaginatively but not literally applicable.



The Other J., "biting your tongue" as an expression is just such a descriptive term or action, not literally meant. It is also a well-known figure of speech. Why don't you just give up? Why did you start this nonsense anyway? It makes you look kind of petty, and me far too brainy for my own good.

Reply
Gunn
1/22/2014 12:04:53 pm

I couldn't post for a few hours...I think my firewall was turned off, but I don't see how that would've prevented me from posting. (?)

Reply
Joe
1/22/2014 12:12:21 pm

not to be annoying but Other J. is correct. Also according to the definition you supplied "biting your tongue" could not be a metaphor, since you can actually bite your tongue.

Reply
Gunn
1/22/2014 12:19:25 pm

Actually, Joe, you are occasionally rather annoying. The Other J. is possibly correct, but so am I. Did you, or did you not read my dictionary's definition? I didn't look up various dictionary definitions...this is the one I regularly use. And it says I'm right. Also, you could just butt-out, too, since I said it is petty, anyway. Look at what I just said my dictionary's definition is. What do you possibly not understand? Just being an annoying trouble-maker, right? Nothing better to do, right?

Joe
1/22/2014 12:29:43 pm

Per the definition that you provided

"metaphor: 1 the application of a name or descriptive term or phrase to an object or action to which it is imaginatively but not literally applicable."

Since you can LITERALLY bite your tongue it is not a metaphor. My wife tells me I am annoying all the time so it really doesn't bother me that others do.

Tara Jordan
1/22/2014 12:37:56 pm

Joe
Have you ever considered leaving your wife? XD.

Gunn
1/22/2014 12:39:05 pm

Joe, what's the matter with you? Just because one can bite one's tongue has nothing to do with the expression also being used figuratively. Now, maybe it's time for you to bite your tongue! You see, Joe, I just used it figuratively. I do not wish for you to actually bite your dag-gum tongue, even though you physically are able to. Do you get it now? Should you have just butted-out? Should The Other J. have just butted-out? I'll answer for you: a double, emphatic YES!

Joe
1/22/2014 12:40:22 pm

Nah, she really great and puts up with me spending too much time reading blogs

The Other J.
1/22/2014 02:21:53 pm

Gunn, at this point I think you wouldn't know a metaphor if it bit you in the ass and spoke in tongues. A picture is a metaphor. An idiom is a metaphor. Every figure of speech is a metaphor. The only thing that isn't a metaphor is a metaphor.

Guess I wasted all that time in grad school and getting published. Should have checked with you first. Good thing my graduate director never read your posts, or I may never have passed a class. I should be more careful about where I waste my time at.

Reply
Gunn
1/23/2014 04:15:53 am

It sounds like yer finally getting the picture. (Don't look around for a picture.)

The Other J.
1/23/2014 01:41:55 pm

Just so you know -- because you keep gnawing on this metaphor bone in other places -- even by your own Oxford definition, you're incorrect. There's still no substitution or juxtaposition of meanings in your images, and that's what "a word or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable" means (unless you don't know what "juxtapose" or "substitute" means -- look them up in your Oxford.)

But you ignored the second definition, "a thing symbolic of something else," which STILL entails a substitution -- one thing representing something else. Your images don't do that. They ARE examples of figurative language, but not all figurative language is a metaphor. If my wife's 9th graders can understand that, why can't you?

I'm trying to be polite when interacting with you because you just seem misguided, but you're making it very hard, and you're generally a dick about it when someone challenges something you say, even if they're trying to help you. Do you also tell mechanics how to fix your car? Or is this just a knee-jerk ant-academic reaction because I actually studied something that you haven't? Maybe you're just too old to help and would prefer to roost in willful ignorance, because that's where you're comfortable. Or maybe I should just stop -- either interacting with you or being polite. I could go either way, it doesn't matter to me.

At least I know the difference between a metaphor and a fool, and only one of them is productive.

Gunn
1/23/2014 02:04:55 pm

"Or maybe I should just stop -- either interacting with you...."

Yes, good idea, The Other J. In fact, you could have saved yourself a lot of wasted wordage by just not butting-in with hair-splitting in the first place. At least you learned something about metaphors from me. What a bite in the butt, huh? Image? Go way back up at the beginning of this conversation and you will see the original metaphor in action, which you purposely chose to ignore, proclaiming yourself to be the Metaphor King.

