Sample

Chapter One - Bones of Contention

It is widely believed, due to its inclusion in the Bible, that Adam and Eve were the first man and woman to live upon the Earth. The subject of exactly when they appeared has been hotly debated over the years by Biblical scholars, and the Church alike. Until recently, the Church of Rome's official view was that Adam came into being in the year 4004 BCE, as decreed by the Irish Archbishop James Ussher of Armagh in Annales Veteris Testamenti, published in 1650 CE.[i]

Archbishop Ussher arrived at this date using a simple method of calculation based on the ages of the early patriarchs when they fathered their sons, back to the time of Noah's flood, calculated at 2348 BCE. He then worked backwards from this point to Adam, using the same method of calculation, until he arrived at 4004 BCE.

In 1654 CE the Vatican Council decreed that anyone daring to challenge this view was a heretic. Astonishingly, it was not until 1952 that Pope Pius XII announced at the Papal Academy of Sciences that this was not the case. He stated that theologians should not ignore the discoveries of science as it was clear from these that the Earth had existed for thousands of millions of years. He also stated that the six days of creation as mentioned in the Bible were symbolic and could not be taken literally, although God was still the supreme creator.[ii]

Whilst it is true that mankind has a strong inquisitive nature, no matter how hard we look, we may never get a definitive answer as to where and when mankind first appeared. We can only guess from dating the known human remains that have been found. There are never any guarantees that there are not even older ones that have either been ignored, or are yet to be unearthed.

New discoveries come to light all the time that change our views of human ancestry. One thing that I learnt from my own studies of this subject is that much of what we are taught as scientific fact is in fact based on little more than conjecture. In my view much of science should therefore be taken with a large pinch of salt, although I am sure there are many who would say the same of spirituality. Having said this, there is now an increasingly fine line between the two, since science is beginning to prove much of what mystics have known and taught for centuries.

Chinless Wonders

It is estimated that two million years ago Africa was inhabited by as many as nine different species of hominids. The oldest known biped thought to be our ancestor was found in Kenya shortly before the millennium and dated to approximately six million years old.[iii] This predates Lucy, the oldest previous specimen by three million years. From Lucy it took a further million years of evolution to reach the stage of homo erectus. After a further 1.75 million years Neanderthal man appeared. Despite the passage of time the tools of these two species hardly differ.

Approximately 40,000 years ago Cro-Magnon man appeared in Europe, seemingly from nowhere. The term Cro-Magnon does not relate to a particular species of mankind, but more to this particular group, whose remains have been found throughout Europe and parts of North Africa. It was Cro-Magnon man who was responsible for the incredible cave art at sites such as Lascaux.

Their physical appearance was virtually identical to that of modern man. They made highly specialized tools from bone and wood and moved out of the caves, erecting temporary shelters made from animal skins. They also used skins to make clothing. Of all our ancestors this line was the only branch to survive and continue the evolutionary chain. The souls of those who had inhabited our earlier ancestors are said to have eventually incarnated into this group.[iv]

The first Neanderthal remains were discovered in Germany in 1857 CE. They were believed at first to be the remains of a Cossack who crawled into the cave to die. Right from the start, Neanderthals were given a bad press, depicted as a primitive species without language or culture. Despite the fact that most of these claims have now been disproved, this attitude continues to persist.

The discovery of a Neanderthal hyoid bone at Kebara, Israel indicates that Neanderthals did have the ability to produce sound. The hyoid is a small bone that sits between the mandible and larynx, anchoring the muscles necessary for speech. Be that as it may, the presence of this bone does not necessarily indicate language, as this also depends on the size and position of the larynx. The consensus view is that Neanderthals did have some form of communication, but that it was not necessarily a spoken language.

They must have had some form of belief system since evidence of elaborate burials have been found, including that of a severely disabled man at Shanidar, Iraq, known as the Old Man of Shanidar. These remains, which were dated to around 45,000 years old, are those of a man aged around 50 years at the time of death. His left eye is missing, and there is evidence of paralysis, with a fractured right foot and a severely withered right arm. The site also revealed traces of 18 different species of pollen, indicating that this man was laid out on a bed of flowers. He was obviously an important and highly revered individual. He lived to a ripe old age, longer than most Neanderthals, since the average life expectancy is estimated at around 30 years.

Since he was unable to hunt or provide food, others within the group must have cared for his needs, indicating that he filled an important function within society. The presence of these injuries, together with the care with which the body was treated, would tend to indicate an advanced and caring society with some kind of hierarchical structure. Perhaps this man was some kind of primitive shaman?

