Recent Epoch

11,000 years ago to the present

Average longevity of species is about 5 to 10 million years according to the fossil records. But now man has reduced the longevity of species to under 100 years.


14,000- 10,500 YEARS AGO

Earth is in the grip of the last Ice Age around 14,000 years ago.

During this time, some humans migrated to North America, living off large mammals consisting of Columbian Mammoths (the cousins of Wolly Mammoths in Europe), bisons and wild boar. In other parts of the world, most humans probably migrated and kept themselves close to the equator and near the oceans for a constant supply of relatively warm air and food. As for other humans, they could have endured the cold by sheltering in caves.

Around 13,000 years ago something had began to warm up the planet.

Why the warming? One possible theory for the rise in temperature relates to a burning of wood by humans to keep warm, and not to mention the methane generated by animals (yes, we can safely assume humans did contribute in their own personal ways to global warming). The process of warming the planet in this way from animals is slow, but everything contributes over time. Then a tipping point came when temperatures in the oceans reached a critical level resulting in the melting of a certain amount of methane hydrate ice beneath the oceans. Suddenly a burst of methane gas entered the atmosphere to intermingle with other global warming gases. The result was a dramatic warming of the planet within a matter of a few years due to the effectiveness of methane as a heat trap for the Sun's energy as it hits the ground and re-radiates back out only to be captured by the methane molecules at the lower infra-red frequency range and kept on Earth for longer. The end of the Ice Age was imminent. In fact, the great warmth arrived in North America faster than expected for some reason. Not long after this, the Gulf Stream in the Atlantic Ocean was re-activated where warm waters in the Caribbean sea and the Gulf of Mexico moved across the Atlantic Ocean to reach northern Europe and pushing the colder waters back to the equator. Once this happened around 10,500 years ago, all it took was one unusually hot European summer with temperatures 6 to 8 degrees celsius higher than usual to begin melting a significant amount of solid ice from glaciers (1). In a matter of 5 to 50 years later (a blink of an eye in Earth's geological history), the Ice Age came to an abrupt end in Europe.

With extra fresh water flowing into the oceans from melting ice sheets and glaciers, sea levels around the world rose significantly. For example, the Island of Tasmania was formed south of the Australian mainland as water rushed over the flat plains to create the sea of Bass Strait. As for the great valley separating Europe from Africa, this would get slowly flooded by salt water from the Atlantic Ocean as it finally toppled over a canyon lying between Spain and Africa. At first it was a trickle, but as the ocean levels rose higher, it appeared as a large waterfall. About 1,000 years later the Mediterranean Sea was formed and joined with the Atlantic Ocean. By the time all of the ice sheets in Europe, Russia and North America had melted, scientists believe sea levels rose by at least 74 and probably as much as 120 metres in a matter of 50 years. This was a fairly quick event compared to the slow rise in temperature during the Ice Age.

Sea floor imaging showing the topography below the oceans of south-east Australia. (Source: Petroleum Exploration Society of Australia web site, 2007).

Despite the alluring theory for how world temperatures increased, not all scientists are in total agreement about how it all started (nice to know that science and healthy skepticism is alive and well in the 21st century and producing different views by their scientific followers). Was it entirely caused by methane and carbon dioxide emissions? The big problem with the theory, or so it seems, is that many large mammals of the megafauna era including the Wolly Mammoths died out after the end of the last Ice Age for no good reason. These are the same animals that survived many previous and more intense Ice Ages followed by several interglacial periods. And yet incredibly, many would not survive the end of the last Ice Age. Why should this be so?

Some scientists have considered a range of possible explanations.

Was it to do with the rate of melting of glaciers that took many slow moving large animals by surprise with sudden floods in low lying areas? For other animals, the melting ice sheets could have created many large marshy areas causing large animals to struggle and eventually got bog down in the mud and, therefore, expended too much energy and not enough food could be accessed to provide the extra energy.

Or did the large animals suffer overheating in the unusually warmer days with their thick skin and fur?

Or it is likely that humans were too eager to hunt down the last remaining large and cumbersome animals to extinction (knowing how easy it was to catch them)?

Now, according to a respected archaeologist Professor Ken Tankersley from the University of Cincinnati, he thinks there could be another explanation.

In a place called Sheridan Cave located in Ohio, USA, Tankersley noticed a thin layer of distinctly reddish dirt known as the Clovis layer below 10 metres of soil. The depth of this reddish material is significant in the sense that it has been dated to around the end of the last Ice Age, approximately 13,000 years ago. A fairly useful observation. Now we just need to know what is this reddish material. Fortunately Tankerly has made another important observation. It seems that this same reddish layer has been observed in at least 20 other sites dotted around the continent suggesting that whatever had deposited this material was a widespread event. Furthermore, after analysing the soil, he noticed unusually high concentrations of iron (up to 50 times above the expected level in the surrounding soil above and below the layer). The question is, "Where did this extra iron come from?"

One clue lies in outer space.

After realising some rocks in space can contain high amounts of iron, Tankersley has put forward a rather controversial theory that perhaps an asteroid may have impacted somewhere in North America causing the end of the last Ice Age. If not, it would be a comet scrapping the Earth's atmosphere and creating a partial combustion of the air. What it was and where precisely he doesn't know for sure. Indeed, the biggest problem with his theory is the lack of a crater and one that is much bigger than the thing that hit Arizona nearly 50,000 years ago. However further studies by planetary geologist Professor Peter Shultz using a high speed gun in California developed by NASA suggests the great glacial ice sheets of North America were up to a mile thick and this may have been sufficient to help reduce the size of the crater and erode much of the evidence of the impact site once the ice melted making it virtually impossible to locate. The theory is sounding more plausible by the day.