You, sir, are the Metaphorical Fool, not me. I am the real Metaphor King, and you tried to fool everyone, just like with Steve...twice, you got caught being an imposter of intellect. You think you can split fine hairs until you wear one down, but you are the double-loser on this blog, lately.

Why not just consider butting-out when your views aren't welcome, and you'll have fewer bloody noses here. Professor.

Rev. Phil Gotsch
1/23/2014 02:42:43 pm

"What is the sound of a guy biting his tongue with his head up his a** ... ???"

LOL ...

Reply
Only Me
1/23/2014 02:51:42 pm

The same sound as a Wolter Loyalist speaking? LOL

(Just having fun again. No knickers were placed in a twist as a result of this humor.)

Reply
Joe
1/23/2014 04:16:03 pm

Not that the "Other J." and "Only Me" need defending. But I thought your expressed purpose was to prevent personal attacks to your friend and professional colleague Scott Wolter.

It seems that you are not above making comments that could be construed as personal attacks yourself. Even if you end it with a LOL doesn't mean it doesn't come off as insulting someone.

Instead of trying to be funny you might want to correct your friend Mr. Gunn that despite his barrage of comments he has still been incorrect on his use of a metaphor.

Reply
Gunn
1/24/2014 05:18:27 am

Say it ain't so, Joe...we got new rules now.

Rev. Phil Gotsch
1/24/2014 04:34:36 am

The fact that (perhaps) Dr. Alberto Rodriguez MAY have an "immigration reform" agenda operating in his desire to understand the origin of the Aztec people is IMHO entirely legitimate …

Seeking better understandings of history is NEVER simply about casual antiquarian notions about the past, but is aways also about TODAY … ALL of the indigenous peoples of "The Americas" have a deep and abiding sincere interest in such questions ...

Reply
Gunn
1/24/2014 05:36:43 am

I'm very liberal, a bleeding heart, when it comes to immigration reform. Personally, I think everyone from all the Americas should be able to travel freely, from the tip of S. America, to the far reaches of Canada. I don't like walls and fences, having worked in corrections. We need to tear down these walls and let the people move about more freely. We are living in huge exclusionary zones, which are illegal in smaller form, in many places.

I was dismayed when all Americans were required to get even more documentation in the aftermath of 911. We got rid of the color-coded signs, but people are still taking their shoes off for Uncle Sam. Movement between Canada and the US and Mexico is now even more difficult for many. It should be the other way around.

We may need the added strength of loving one another more as neighbors one day--but we should be more neighborly anyway, of course. Fences (and walls) in this case do not make good neighbors. We don't need more bricks in the wall, we need more openness. Welcome, Friends to the North, East, South, West. Let's get together and move in a big circle. Flash-mob? You wish, Gunn. It ain't happenin' any time soon.

Reply

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    Blog
    Picture

    Author

    I am an author and researcher focusing on pop culture, science, and history. Bylines: New Republic, Esquire, Slate, etc. There's more about me in the About Jason tab.

    Become a Patron!
    Tweets by JasonColavito
    Picture

    Newsletters

    Enter your email below to subscribe to my newsletter for updates on my latest projects, blog posts, and activities, and subscribe to Culture & Curiosities, my Substack newsletter.

    powered by TinyLetter

    Blog Roll

    Ancient Aliens Debunked
    Picture
    A Hot Cup of Joe
    ArchyFantasies
    Bad UFOs
    Mammoth Tales
    Matthew R. X. Dentith
    PaleoBabble
    Picture

    Categories

    All
    Alternative Archaeology
    Alternative Archaeology
    Alternative History
    Alternative History
    America Unearthed
    Ancient Aliens
    Ancient Astronauts
    Ancient History
    Ancient Texts
    Ancient Texts
    Archaeology
    Atlantis
    Conspiracies
    Giants
    Habsburgs
    Horror
    King Arthur
    Knights Templar
    Lovecraft
    Mythology
    Occult
    Popular Culture
    Popular Culture
    Projects
    Pyramids
    Racism
    Science
    Skepticism
    Ufos
    Weird Old Art
    Weird Things
    White Nationalism

    Terms & Conditions

    Please read all applicable terms and conditions before posting a comment on this blog. Posting a comment constitutes your agreement to abide by the terms and conditions linked herein.