Neanderthal man existed exclusively in Eurasia between 230,000 and roughly 30,000 years ago. His brain was larger than ours, with a distinctly shaped head, longer and lower with heavy brow ridges and no chin. He seems to have been anatomically adapted to the cold; short and stocky with heavy limbs. Although short, he had immense strength, with evidence of powerful muscle attachments. He must have been a formidable hunter with great strength and stamina. By 30,000 BCE Neanderthal man had all but died out, supposedly due to competition with homo sapiens, or perhaps an inability to adapt.

Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons existed side by side for upwards of 10,000 years, leading to much speculation as to whether they were related or interbred. The problem seemed to be solved in 1997 when a team of American and German scientists led by Dr Svante Pääbo extracted DNA from the humerus of the first Neanderthal specimen found in Germany in 1857. The mitochondrial DNA of the Neanderthal was compared with that of modern humans from a variety of racial backgrounds.[v]

Whilst modern humans tend to differ by an average of eight sequences, it was found that Neanderthals and humans differed in 27 sequences. The scientists therefore announced that the Neanderthal species was almost certainly a biological dead end, unrelated to homo sapiens. Humans and chimpanzees are believed to have diverged about four million years ago. The scientists therefore concluded that Neanderthals must have diverged from humans about 500,000 to 600,000 years ago, much earlier than previously believed.[vi]

In November 1998, a remarkable discovery was made that appeared to turn this theory on its head, when the skeleton of a young boy was found by a team of Portuguese archaeologists led by Dr João Zilhãao, at the Lagar Velho rock shelter in the Lapedo Valley 90 miles north of Lisbon. This was an unusual skeleton as it displayed the typical facial characteristics of a modern human together with the stocky body and short limbs of the Neanderthals, leading the archaeologists to conclude that it must be a hybrid.

Radio carbon dating confirmed that the boy had died around 24,500 years ago; 4000 years after Neanderthals are thought to have become extinct. If true, this would seem to indicate that this child was not the result of one isolated incident, but rather the descendant of a mixed population which had been inter-breeding for some considerable time.[vii] DNA testing is yet to be carried out. I am sure that if and when it is, the results will prove extremely interesting.

Family Tree or Family Forest?

As progressively more evolved species began to emerge, palaeoanthropologists naturally believed that each was descended from the other. Thus it was that homo erectus was thought to have evolved from homo habilis. Likewise homo sapiens was said to be the next step up from homo erectus on the evolutionary chain.

This changed in 1996. In December of that year some skulls were found on the Indonesian island of Java. These seemed to indicate that homo erectus, who was thought to have become extinct 200,000 years ago, was alive and well until as recently as 28,000 years ago, proving that neither Neanderthals nor Cro-Magnons could have evolved from this source. These three were therefore totally separate species.[viii]

From the neck down homo erectus was similar to modern man, tall, slender and robust. The head though was very different; they had long, low skulls with no chin and heavy brow ridges. By contrast, Cro-Magnons had high foreheads, with prominent chins and no brow ridges.

Since no Neanderthals have been found east of Uzbekistan we can surmise that they were an exclusively Eurasian species. The plot thickens when one realizes that genetic studies indicate that the modern human family, that of homo sapiens, originated as a single ancestral line in Africa, some 200,000 years ago.

Allan Wilson was the first to study mitochondrial DNA as a means of tracking the origins of humanity. Wilson and his team analyzed the mitochondrial DNA of 147 people from five geographic populations around the world, and came to the conclusion that these originated from one single female ancestor in Africa approximately 140,000 to 280,000 years ago. His study was subsequently published in the January 1987 edition of Nature magazine, entitled Mitochondrial DNA and Human Evolution. The term Mitochondrial Eve was later coined, after newspaper coverage of the article.[ix]

Bryan Sykes, a Professor of Human Genetics at the Institute of Molecular Medicine at Oxford University, together with his team, have developed a system known as MatriLine^TM that can link anyone of European ancestry to one of seven women, to whom he refers as the Seven Daughters of Eve. These seven women are believed to have lived between 8,000 and 45,000 years ago in various parts of Europe. All seven can in turn, be traced to a single female in Africa. A total of 36 clans have since been discovered throughout the world, all of which have been traced back to this one African female, whom Sykes names as Lara.[x]

A human egg cell contains over a quarter of a million mitochondria, but sperm cells contain just enough to enable them to swim up the fallopian tube in order to fertilize the egg. After fertilization the egg no longer requires the sperm's mitochondria, and they are discarded, along with the sperm's tail. In this way, although we inherit DNA from both our parents, mitochondrial DNA is inherited exclusively from the mother.[xi]

This is not to say that this single female ancestor refers to one single woman from whom all of humanity are descended, rather it refers to the earliest genetic line to have survived to the present day. As mitochondrial DNA is inherited exclusively via the mother, every time a woman has only sons, her mitochondrial line dies out. In this way, sooner or later everyone on the planet will be part of one remaining mitochondrial line. 