The mysterious red layer with unusually high deposits of iron. This is taken inside Sheridan Cave in Ohio, USA. (Image from the BBC documentary film Catastrophe, 2010.).

If this isn't convincing enough, Tankersley has discovered bones of mega mammals living on the continent that have suddenly stopped existing above the crucial iron-rich red layer. As Tankersley said:

"We're looking at the Clovis layer. It's a very distinct layer here in the case. Beneath it, we have mega mammals remains. Above the layer, there are no more mega mammals. This literally represents the extinction event." (Quote from the BBC documentary film Catastrophe, 2010.)

On closer examination, the bones within the layer appear to have characteristic signs of flesh having been burned off the bone at temperatures above 300 degrees celsius which no ordinary cooking method by humans could achieve. The seemingly sudden nature of the extinction of the mega mammals in North America and the widespread nature of the iron-rich layer of soil is not suggesting to Tankersley of any possible human contribution to the extinction (well, at least in the North American continent). As Tankersley stated:

"One of the things that intrigues me about this time period and about this site is we have no clear cut answer as to what caused the extinction of these mega mammals. Over hunting, people killing these animals just does not fit. And when we look at all the other Ice Ages which came to an end, these mega mammals did not go extinct. So why now? And why here? This is one of the most intriguing questions that I've ever faced." (Quote from the BBC documentary film Catastrophe, 2010.)

It is most certainly intriguing by any account.

Yet we have a problem with this asteroid theory as the sole explanation for the extinction of all mega-mammals. This single catastrophic event that allegedly took place in North America was not sufficient to cause an immediate extinction of all mega mammals in other parts of the world, most notably the Wolly Mammoths in northern Europe and Russia. As for the theory of melting waters creating marshy grasslands to prevent the easy escape of these large animals, it would take a while for the ice to melt, probably a few months, and so permitting enough time for these animals to migrate to higher ground and in places where there would be plenty of food. And if they did somehow survive, why would the Wolly Mammoths of Europe and Russia eventually disappear from the face of the Earth after its cousins in North America did? Even the fact that Wolly Mammoths survived much colder conditions in previous Ice Ages would suggest something else must have pushed them over the edge.

To make matters worse, it isn't as if the impact was so catastrophic that it wiped out all the large animals, at least in North America. In fact, the impact wasn't even big enough to wipe out a large two-legged creature called humans. Something is telling us we can't totally discount the contributions of humans to the destruction of these great animals.

Perhaps it would be reasonable to say that there was a reduction in the number of mega-fauna at the time of the impact as suggested by Professor Tankersley, or even an extinction in North America. But in Europe and Russia, the large Wolly Mammoths persisted for longer. After the short period of colder and drier conditions following the impact, conditions began to warm up. Then we have a situation where the greater problem for these large animals was trying to survive the predator of humans. Combined with a reproductive system and method of looking after the limited numbers of offsprings taking many years, and possibly up to a couple of decades, and the constant pressure of humans hunting them down probably led to the extinction of the species.

Sure, the warming of the planet can reduce the vast grasslands spread across southeastern Europe right across to the eastern edge of Russia as a source of food for the large animals. There is even talk of extra snow falling in the United States after the ice sheets melted forcing the warm and moist air to travel further north and leaving the eastern United States in extra snow in the winter and a drier desert-like environment in the southwest of the continent. But all this would simply mean the large animals would migrate to where the food would grow. And as evidence would have it, we learn that Wolly Mammoths and other large animals did migrate north to follow the ice sheets while staying on higher ground to enjoy the dry and thick grasslands. Following them were reindeer, bisons and other animals that still exist to this day. But not the largest animals.

On a Russian island in the northern Arctic region, the last place to find the most recent remains of Wolly Mammoths showed they indeed migrated north and survived. Interestingly these animals became smaller in size to adapt to the environment on the island. But again they would not survive the last Ice Age.

There is only one explanation: humans must have reached the island and eventually played a role in the ultimate demise of the largest animals of the Ice Age era.

Why else would humans not become extinct at the same time as the other animals so soon after the last Ice Age? Somehow humans would continue to dominate and survive the cold, heat, floods, dry and anything else the universe and mother nature would care to throw at this planet only because we probably relied on these large animals as a valuable source of food and warmth to survive long enough to get through the harsh conditions. Afterwards, humans walked around in the summer and probably thought, "Where have all those big hairy elephants with large tusks gone? Have the gods been mean to us for not giving enough of our offerings to appease them and give us a bountiful supply of wild game to hunt for the summer?"

Then the humans probably came up with the bright idea of hunting some more animals of the smaller variety and later sacrificed a few to the gods thinking the large animals will return. Yet humans continued to wonder why animals were becoming extinct. Well, it doesn't take a genius to work out why.

And now the most recent evidence from American scientists of damage to bones of Ice Age giants show that the increasing population of humans had indeed been messing up the ecology of the mega-fauna with signs that humans may have targeted the large male mammoths in an unsustainable way until eventually the female mammoths didn't have a stable social structure and a reliable source of breeding to support a population that essentially was slow breeding and took a long time to look after the one or two offsprings born every so many years.

It is a most interesting piece of research from Professor Ken Tankersley that will remain intensely debated for many years to come. Until we have the final answer, one thing is certain: the last Ice Age was coming to an end. So naturally we would expect places where great flooding would take place in some parts of the world.