    Archives

    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    October 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    April 2010
    March 2010
    February 2010

    RSS Feed

Picture
Home  |  Blog  |  Books  | Contact  |  About Jason | Terms & Conditions
© 2010-2023 Jason Colavito. All rights reserved.

  • Home
  • Blog
  • Books
    • Legends of the Pyramids
    • The Mound Builder Myth
    • Jason and the Argonauts
    • Cult of Alien Gods >
      • Contents
      • Excerpt
      • Image Gallery
    • Foundations of Atlantis
    • Knowing Fear >
      • Contents
      • Excerpt
      • Image Gallery
    • Hideous Bit of Morbidity >
      • Contents
      • Excerpt
      • Image Gallery
    • Cthulhu in World Mythology >
      • Excerpt
      • Image Gallery
      • Necronomicon Fragments
      • Oral Histories
    • Fiction >
      • Short Stories
      • Free Fiction
    • JasonColavito.com Books >
      • Faking History
      • Unearthing the Truth
      • Critical Companion to Ancient Aliens
      • Studies in Ancient Astronautics (Series) >
        • Theosophy on Ancient Astronauts
        • Pyramidiots!
        • Edison's Conquest of Mars
      • Fiction Anthologies >
        • Unseen Horror >
          • Contents
          • Excerpt
        • Moon Men! >
          • Contents
      • The Orphic Argonautica >
        • Contents
        • Excerpt
      • The Faust Book >
        • Contents
        • Excerpt
      • Classic Reprints
      • eBook Minis
    • Free eBooks >
      • Origin of the Space Gods
      • Ancient Atom Bombs
      • Golden Fleeced
      • Ancient America
      • Horror & Science
  • Articles
    • Skeptical Xenoarchaeologist Newsletter >
      • Volumes 1-10 Archive >
        • Volume 1 Archive
        • Volume 2 Archive
        • Volume 3 Archive
        • Volume 4 Archive
        • Volume 5 Archive
        • Volume 6 Archive
        • Volume 7 Archive
        • Volume 8 Archive
        • Volume 9 Archive
        • Volume 10 Archive
      • Volumes 11-20 Archive >
        • Volume 11 Archive
        • Volume 12 Archive
        • Volume 13 Archive
        • Volume 14 Archive
        • Volume 15 Archive
        • Volume 16 Archive
        • Volume 17 Archive
        • Volume 18 Archive
        • Volume 19 Archive
        • Volume 20 Archive
      • Volumes 21-30 Archive >
        • Volume 21 Archive
        • Volume 22 Archive
    • Television Reviews >
      • Ancient Aliens Reviews
      • In Search of Aliens Reviews
      • America Unearthed
      • Pirate Treasure of the Knights Templar
      • Search for the Lost Giants
      • Forbidden History Reviews
      • Expedition Unknown Reviews
      • Legends of the Lost
      • Unexplained + Unexplored
      • Rob Riggle: Global Investigator
    • Book Reviews
    • Galleries >
      • Bad Archaeology
      • Ancient Civilizations >
        • Ancient Egypt
        • Ancient Greece
        • Ancient Near East
        • Ancient Americas
      • Supernatural History
      • Book Image Galleries
    • Videos
    • Collection: Ancient Alien Fraud >
      • Chariots of the Gods at 50
      • Secret History of Ancient Astronauts
      • Of Atlantis and Aliens
      • Aliens and Ancient Texts
      • Profiles in Ancient Astronautics >
        • Erich von Däniken
        • Robert Temple
        • Giorgio Tsoukalos
        • David Childress
      • Blunders in the Sky
      • The Case of the False Quotes
      • Alternative Authors' Quote Fraud
      • David Childress & the Aliens
      • Faking Ancient Art in Uzbekistan
      • Intimations of Persecution
      • Zecharia Sitchin's World
      • Jesus' Alien Ancestors?
      • Extraterrestrial Evolution?
    • Collection: Skeptic Magazine >
      • America Before Review
      • Native American Discovery of Europe
      • Interview: Scott Sigler
      • Golden Fleeced
      • Oh the Horror
      • Discovery of America
      • Supernatural Television
      • Review of Civilization One
      • Who Lost the Middle Ages
      • Charioteer of the Gods