Studies of the Y chromosome, which passes exclusively down the male line, tell more or less the same story, indicating that modern humans can all trace their ancestry back to one man - Y-chromosomal Adam, who lived about 100,000 years ago. Hence by the mid 1990's, the Out of Africa theory had become the dominant view of human evolution.[xii]

Accident or Design

Two theories regarding human evolution have emerged, known as the Out of Africa model and the Multiregional theory. Both accept that the first migration out of Africa, by homo erectus, was around one million years ago. The Out of Africa Model states that a second migration occurred around 100,000 years ago, by antecedents of homo sapiens, who they believe are descended from homo erectus. These people supposedly migrated to Europe and Asia, replacing all other populations descended from homo erectus. In contrast, the Multiregional theory contends that homo sapiens did not evolve separately in Africa, but rather from homo erectus, after he left Africa, simultaneously in different parts of the world.

Until the mid 1990's, when new evidence began to emerge, the Out of Africa theory seemed to be the accepted consensus view, but the Y chromosome and mitochondrial DNA are not the only sources of genetic information that can be looked at. In terms of size, the nuclear genome dwarfs both these sources, making it a potentially far richer resource for reconstructing human origins and tracking our ancestry.

However, nuclear DNA is far more difficult to work with, since unlike the Y chromosome and mitochondrial DNA, both of which are passed on intact, the nuclear genome is reformed into different combinations with each generation. This makes it very difficult to know which sequences have been passed on through random shuffling, and which are due to chance mutations.

Thankfully, small chunks of nuclear DNA known as haplocytes are immune to this random shuffling, being passed on intact from generation to generation. However, there are patterns of variation within these haplocytes that appear distinctly at odds with the so called single origin or Out of Africa theory.

The first of these was discovered in the late 1990's, when anthropologist Eugene Harris and geneticist Jody Hey at Rutgers University, Piscataway, New Jersey, looked at a haplocyte within one particular gene known as PDHA1. They examined random samples from 35 men across the world and were surprised to find several different versions of this haplocyte.

The sequences could be broken down into two basic types or lineages, both of which shared a common ancestor 1.8 million years ago. Then 200,000 years ago, the lineages split again. If humans evolved from a small isolated group 150 to 200,000 years ago, how could this haplocyte have diverged 1.8 million years ago?

This poses a serious problem for the Out of Africa theorists that could have several explanations. Perhaps the Multi Regionalists are correct, and mankind did evolve simultaneously in other parts of the world. Perhaps we occasionally interbred with other species, such as Neanderthals. Until testing takes place on finds such as the Lagar Velho Child, the so called human-Neanderthal hybrid, we may never know.

In the meantime, Bruce Lahn, a geneticist at the University of Chicago has uncovered some very unusual patterns in the distribution of genes which play a role in human cognition (the process of reasoning or intelligence), in particular one called microcephalin. Mutations in this gene lead to a condition called microcephaly, which is characterised by a small head and various other neurological symptoms. The human hobbit, homo floresiensis, which was officially recognised as a new species of hominid in early 2007 springs to mind. Lahn's studies show that a new variant of microcephalin appeared around 40,000 years ago and swept rapidly through the population to the extent that it is now estimated to be present in 70 percent of living people.

The obvious interpretation would be that this was just another random mutation, yet when Lahn looked at a haplocyte within microcephalin and studied the differences between this new variant and older versions of the gene, he concluded that they diverged at least one million years ago. The new version then must have split off at this time, and then for some reason, jumped back in 40,000 years ago. Could it then be that this new version evolved separately in another species of human and was reintroduced to our lineage via interbreeding? The second date of 40,000 years seems to correspond to the sudden appearance of Cro-Magnon man in Europe and the explosion of cave art, when humans and Neanderthals co-existed side by side, so this could indicate interbreeding.[xiii]

Despite these obvious anomalies, homo erectus is still listed on the majority of evolutionary models as the ancestor of homo sapiens. This though is by no means proven. The fact that homo erectus seemed to be alive and well, living happily on the Indonesian island of Java as late as 28,000 years ago is by itself enough to raise serious questions. If homo sapiens is supposed to have replaced him, what was he still doing there?