April 2017

Research work conducted by Dr Martin B. Sweatman, of the University of Edinburgh’s School of Engineering, has effectively sealed the case for a comet hitting the Earth as the most likely explanation after discovering another anomaly in the soil. This time platinum was found in higher concentrations than expected. But what really swayed the case in favour of the comet theory for North America is the discovery of what is the oldest known man-made stone carving showing a record of an important astronomical event. At first the symbols in the carving were interpreted as animals. Later, computer simulations of constellations in the sky for the time supporting the age of the carving through carbon-dating has pretty much confirmed the symbols represent a constellation in the sky and the arrival of a comet. Scientists were also able to pinpoint the date of the event that led to the comet hitting the Earth from the position of the symbols and computer modelling as well as carbon-dating of the carved stone to 10,950 B.C.

Following the impact, scientists remain confident that nomadic hunters in the Middle East had to adjust to a change in climate. Initially the vast areas of the Middle East grew wild wheat and barley with relative ease and a plentiful supply of water. After the impact, conditions in the Middle East got colder and drier. This forced humans to come together and figure out ways to grow and maintain the crops, through effective watering techniques and selective breeding. It is from this moment that farming began, allowing the rise of human civilisations.

As Dr Sweatman summed up the work:

"I think this research, along with the recent finding of a widespread platinum anomaly across the North American continent, virtually seal the case in favour of (a Younger Dryas comet impact).

Our work serves to reinforce that physical evidence. What is happening here is the process of paradigm change.

It appears Göbekli Tepe was, among other things, an observatory for monitoring the night sky. One of its pillars seems to have served as a memorial to this devastating event – probably the worst day in history since the end of the ice age."

Details of this research can be found in Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry (Volume 17, Number 1, pp.223-250), titled "Decoding Gobekli Tepe with Archaeoastronomy: What Does the Fox Say?"

10,500- 10,000 YEARS AGO

Interestingly, a study of some great civilisations such as the Aztecs have revealed fascinating stories of a great flood occurring at this time. Some civilisations were thought to have been destroyed and new ones formed as a result of the great flood sweeping across different parts of the world. If there is any truth to this, it would seem as if some people were oblivious to the impending disaster and were not expecting sudden floods to take place at this time.

At any rate, prehistoric man at the end of the last Ice Age continued to hunt and gather food and lived in groups of between 20 and 100 individuals, averaging about 40 people. On rare occasions, some groups in different parts of the world would swell to great numbers (approximately 10,000 people) forming what are crudely known as human civilisations. Human population throughout the world probably didn't exceed 5 million.

Michael S. Bisson from the Anthropology Department at McGill University, Montreal, Canada, said:

"At the end of the Pleistocene, there was a dramatic warming of the climate that had very important ecological consequences. First, the polar ice caps melted back significantly as well as the continental ice sheets. This raised ocean levels and isolated North America from east Asia, and also isolated Japan and parts of Indonesia from the Asian land mass. This allowed genetic drift to create new forms of new species in these different areas. At the same time, cold-adapted animals — particularly the large mammals such as the Mammoths — no longer had an environment in which they could survive and they became extinct, perhaps helped by human hunting. In other parts of the world, however, increases in temperature generated much bigger increases in biomass. Animal and plant productivity increased and this created important opportunities for humans." (Quote from the French documentary film Homo Sapiens: He Domesticates Nature produced by France 3 Production Sud-Ouest, France 5 TSR RTBF, To Do Today Productions (Belgium), CAB Productions (Switzerland), Productions Pixcom (Canada), Ballistic Pictures (South Africa), Tang Media (China), Danit Rossner (Israel). 2004.)

Michael S. Bisson. (Image from the French documentary film Homo Sapiens: He Domesticates Nature, 2004. ).

April 2017

Professor Alexander Tollmann from the institute of geology at the University of Vienna has studied numerous myths of a great flood, recorded in almost every prehistoric civilisation. The timing for these myths seem to coincide with the geological evidence for a comet impact in North America. The flood has led to many islands and caves being filled with ancient bones showing a great catastrophe had occurred in our distant past.

10,000 YEARS AGO

Definitely the last of the Wolly Mammoths, Wolly Rhinos, Bisons, and the Sabre-Toothed cats died out. The coet impact had affected the mega-fauna with the potential of extinctions in North America. But in Europe and Russia, the case is less compelling. Something else had put an end to many large animals. Perhaps a natural change in world climate resulting in the end of the Ice Age reduced the food supplies of the large herbivores?

Now we can safely say that the largest mega-fauna mammala of the Ice Age era were already on the stone age dinner plates of various human groups existing at this time. The appetite for such creatures had not waned despite a change in climate. And it is likely as well that humans were growing in numbers and finding more efficient and effective ways of hunting some animals for food and perhaps for pleasure (or sacrifice to the gods in the hope of hunting more animals). Once the main food supply was gone, it can easily bring down with it other species in the ecology.

13 May 2006

A poorly reported study in The Canberra Times (forcing readers to check the Nature edition for names of scientists involved in the work and their official quotes) claims carbon-dating of more than 600 bones from bison, wapiti, moose, humans, wild horses and mammoths recovered from Alaska and the Yukon Territory suggest the timing for human habitation was either a little late (the fossils for humans in these regions seem to point to a figure of 12,300 years ago and not earlier) or left very little time for humans to cause the extinction of an animal such as the Wolly Mammoths. Scientists are inclined to believe the extinction was probably due to natural climate change. In other words, 2,300 years is considered not enough for humans to cause the demise of a large animal such as the Wolly Mammoths in reasonable numbers. The scientists of this study, however, are putting the decline of the Wolly Mammoths at closer to 11,800 years ago, rather than 10,000 years ago. We assume this is from the fossil records. So we are left with a time frame of say 500 years for humans to do the damage.