    • Collection: Ancient History >
      • Prehistoric Nuclear War
      • The China Syndrome
      • Atlantis, Mu, and the Maya
      • Easter Island Exposed
      • Who Built the Sphinx?
      • Who Built the Great Pyramid?
      • Archaeological Cover Up?
    • Collection: The Lovecraft Legacy >
      • Pauwels, Bergier, and Lovecraft
      • Lovecraft in Bergier
      • Lovecraft and Scientology
    • Collection: UFOs >
      • Alien Abduction at the Outer Limits
      • Aliens and Anal Probes
      • Ultra-Terrestrials and UFOs
      • Rebels, Queers, and Aliens
    • Scholomance: The Devil's School
    • Prehistory of Chupacabra
    • The Templars, the Holy Grail, & Henry Sinclair
    • Magicians of the Gods Review
    • The Curse of the Pharaohs
    • The Antediluvian Pyramid Myth
    • Whitewashing American Prehistory
    • James Dean's Cursed Porsche
  • The Library
    • Ancient Mysteries >
      • Ancient Texts >
        • Mesopotamian Texts >
          • Atrahasis Epic
          • Epic of Gilgamesh
          • Kutha Creation Legend
          • Babylonian Creation Myth
          • Descent of Ishtar
          • Berossus
          • Comparison of Antediluvian Histories
        • Egyptian Texts >
          • The Shipwrecked Sailor
          • Dream Stela of Thutmose IV
          • The Papyrus of Ani
          • Classical Accounts of the Pyramids
          • Inventory Stela
          • Manetho
          • Eratosthenes' King List
          • The Story of Setna
          • Leon of Pella
          • Diodorus on Egyptian History
          • On Isis and Osiris
          • Famine Stela
          • Old Egyptian Chronicle
          • The Book of Sothis
          • Horapollo
          • Al-Maqrizi's King List
        • Teshub and the Dragon
        • Hermetica >
          • The Three Hermeses
          • Kore Kosmou
          • Corpus Hermeticum
          • The Asclepius
          • The Emerald Tablet
          • Hermetic Fragments
          • Prologue to the Kyranides
          • The Secret of Creation
          • Ancient Alphabets Explained
          • Prologue to Ibn Umayl's Silvery Water
          • Book of the 24 Philosophers
          • Aurora of the Philosophers
        • Hesiod's Theogony
        • Periplus of Hanno
        • Ctesias' Indica
        • Sanchuniathon
        • Sima Qian
        • Syncellus's Enoch Fragments
        • The Book of Enoch
        • Slavonic Enoch
        • Sepher Yetzirah
        • Tacitus' Germania
        • De Dea Syria
        • Aelian's Various Histories
        • Julius Africanus' Chronography
        • Eusebius' Chronicle
        • Chinese Accounts of Rome
        • Ancient Chinese Automaton
        • The Orphic Argonautica
        • Fragments of Panodorus
        • Annianus on the Watchers
        • The Watchers and Antediluvian Wisdom
      • Medieval Texts >
        • Medieval Legends of Ancient Egypt >
          • Medieval Pyramid Lore
          • John Malalas on Ancient Egypt
          • Fragments of Abenephius
          • Akhbar al-zaman
          • Ibrahim ibn Wasif Shah
          • Murtada ibn al-‘Afif
          • Al-Maqrizi on the Pyramids
          • Al-Suyuti on the Pyramids
        • The Hunt for Noah's Ark
        • Isidore of Seville
        • Book of Liang: Fusang
        • Agobard on Magonia
        • Book of Thousands
        • Voyage of Saint Brendan
        • Power of Art and of Nature
        • Travels of Sir John Mandeville
        • Yazidi Revelation and Black Book
        • Al-Biruni on the Great Flood
        • Voyage of the Zeno Brothers
        • The Kensington Runestone (Hoax)
        • Islamic Discovery of America
        • The Aztec Creation Myth
      • Lost Civilizations >
        • Atlantis >
          • Plato's Atlantis Dialogues >
            • Timaeus
            • Critias
          • Fragments on Atlantis
          • Panchaea: The Other Atlantis
          • Eumalos on Atlantis (Hoax)
          • Gómara on Atlantis
          • Sardinia and Atlantis
          • Santorini and Atlantis
          • The Mound Builders and Atlantis