In fact there seems to be some dispute as to exactly what constitutes a new species or branch on the human family tree. Several finds attributed to intermediary species, such as homo ergaster and homo rudolfensis are now believed by some, to be variations of the same species and not separate at all. The criterion for deciding how and when new species emerge seems to depend very much on the size of the brain.

In the meantime the Creationist argument continues to rage. Creationists are those who believe that man arose not from a slow and gradual evolution, but as a result of some outside intervention in the form of intelligent design. Some, but by no means all, are Christians who claim a literal interpretation of the Bible, that man was created in six days from the dust of the eEarth. To them, Neanderthals and other species of hominid are explained as degenerates who were suffering from syphilis or some other disease.

On July 10, 1925, John Scopes, a teacher from Tennessee in the southern United States, was found guilty of teaching the theory of evolution. Eighty years on, the Creationist view maintains its grip on American classrooms. The US Supreme Court may have deemed it impossible to teach divine creation as a form of science, but in response to this, Creationists have invented the concept of Intelligent Design. This is nothing to do with intervention from extraterrestrial, or other sources, but more to do with a repackaging of Creationist views to make them more user- friendly in the modern age.

Intelligent Design knows what it wants and how to do it, achieving results without experimentation. Intervention on the other hand, involves trial and error. You may have an idea of what you want to achieve, and a rough outline of how to do this, but you have to experiment before those results can be perfected. Intelligent Design can therefore be seen as Creationism by the back door. The Discovery Institute, which serves as Intelligent Design's spiritual home, makes no bones about this, stating that part of their mission is ‘to spread the word that nature and human beings are created by God'.'[xiv]

Despite this uncomfortable fact, as of January 2005, 18 pieces of legislation had been introduced in 13 states across America. This legislation seeks mainly to enforce the teaching of Intelligent Design, or evidence against evolution in science classes.

The battle though is not confined to schools. In June 2005, that bastion of science, the Smithsonian Institute in Washington DC allowed, in its infinite wisdom, the showing of a film on Intelligent Design. The screening was later withdrawn after a huge outcry. That same month, a publicly funded zoo in Tulsa, Oklahoma voted to install a display depicting the six days of creation as mentioned in the Book of Genesis. In March 2005, the science museum in Fort Worth, Texas abandoned the showing of an IMAX film entitled Volcanoes of the Deep Sea following a negative reaction towards its evolutionary slant. The museum later changed its mind after press coverage provoked a public outcry. Despite this, IMAX cinemas elsewhere in the United States have refused to show films which endorse evolutionary ideals in an effort to avoid controversy.[xv] What they fail to realize is that in making this decision, this is the very thing that they are creating.

No one would dispute that both sides of any argument must always be given equal room, but when these ideas are dressed up and made to look like something else then this begins to look more like religious propaganda, an accusation which the Discovery Institute strongly denies.

To allow what is in effect religious dogma to dictate what should be taught in schools and therefore society, sets a dangerous precedent which cannot be allowed to take form. Those who doubt the validity of this claim should remember what happened to Galileo.

When Galileo stated that the Earth was not the centre of our solar system, and revolved instead around the Sun, he was imprisoned for his beliefs and forced to recant his views. The Vatican initially gave him permission to publish his findings, but later recanted, and he was arrested by the Inquisition and interrogated for 18 days. Despite refuting his beliefs (under threat of torture) he was sentenced to life imprisonment. It was not until 1992 that the Church finally accepted that he may have been right after all, and conceded to forgive him.[xvi]

The real puzzle is not when or how mankind evolved, but why there are such variations in populations throughout the world. There are many remote tribes in various parts of the world whose culture seems to have changed little since the Stone Age, supposedly due to their isolation. Isolation though from what? The question we should be asking is not why they stayed where they are, but why and how the sudden leap forward occurred in the rest of mankind.[xvii]

Evolution or Intervention

According to Jamie Sams, a well known Native American author, sky gods came to Earth at the end of the third world of water, when the Earth consisted of just one continent. The Native Americans refer to this as Turtle Island, but we call it Pangea. It was the sky gods that helped the early people to create the wonders of the ancient world, such as Stonehenge and the Egyptian Pyramids.