Is it possible? Yes. But is it probable? Depends on how many humans were around and the kind of diet these humans had (was it more meat, or did it contain plant materials?).

Actually the study doesn't entirely discount the possibility humans could have had an impact. It just suggests the available human bone fragments put them at a time where it seems there was little time for whatever number of humans were around to have created the damage. But it isn't impossible. Furthermore, these humans could have been living in these areas at an earlier time. And any animals killed by humans need not have to be for food. Perhaps some humans were trying to prove how much of a man they were by killing enough Wolly Mammoths and other animals?

As for the warming of the planet starting from 13,000 years ago, one would think this would have favoured the existence of these larger animals with extra grass. Some scientists are not too sure, suggesting the muddy grasslands would be an impediment for larger animals trying to escape predators including humans.

So why not migrate to warmer and less muddy regions? Or travel closer to the poles? Animals would surely take an easier route so long as there is food beneath the snow. It would explain why these creatures had continued to survive during the previous Ice Ages and interglacial periods.

Now some scientists are certain humans had an impact after realising these larger animals were genetically predisposed to producing very few offsprings, and a number of bones from these animals show signs of spears that had been thrown at the animals by humans. If human populations expanded in the warmer interglacial period and hunted in greater numbers the remaining adult Wolly Mammoths (or even the offsprings), there may be little time for these animals to recover and produce enough surviving offsprings to maintain its own population.

Now here is an interesting theory.

But did this all occur between 12,300 and 11,800 years ago? Further work by the scientists is taking place as we speak to solve this intriguing mystery. But it is now looking like climate change pushed the animals to new areas in the north following the retreating ice sheets, whereas humans simply followed the animals until they managed to finish off the destruction of the biggest of the animals without realising what they were doing.

To add to the problem, the slow reproductive rates and slow speed of the largest mammals didn't help their cause.

Still, this isn't an excuse for humans to keep on hunting the largest animals to extinction. Just a testament of the short-sightedness of humans when it came to looking after the remaining animals in a new and changing environment.

9,800 - 6,000 YEARS AGO

For a couple of thousand years after the end of the last Ice Age (certainly by 9,800 years ago), food was considered in plentiful supply (even if animals of the mega-fauna variety were on the decline at this time). Humans could walk a short distance to gather food across the countryside without too much difficulties. In the more seasonal temperate zones, perhaps humans would still migrate to warmer regions during the winter to continue the tradition of gathering food. However something happened around 8,000 years ago to minimise this extra work.

An increasing number of humans seem to no longer be interested in migrating every year or by the seasons. Now the fear of losing valuable territory to the competition from other humans roaming the countryside became too great. Perhaps this is the origins of countries and establishing borders? The Neolithic Age had arrived. Whatever the cause for staying in one spot, it forced humans to see the usefulness of cultivating specific plants and breeding certain types of animals to help maximise and stabilise the food supply for humans in a specific region. Among the foods being cultivated and bred extensively for humans around 8,000 years ago include wheat, rice, oats, barley, cattle, chickens and goats to name a few.

Humans were also learning to store grains to last the cold winters, thereby avoiding the need to migrate to warmer lands. Just so long as humans had access to wood from the forests to burn in order to keep warm, it should pose no significant problems for humans surviving on a given territory.

The raising of farm animals in greater numbers would also coincide with an anomalous rise in the levels of two greenhouse gases in the atmosphere — in particular, methane and carbon dioxide. These gases prevented what would have been, as the scientists have come to accept as, the next expected cooling of the planet and possibly another Ice Age starting around 5,000 years ago according to recent computer models of world climate over the past 400,000 years. Except something was increasing the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere at this time, thereby ending any chances of establishing another ice age any time soon. Indeed, even today, scientists are certain we have entered the warmest period of the planet's history in more than 1 million years.

So what exactly was causing world temperature to increase?

Did humans suddenly evolve into a new species known as Homo Flaturectumus? Highly unlikely. Even if humans could have caused this abundance in greenhouse gases through massive flatulence, it would have required a massive surge in population growth and a massive consumption of food. Or were the cattle, chickens and other farm animals contributing significantly to the greenhouse gases? Certainly methane is 22 times more potent in trapping heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide. And humans would have needed to produce more animals for food. On top of that, we do know cows (a domesticated animal in the Neolithic Age) can produce considerably greater amounts of methane than humans.

Or what about the cutting down of trees and the burning of wood by humans?

Evidence to support the increase in the two important greenhouse gases by around 5,000 years ago comes from precise measurements into the types and amount of each gas found present in the ancient atmosphere through tiny ancient air bubbles trapped in the Antarctic ice. As Professor Bill Ruddiman of the University of Virginia said during a meeting of the American Geophysical Union on Tuesday 9 December 2003:

"[An analysis of the gases trapped in the ice shows] You have 395,000 years of history, which sets some rules, and 5000 years that break those rules." (2)

The observations indicate methane and carbon dioxide are on the rise. So what was causing the increase in greenhouse gases? Ruddiman suggested humans were affecting the climate in a slow and steady rate over a period of 3,000 years because of the way they were organising their natural environment nearly 8,000 years ago. He believes it is possible the clearing of forests, planting crops and raising livestock were integral to explaining the rise in greenhouse gases.