          • Donnelly's Atlantis
          • Atlantis in Morocco
          • Atlantis and the Sea Peoples
          • W. Scott-Elliot >
            • The Story of Atlantis
            • The Lost Lemuria
          • The Lost Atlantis
          • Atlantis in Africa
          • How I Found Atlantis (Hoax)
          • Termier on Atlantis
          • The Critias and Minoan Crete
          • Rebuttal to Termier
          • Further Responses to Termier
          • Flinders Petrie on Atlantis
        • Lost Cities >
          • Miscellaneous Lost Cities
          • The Seven Cities
          • The Lost City of Paititi
          • Manuscript 512
          • The Idolatrous City of Iximaya (Hoax)
          • The 1885 Moberly Lost City Hoax
          • The Elephants of Paredon (Hoax)
        • OOPARTs
        • Oronteus Finaeus Antarctica Map
        • Caucasians in Panama
        • Jefferson's Excavation
        • Fictitious Discoveries in America
        • Against Diffusionism
        • Tunnels Under Peru
        • The Parahyba Inscription (Hoax)
        • Mound Builders
        • Gunung Padang
        • Tales of Enchanted Islands
        • The 1907 Ancient World Map Hoax
        • The 1909 Grand Canyon Hoax
        • The Interglacial Period
        • Solving Oak Island
      • Religious Conspiracies >
        • Pantera, Father of Jesus?
        • Toledot Yeshu
        • Peter of les Vaux-de-Cernay on Cathars
        • Testimony of Jean de Châlons
        • Rosslyn Chapel and the 'Prentice's Pillar
        • The Many Wives of Jesus
        • Templar Infiltration of Labor
        • Louis Martin & the Holy Bloodline
        • The Life of St. Issa (Hoax)
        • On the Person of Jesus Christ
      • Giants in the Earth >
        • Fossil Origins of Myths >
          • Fossil Teeth and Bones of Elephants
          • Fossil Elephants
          • Fossil Bones of Teutobochus
          • Fossil Mammoths and Giants
          • Giants' Bones Dug Out of the Earth
          • Fossils and the Supernatural
          • Fossils, Myth, and Pseudo-History
          • Man During the Stone Age
          • Fossil Bones and Giants
          • American Elephant Myths
          • The Mammoth and the Flood
          • Fossils and Myth
          • Fossil Origin of the Cyclops
          • Mastodon, Mammoth, and Man
        • Fragments on Giants
        • Manichaean Book of Giants
        • Geoffrey on British Giants
        • Alfonso X's Hermetic History of Giants
        • Boccaccio and the Fossil 'Giant'
        • Book of Howth
        • Purchas His Pilgrimage
        • Edmond Temple's 1827 Giant Investigation
        • The Giants of Sardinia
        • Giants and the Sons of God
        • The Magnetism of Evil
        • Tertiary Giants
        • Smithsonian Giant Reports
        • Early American Giants
        • The Giant of Coahuila
        • Jewish Encyclopedia on Giants
        • Index of Giants
        • Newspaper Accounts of Giants
        • Lanier's A Book of Giants
      • Science and History >
        • Halley on Noah's Comet
        • The Newport Tower
        • Iron: The Stone from Heaven
        • Ararat and the Ark
        • Pyramid Facts and Fancies
        • Argonauts before Homer
        • The Deluge
        • Crown Prince Rudolf on the Pyramids
        • Old Mythology in New Apparel
        • Blavatsky on Dinosaurs
        • Teddy Roosevelt on Bigfoot
        • Devil Worship in France
        • Maspero's Review of Akhbar al-zaman
        • The Holy Grail as Lucifer's Crown Jewel
        • The Mutinous Sea
        • The Rock Wall of Rockwall
        • Fabulous Zoology
        • The Origins of Talos
        • Mexican Mythology
        • Chinese Pyramids
        • Maqrizi's Names of the Pharaohs
      • Extreme History >
        • Roman Empire Hoax
        • American Antiquities
        • American Cataclysms
        • England, the Remnant of Judah
        • Historical Chronology of the Mexicans
        • Maspero on the Predynastic Sphinx
        • Vestiges of the Mayas
        • Ragnarok: The Age of Fire and Gravel