Sams states that these early people were the Neanderthals. As the Neanderthals evolved, their heads started to grow bigger as their brain size increased. This was because their brains stored all the genetic memories that grew with each generation. Due to this the females were finding giving birth more difficult, until extinction seemed inevitable. It was around this time, when the population was threatened with extinction that the sky gods came, from the Pleiades, from Orion and from Sirius.

It is certainly true that Neanderthals did have huge heads in comparison to ours. The pelvic canal initially appeared to be unusually large, prompting Erik Trinkaus, Professor of physical anthropology from Washington University in St Louis, to postulate a longer gestation period. These early specimens were though for the most part incomplete. When a more complete specimen was found in Israel, in 1987, it showed that the pelvic bone was not larger, but longer, with no discernible difference in the size of the actual canal. This curious fact has long puzzled palaeoanthropologists, as these large heads must have caused great difficulties when giving birth. This then led to a new theory of continued brain growth after birth. It is difficult though to see any evolutionary advantage in this since it would leave the child extremely vulnerable. The mother would be so tied up in caring for her child that she would be unable to help find food. Sams is not the only one to suggest that the large head size was due to storage of genetic memories, since Jean M Auel also mentions this in her series of novels, known as Earth's Children^TM.

When the sky gods arrived they knew that they would not be able to live long in Earth's atmosphere. Like the Neanderthals, they too were dying, so there was an exchange. The genes of the sky gods were spliced together with the genes of the Neanderthals in order to help both species survive, but in a new form. This species, according to Sams became known as homo sapiens. The memories the Neanderthals had been storing in their brains were then transferred into the DNA, so the brain did not have to get any bigger.

This is why there are indigenous people all over the world who talk of our origins in the stars, and of the ancient sky gods. There are others who say that we come from the Earth. Both are correct, for we have two lines of ancestry and genetic memory. That is why DNA has two strands. Originally one strand contained our Earth memories, and the other those of our celestial ancestors.[xviii] This statement however goes totally against the theory of evolution.

Darwin's theory of evolution is based on two main premises; evolution through accidental mutation and survival of the fittest. These genetic mutations supposedly led, over a process of time, to the emergence of new species. The problem is there is scant evidence from the fossil records to back this up, as no transitional species have been found. Instead, species seem to appear and disappear literally from nowhere.

Darwinists use two explanations to account for this absence of evidence; firstly that the fossil record must be incomplete and secondly that these missing links are yet to be found. This would appear to be a logical explanation, but when one looks beneath the surface, and sees the broader picture, these explanations begin to look inadequate.

Take for example the sudden appearance of flowering plants. These seemed to appear from nowhere around 100 million years ago. There are no transitional species on record and no logical explanation as to why this change occurred. To invest time and energy in changing from one type of reproduction to another, when the new type requires the cooperation of insects and birds would indicate that something else was at work other than random mutation.[xix] Furthermore, if this were a gradual change from one type of plant to another, then why do the two continue to co-exist? Surely the oldest type, non-flowering plants should have died out?

Logically, the fact that they didn't can only mean one thing; the two types must have evolved independently of each other. The question then becomes, how and why did flowering plants emerge, and perhaps more interestingly, where from?

Life seems too complex for it all to have happened by chance. As the late astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle pointed out, the emergence of a living cell from an inanimate chemical soup is about as likely as the assembly of a 747 by a whirlwind passing through a junkyard![xx] If species did not evolve slowly, here on Earth, then there is only one place they could have evolved - another planet.

The theory of Panspermia (meaning seeds everywhere), originated in the fifth century BCE, when Greek philosopher Anaxagoras stated that the seeds of life swarmed through the cosmos and were not exclusive to Earth. Panspermia would probably have become accepted theory then, were it not for the fact that Aristotle came up with a theory of his own - the spontaneous generation of life. This remained a workable theory until it was finally disproved by French chemist Louis Pasteur in the late nineteenth century.

It was not until 1903 that Panspermia would again raise it head, when Swedish physicist and Nobel prize winner, Svante Arrhenius- hypothesised in his book, Worlds in the Making, that life on Earth emerged from microscopic spores which were propelled through space by the radiation pressure of star light.[xxi]

Panspermia as a theory has had some heavyweight scientific support over the years. Francis Crick, co-discover with James Watson of the double-helix DNA, proposed in his book, Life Itself: It's Origin and Nature that life had evolved on another planet to a technical level greater than that on Earth. Once this civilization had reached a high point in its development, they began sending rockets that contained spores through space.