8,000 - 7,000 YEARS AGO

Life was getting a little easier for people thanks to the sudden increase in food supplies. As a result, trade had to be considered integral at this time. Trade is the means by which people can acquire, sell and buy foods, tools, clothing and other services from a central point (usually within easy distance from a major population centre where people want live and/or where the source of the materials to make the products are easy to obtain).

Among the new and valuable materials being discovered and sold for a successful trade at this time include a rare and one of the hardest substances on Earth called obsidian formed by lava cooling rapidly. Because of its hardness and durability, this glass-like material was fashioned into cutting implements considered more sharper and tougher than stone implements. On a less violent note, this was also the material for making the world's first artificial and portable mirrors for humans to look at themselves (3). Not such a bad idea considering humans were having an increasing influence on the environment.

7,000 to 7,500 YEARS AGO

The Black Sea made its grand and rather dramatic and sudden appearance just a tad over 7,000 years ago when the Mediterranean Sea rose high enough to break through a wall of rock and soil of several miles in length. It is also quite feasible, being in an earthquake-prone region, that movements in the Earth's crust may have also contributed to the collapse of the wall by weakening it. However, the latter remains a matter of conjecture. What we do know, however, is that the water was definitely rising and the Black Sea did get suddenly formed roughly 2,000 to 3,000 years after the Mediterranean Sea was created.

The location for this great flooding to form the Black Sea is rather interesting because it is believed this is the place where the fabled story of an old man named Noah, his few "chosen" people, and various animals he rounded up from the region, had survived a great flood thanks to his remarkable effort to build a large wooden vessel described as the Ark.

Did such a story take place in reality? Or was it a great way for humans to teach the next generation the importance of taking with them certain things to help survive major calamities? Apart from the geological evidence for the flooding, we can only go by what's mentioned in the Bible. A dubious source, perhaps? Still, the story has not changed for thousands of years and it is probably worth mentioning. Indeed, if the story had been made-up by some creative genius as a means of entertaining simple-minded and less-educated children and adults alike for the sake of making a bit of money on the side and yet still managed to pass on an important message of how to survive disasters (relevant to today and in the future for any civilisation), the story would have changed many times over and been embellished with more elaborate and amazing scenes and by now we would know the story would be impossible to believe. Apparently this isn't the case (so long as we ignore the latest "over the top" Hollywood movie starring Russell Crowe having its more than fair share of the creative license applied to the story). The great effort to remember this story by many generations of people in its original form suggests there could be some reality behind it (whether scientists like it or not).

If one could accept this story as having some basis in truth and related to an actual event, there is a more disturbing element to the story: it concerns the presence of a thing called God. Apparently, whatever this entity is and the reason for getting involved in the event and with humans, it seems we have another aspect to this story to contend with. How can we explain God?

Of course, we can always go the totally supernatural way by depicting God (and its various "angels" designed to help God by being the eyes and ears of God and even to assist certain humans in achieving certain things) in all sorts of fancy CGI graphics as we have seen in Russell Crowe's Noah. Unfortunately, this will only confuse things further. In order to bring out some sense of reality to this story while considering the possibility of a God guiding humans along the right path (given how many times this gets mentioned in the Bible), we could picture this story in a slightly more believable way. Here is how we can approach it.

What we can say is that the universe is unlikely to be devoid of life (other than our planet). Although this is not scientifically proven (until we discover and use the right technology to visit neighbouring stars and observe the Earth-like planets out there, or one of these technically-advanced life forms choose to visit our planet and make some form of contact), we can expect other forms of life beyond the Earth to exist and be technically more advanced than we are. And given what is now possible through the laws of electromagnetism to build an exponentially-accelerating vessel (see Can UFOs Advance Science? A New Look at the Evidence), there is absolutely no reason to believe it is impossible for other lifeforms not to be able to reach the Earth. With this in mind, it would not be beyond the realms of scientific possibility to consider contact between certain humans in the past and one of these visiting "aliens". If so, we can probably understand how some Biblical writers might create a word to describe these people from the sky. Hence the word "God" in our vocabulary.

Or are we dealing with a "god" or "gods"?

Interestingly, the Biblical writers do make a distinction between "god" and "God". Basically, the one who is hidden behind the scenes (usually behind some cloud in the sky to camouflage itself), making all the decisions, and sending down "angels" as messengers to carry out the decisions and/or inform certain humans of what will happen, is often described as "God". Whereas those angels that decide to influence human affairs are just simply called "gods". Is this technically accurate? Or are we dealing with a more knowledgeable and technically-advanced "god" that directs other less-knowledgeable "gods" to do its bidding?

Just to add to this confusion, we learn how the Jewish scholars nearly 2,000 years ago had trouble seeing themselves as "gods" despite a famous young carpenter who later sacrificed himself on the cross to prove a point about life after death and the power of love from God stating to these skeptical scholars that we should see ourselves as "gods", but not "God".

As it is not an impossibility for life in the universe to exist and given the age of the Milky Way that would allow an advanced civilisation to have the means of reaching the Earth and possibly influencing us (for whatever reason), mentioning this God connection for certain events here on Earth according to certain stories should not be an uncomfortable affair. We just need to be open-minded. And that means we need to acknowledge this possibility from certain stories passed down through the generations to this day, no matter how fantastic it may seem, at least for now. This is particularly true as we have yet to disprove certain stories. The story of Noah is an example where science cannot say for sure whether it happened or not. It is a strong possibility that it could have happened, so we must consider it.