        • Origins of the Egyptian People
        • The Secret Doctrine >
          • Volume 1: Cosmogenesis
          • Volume 2: Anthropogenesis
        • Phoenicians in America
        • The Electric Ark
        • Traces of European Influence
        • Prince Henry Sinclair
        • Pyramid Prophecies
        • Templars of Ancient Mexico
        • Chronology and the "Riddle of the Sphinx"
        • The Faith of Ancient Egypt
        • Spirit of the Hour in Archaeology
        • Book of the Damned
        • Great Pyramid As Noah's Ark
        • Richard Shaver's Proofs
    • Alien Encounters >
      • US Government Ancient Astronaut Files >
        • Fortean Society and Columbus
        • Inquiry into Shaver and Palmer
        • The Skyfort Document
        • Whirling Wheels
        • Denver Ancient Astronaut Lecture
        • Soviet Search for Lemuria
        • Visitors from Outer Space
        • Unidentified Flying Objects (Abstract)
        • "Flying Saucers"? They're a Myth
        • UFO Hypothesis Survival Questions
        • Air Force Academy UFO Textbook
        • The Condon Report on Ancient Astronauts
        • Atlantis Discovery Telegrams
        • Ancient Astronaut Society Telegram
        • Noah's Ark Cables
        • The Von Daniken Letter
        • CIA Psychic Probe of Ancient Mars
        • Scott Wolter Lawsuit
        • UFOs in Ancient China
        • CIA Report on Noah's Ark
        • CIA Noah's Ark Memos
        • Congressional Ancient Aliens Testimony
        • Ancient Astronaut and Nibiru Email
        • Congressional Ancient Mars Hearing
        • House UFO Hearing
      • Ancient Extraterrestrials >
        • Premodern UFO Sightings
        • The Moon Hoax
        • Inhabitants of Other Planets
        • Blavatsky on Ancient Astronauts
        • The Stanzas of Dzyan (Hoax)
        • Aerolites and Religion
        • What Is Theosophy?
        • Plane of Ether
        • The Adepts from Venus
      • A Message from Mars
      • Saucer Mystery Solved?
      • Orville Wright on UFOs
      • Interdimensional Flying Saucers
      • Flying Saucers Are Real
      • Report on UFOs
    • The Supernatural >
      • The Devils of Loudun
      • Sublime and Beautiful
      • Voltaire on Vampires
      • Demonology and Witchcraft
      • Thaumaturgia
      • Bulgarian Vampires
      • Religion and Evolution
      • Transylvanian Superstitions
      • Defining a Zombie
      • Dread of the Supernatural
      • Vampires
      • Werewolves and Vampires and Ghouls
      • Science and Fairy Stories
      • The Cursed Car
    • Classic Fiction >
      • Lucian's True History
      • Some Words with a Mummy
      • The Coming Race
      • King Solomon's Mines
      • An Inhabitant of Carcosa
      • The Xipéhuz
      • Lot No. 249
      • The Novel of the Black Seal
      • The Island of Doctor Moreau
      • Pharaoh's Curse
      • Edison's Conquest of Mars
      • The Lost Continent
      • Count Magnus
      • The Mysterious Stranger
      • The Wendigo
      • Sredni Vashtar
      • The Lost World
      • The Red One
      • H. P. Lovecraft >
        • Dagon
        • The Call of Cthulhu
        • History of the Necronomicon
        • At the Mountains of Madness
        • Lovecraft's Library in 1932
      • The Skeptical Poltergeist
      • The Corpse on the Grating
      • The Second Satellite
      • Queen of the Black Coast
      • A Martian Odyssey
    • Classic Genre Movies
    • Miscellaneous Documents >
      • The Balloon-Hoax
      • A Problem in Greek Ethics
      • The Migration of Symbols
      • The Gospel of Intensity
      • De Profundis
      • The Life and Death of Crown Prince Rudolf
      • The Bathtub Hoax
      • Crown Prince Rudolf's Letters
      • Position of Viking Women
      • Employment of Homosexuals
      • James Dean's Scrapbook
      • James Dean's Love Letters
      • The Amazing James Dean Hoax!
    • Free Classic Pseudohistory eBooks
  • About Jason
    • Biography
    • Jason in the Media
    • Contact Jason
    • About JasonColavito.com
    • Terms and Conditions
  • Search