Sir Fred Hoyle further asserted in his book, Lifecloud: The Origin of Life in the Universe, co-written with Chandra Wickramsinghe, that spores reached Earth via comets. The authors were ridiculed by the scientific community, who to put it mildly were not impressed by these claims. The consensus seemed to be that it was highly unlikely that any life-forms could survive in such harsh conditions.

However, the Apollo 12 mission proved otherwise when the common throat bacterium Streptococcus mitus was inadvertently carried to the Moon via a camera attached to the Surveyor 3 landing module. When the lander was rescued, without contaminating the bacterium's sterile conditions, the mission were astonished to find that the bacterium had survived in these harsh conditions for over a year. [xxii]

In 1961, a meteorite examined by Spanish-American biochemist Juan Oro, was found to contain micro fossils of an algae-like organism known as adenine, together with component nucleic acids of both RNA and DNA, in sufficient quantities to produce ATP, an energy releasing molecule found in living cells. Eight years later, in 1969, a meteorite that landed in Victoria, Australia was found to contain a complex series of organic compounds, which together formed the building blocks of DNA. Subsequent tests by Dr Ron Brown from Monash University, Melbourne revealed formations reminiscent of a very primitive form of cell structure.[xxiii]

There is also the famous, or perhaps infamous meteorite (designated ALH84001) found in Antarctica in 1984, and formed from crystallised Martian rock 4.5 billion years old. When examined under a scanning electron microscope, this was found to contain structures described as ‘fossilised bacteria-like life forms', presenting the first solid evidence of the presence of extra terrestrial life.[xxiv]

More recently, as reported in New Scientist magazine, the Chinese space programme has undertaken experiments whereby seeds are flown into space and brought back to Earth for sowing. These are said to have shown remarkable results, whereby trees are more resistant to disease and vegetables taste better. These effects are supposedly due to genetic mutations caused by the radiation.[xxv]

Suddenly then, the theory of Panspermia does not seem quite so far-fetched, and the possibility of extraterrestrial intervention becomes viable. It cannot be coincidence that six cultures, in Egypt, Sumeria, China, India, Mexico and Peru, sprang up from nowhere, all with creation ‘myths' in which gods came down to Earth, created humans and then taught them civilization.[xxvi] What if these ‘myths' were true?

[i] Genesis of the Grail Kings: Laurence Gardner, p17

[ii] Ibid, p18

[iii] Secrets of the Dead, shown Channel Four November 19, 2001

[iv] We are the Nibiruans: Jelaila Starr, p94

[v] The Times July 11, 1997, from an article in the scientific journal Cell

[vi] Time magazine July 21, 1997

[vii] The early Upper Paleolithic Human Skeleton from the Abrigo do Lagar Velho (Portugal) and Modern Human Emergence in Iberia: Cidália Duarte, João Maurício, Paul B Petitt, Pedro Souto, Erik Trinkaus, Hans van der Plicht and João Zilhão, published PNAS June 22, 1999, www.pnas.org

[viii] Genesis of the Grail Kings: Laurence Gardner, p72

[ix] Mitochondrial DNA and Human Evolution: Rebecca L Cann, Mark Stoneking and Allan C Wilson, Nature magazine, January 1987, www.nature.com

[x] see www.oxfordancestors.com

[xi] The Seven Daughters of Eve: Brian Sykes, p54

[xii] The Neanderthal Within: Dan Jones, New Scientist, March 3, 2007

[xiii] Ibid

[xiv] A Battle for Science's Soul: Debora Mackenzie, New Scientist, July 9, 2005

[xv] Ibid

[xvi] The Inquisition: Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, p141 

[xvii] The Twelfth Planet: Zecharia Sitchin, p2-3

[xviii] The Mystery of the Crystal Skulls: Chris Morton and  Ceri Louise Thomas, p373-376

[xix] The Genesis Race: Will Hart, p31-32

[xx] The Intelligent Universe: Fred Hoyle, p19

[xxi] The Cygnus Mystery: Andrew Collins, p226

[xxii] The Genesis Race: Will Hart, p39-40

[xxiii] The Cygnus Mystery: Andrew Collins, p227

[xxiv] Meteorite Yields Evidence of Primitive Life on Early Mars: Donald L Savage, James Hartsfield and David Salisbury, www2.jpl.nasa.gov/snc/nasa1.html

[xxv] New Scientist Magazine, June 11, 2005

[xxvi] The Genesis Race: Will Hart, p40

View Synopsis View Reviews View Information Purchase Options