Okay. So we have this amazing story and its likely connection to the formation of the Black Sea. What could have happened based on what is said in the Bible, but with a little more reality?

If we can give this remarkable story in the Bible some credence, then it would appear that this old man called Noah probably lived in a highly fertile valley at the time. Everything was available in reasonable abundance to the point where he and other men (and women) probably never had to venture beyond the mountains that bordered this valley to see the wider world. There is also a sense that this old man lived his life, together with his wife and children, in relative independence from other people in the valley, mainly because he felt that he did not "fit in" with society. Perhaps this was out-of-concern for the direction in which his fellow humans were heading, which wasn't to his liking. Perhaps he saw a lot of corruption and bad behaviour that wasn't promoting the true principle of love and he decided to keep away from the people as much as possible. At any rate, a point came in his life when Noah suddenly decided he would build a rather large wooden boat while the days remained sunny and the land was relatively dry. Well, at least for many generations of people living in the valley, it seemed impossible that any rain could be big enough to flood the valley. So perhaps those who watched Noah build his Ark must have laughed themselves silly at the sight of a man who they thought had lost his marbles building a boat in a place where they did not expect a flood to come. Yet something convinced Noah to do exactly the thing he did. Sure, the trees were available in reasonable quantities to make the task easier (probably revealing the true fertile extent of the valley, and certainly not some kind of miracle of God instantly building the forest for Noah as we see in Russell Crowe's movie). Yet something had convinced the old man to pursue his ambitious plan? Why? And what gave him such confidence to pursue the goal? These are very good questions to ask. And probably the hardest questions to answer because we have come to the only sticking point in the whole story that somehow needs an explanation. It is the part where things do get a little concerning for the rational scientist (especially when the evidence remains lacking). Well, according to the Bible, the old man claimed his inspiration to build the boat came from a mysterious entity called God. Apparently, God came to him one day or night and spoke to him and recommended that this is what he should do. If it was a hallucination, it was a particularly powerful one. Otherwise he probably would have ignored it, especially if he had some rational skills (which apparently he did given his skills as a carpenter and building a formidable and effective vessel to protect his family and the animals he would carry inside). But something drove him to do what he did, no matter how incredible this God-human intervention might seem.

One could argue that perhaps Noah suffered from schizophrenia, but he isn't the only old man in history to have heard voices from God as we shall see later, and to somehow know when a disaster would come.

At any rate, among the words spoken to Noah was the idea that he should bring into the boat two of every animal (obviously of opposite genders, to make any sense). This would be described in the written story, perhaps with a little creative license, as all the animals in the world. However, as we all know, the man's understanding of the world probably extended to no more than 50 kilometres from where he lived. The valley itself must have been isolated or contained everything he and his family ever needed and rarely if ever ventured far to get anything else. So maybe this is just a play on words. Anyway the idea of preserving things is interesting. It is, in fact, an important lesson we can all learn for any civilisation in the universe. Even today we know of the upcoming calamity of global warming and the extinctions we are already facing. Thus it would be prudent even in the 21st century to create our own technological Ark to save the DNA material of those animals (and plants) expected to disappear from this planet. And what about in the much more distant future when the Earth eventually disappears and we must survive elsewhere in the universe? Should we not take some animal and plant materials with us to help continue evolution and keep us alive? In the case of Noah, we can see how he wanted to preserve as many animals as he could, but surprisingly no evidence of plants as well. How odd? If this disaster was to be a global event, surely the plants would get wiped out too, wouldn't it? Otherwise, the impending disaster could not be as widespread as we are led to believe by God, in which case even this tiniest of detail in the story could be rather telling and may help us to understand the true nature and extent of the disaster. Maybe we are dealing with the formation of the Black Sea and nothing else?

Whatever we might think about this knowledge of biologically preserving things or any aspect of the disaster itself, luckily for the old man he listened and followed God's word right down to a tee. A particularly wise decision no doubt as it turned out the time of the flood was during an unseasonally rainy period lasting many days and nights. Those people living in the valley thought this was just a particularly wet period and would soon pass as it normally does. Or if a few did feel a sense that perhaps Noah was right and there could be a flood, some may have tried to convince Noah to allow them to get onboard the Ark. Noah clearly refused.

Suddenly the wall of rock and soil separating the Mediterranean Sea from this ancient deep and fertile valley broke. The once impossible possibility was fast becoming a reality as the waters from the Mediterranean Sea began rushing into the valley with great force. Perhaps more of a testament of how little people knew of the wider world around them. In fact, when the flood did arrive, it would be very easy for Noah and his people to think the entire world was engulfed in water. Certainly the story gives us this impression. We have to say these people in the valley didn't travel very far and had no idea what was about to hit them.

Then the floods came. The people on land quickly drowned. With the Ark resting on top of a small hill to allow the rapidly rising and turbulent waters to surround the boat and lift it off its moorings, those "chosen by God" (via the old man) including the animals were kept relatively safe and dry. No doubt a little rough in the early stages as the turbulent waters tossed and turned the boat in various directions, but eventually the waters would settle down.

For allegedly up to 5 months (according to the Bible) the boat either drifted aimlessly or was pushed around by the flow of the water. Again this reveals a little more about the purpose of the boat, which is clearly not designed for sailing the winds to get to a destination fast, but rather to save the animals and selected humans in order to endure a period of time on the newly-formed sea. To the simple-minded folks on the boat, this could have been seen as another great test in determining how faithful everyone was to God in delivering them to safety, wherever this might be found. When land was eventually sighted again it would either be on the new shores of the Black Sea or the boat had been pushed up onto the slope of a large hill and as the waters receded came to ground somewhere in the country we call Turkey.

As we would expect, Noah didn't come out of his boat straight away. The ground was too wet. He waited at least another month. Very sensible. Combine this with the period of rain that lasted more than a month and another week or so prior to the rains and we must presume Noah was in the Ark anywhere between 7 months and perhaps up to a year. That's a long time. It would certainly make some scientists wonder how big the boat would have been to hold enough animals and the food required for the journey. And could one man or even with the help of some people around him build the boat? Was there a great forest in the valley at the time? Or did Noah receive any help from human-like but very strong angels from God to build the Ark? And how long would it take to build such an Ark? The truth is, we really don't know.

Or perhaps the reality is that there really wasn't that many animals in the first place to gather — only those that lived in the valley? In which case, the boat could be a lot smaller and more easily built by one man and his small family.

Whether or not such a story is true (it has certainly not stopped many Christians in modern times from searching for the evidence in the hope of ultimately proving the existence of God), some scientists are starting to question who or what is God (if there is any evidence of extraterrestrial interventions in the past) given the way this mysterious entity keeps managing to crop up more than a few times throughout human history and at the right times to warn certain individuals of natural and cataclysmic events. Perhaps these events are nothing more than a mere coincidence? Or could there be something special about this mysterious God?

This would not be the last time God made its presence known to humans. Indeed, the next significant story to survive the ages and to suggest the possible existence of God was when another old man was approached by this mysterious entity and asked to save his own people from a ruthless Egyptian pharoah just before another natural disaster would take place. This old man would be named Moses.

5,000 - 7,000 YEARS AGO

World human populations reach around 50 million nearly 7,000 years ago (i.e. 5,000 B.C.E).

At around this time, ancient people visiting the island of Malta in the Mediterranean Sea were initially greeted with a natural environment abundant with vegetation and a reasonably fertile soil. Then around 5,000 years ago (i.e. 3,000 B.C.E), the societies on the island effectively denuded the fragile landscape of its natural vegetation, allowing severe soil erosion to rob the land of its productivity. Soon many humans living on the island had to go through periods where agricultural yields became unpredictable and costs to produce food went up. Then a hierarchical structure was set up by certain rich and powerful leaders in order to control the remaining resources. The farmers became more introverted, less educated and worked tirelessly for a few powerful extraverted people who had knowledge of the outside world and used whatever methods available to control the information in order to maintain power over the working class people. Those who did not do as they were told would experience extreme poverty. Then the people of Malta had less and less produce to sell to people in Italy and the rest of Europe. People on the island relied less on imports from other countries. Life was getting harder and harder. It wasn't long before people turned to religious sculpture and art where the people began worshipping the gods, hoping the foods would be plentiful again by the next season (sounds familiar?).

As starvation and death became a common sight among the Maltese societies, the people showed a religious obsession with life and death.

Small stone statuettes from the island showing images of obese human figures as a sign of fertility were common. The large numbers of such stone artifacts gives an indication of the obsession these people had with religion when the environment was already seriously damaged.

To make matters worse, a cult society with a religious hierarchy consisting of priests at the top of this controlling structure appeared in the final stages of the societies' collapse around 4,500 years ago. People were made to feel compelled to honour the dead, placing the dead in burial chambers and caves, following many religious rites, making statuettes to link the dead with animals and human obesity, and expending immense energy to build temples at the request of the priests. All this in the hope the gods would be appeased and give the people the food they needed.

Soon the death toll rose and the need for people to remove the older bones to make room for the dead became paramount.

Then suddenly something changed. Not long after all of this religious activities, all this temple building suddenly ceased, the priests lost power, and a new religious practice began. By around 4,000 years ago (i.e. 2,000 B.C.E.), the old religious culture disappeared in favour of cremation burials. No more statuettes of fat women would be created from this moment on. It is as if the people finally saw the light and decided to start a new life.

Today, the people of Malta live on a hilly relatively treeless island with very little fresh water and a land seemingly inhospitable for farmers to grow anything. The people rely more on fishing as the essential source of food, the tourism dollar, and food imports from its neighbouring countries to survive.


German amateur mountaineer Helmut Simon and his wife discovered in September 1991 the remains of what is now come to be known as "The Iceman" or Ötzi as many local people in the area would affectionately prefer to call him. Believed to have lived in central-northern European through careful DNA analysis, the 159-centimetre tall iceman died in late spring or early summer while sheltering behind a rock in the treacherous Alps nearly 5,300 years ago (i.e. the Neolithic, or New Stone Age period). So dangerous is this part of the world that Mr Simon fell to his own death in October 2004 near the spot where Ötzi was discovered just when the weather suddenly turned bad.

Other people were also caught in the storm and had to be rescued by helicopter. Such bad weather is believed to be how Ötzi came to his end.

Analysis of the body suggests he died at the ripe old age of 46 years. Some evidence of arthritis can be observed in the lower spine, right knee and ankle suggesting he did a lot of walking through the mountains. A look at the contents of his last meal suggests he may have been a shaman relying on medicinal mushrooms and grains for his sustenance. But he also ate red deer and alpine ibex (wild goat) to complement his diet.

Clothing consisted of a bearskin hat, three layers of clothing — consisting of leggings, loincloth and jacket made of deer hide and goat, and a cape made of grass and bast — and shoes made of bearskin soles, goat-skin uppers and grass to insulate his feet.

The man was involved in some fighting with x-ray images revealing an arrowhead in his shoulder blade according to Paul Gostner and Eduard Egarter Vigl of the Regional Hospital of Bolzano in Italy. There is also a deep cut between the index finger and the thumb on the right hand. Histological analysis of the cut suggests the injury happened between three and eight days before his death. And DNA tests confirmed traces of blood on his clothing from four different people according to Tom Loy of the University of Queensland.

So who was the iceman and what was he doing towards the end of his life?

Scientists have speculated on his life based on emerging evidence. The first explanation suggested by scientists is that he was a shepherd preparing for a usual trip over the mountains in early alpine springtime. Except on this occasion the weather turned nastier than he expected and his health for such an old man was not as good as he thought. Maybe this is how he died.

Some scientists, notably Professor Walter Leitner of the University of Innsbruck, has suggested an alternative explanation as more forensic details emerged since 2003. The appearance of an arrowhead in the shoulder blade and the presence of a sharp axe the old man was carrying around suggests he may have been a travelling trader and blacksmith dealing in recycling copper for local communities. Being a stranger, it is possible he may have got himself into a fight with young rivals and tried to escape by foot over the mountains where he hoped the rivals would not pursue him. This he may have succeeded. But on this occasion, despite his experience with the mountains, he may have timed it badly when the weather suddenly turned nasty and a blizzard ensured he paid the ultimate price. Either that or this old man was being pursued into the mountains by his rivals who wanted him dead but decided not to hunt him down after seeing how quickly the weather was turning bad. Or maybe these assailants did manage to catch the old man and had already ended his life up in the mountains or had left him for dead when they saw the weather getting worse?

The latest forensic evidence suggests a third and final explanation. This explanation suggests he was not a stranger but a local. Trace isotope elements in the teeth composed of strontium 87/88 and oxygen suggests he didn't travel further than 60 kilometres from where he was born. Combined with the deep fresh cut in his hand which could be a defensive move against a sharp implement and the blood from four different individuals on his clothes and axe, it is possible the man was involved in a major fight between tribal groups near the end of his life.

Weakened by his wounds, he could have decided to make a desperate trip over the mountains to return to his homeland only to be caught in a severe blizzard.

The truth is, scientists don't really know for sure. We have tantalising glimpses into the life of the iceman. But not enough to give a firm answer as to what really happened to him.


The first known evidence of writing as a means of recording events, how much of something was available, and various other things is thought to have began during this time. Record-keeping on animal skin was primarily to mark how much or how many of something was available, who did what, and when is the best time to grow food and perform certain ceremonies (considered by some psychologists as a strongly L-brain activity).

As the development of writing was taking place, the Bronze Age also began at around this time (i.e. 3,000 BC) in the area we call Mesopotamia. Prior to the invention of bronze, people were still using stones, copper and obsidian as tools.

Apart from the L-brain skills needed to develop effective writing and communication, this was also an inventive time (i.e. a R-brain skill) when the lands of Mesopotamia were sufficiently fertile enough to grow enough food for everyone, allowing certain individuals to become specialized craftsmen learning to experiment in making fine works of art and practical everyday implements and tools using different materials.

It was at this time when certain craftsmen learned to combine tin and copper in their smelting furnaces to create a new metal called bronze. Bronze had the benefit of being a much harder material than ordinary copper and resulted in the development of more durable products.

At first bronze tools were made for the rich and powerful in society. After a while it slowly tricked down to the rest of society. For very low costs, pottery made from clay and heated in a furnace still remained the best option for most people for carrying food and water or storing other items.

However being rich can bring out the worse in other people as they fight for the riches. Therefore the need for a new metal such as bronze to protect the rich and the infrastructure eventually grabbed the attention of the military and soon bronze became the metal of choice for building more sophisticated weapons.

4,900 - 3,000 YEARS AGO

Humans had well and truly discovered the usefulness of metals for creating very sharp cutting implements considered vital for hunting, protection and fighting other predators (including humans).

Metals used by humans in the early stages tended to be of the soft variety (e.g. copper) resulting in the metals getting easily damaged after repeated blows or for cutting. As more metals were discovered, human were clever enough to carefully select the right ones (e.g. bronze at around 5,000 years ago and iron at around 3,300 years ago) for their hardness and durability and were fashioned using new technologies to help melt the metals and combine them in the right way as well as clever techniques to harden the metals such as rapid cooling and adding some impurities like carbon to the metals. Now if only humans were smart enough to resolve differences and survival issues without having to fight other humans.

NOTE: Military wars still remained common at this time as people enjoyed a sense of power and wanted to expand territories to gather valuable resources for their survival and wealth. Metals were considered a new and important part of the military at this time. Today, humans are no different except for the metals we use — now progressed to the use of titanium for jet fighters and missiles.

Leaving metals side, horses became the next animal to be domesticated by humans. This time horses were seen as useful creatures to help carry humans and their accumulated possessions over relatively large distances in almost any environment (except for the deserts where camels came into their own), and to overwhelm the enemy with shear size and speed together with the skills of the rider to wield a sword and other weapons.


Although it is quite likely civilisations have existed prior to this time and we just don't know about it until the archaeologists dig holes in the right places, the world's oldest known human civilisations (proven by archaeological finds) have been dated to this time.

One might logically ask, "Why create a civilisation?" Good question. Maybe the answer lies in the sorts of benefits people can receive with the least amount of effort (i.e., within short walking distances from people's homes — in 2013 it should be described as being within arms length in terms of ordering products and services on the internet with a computer) when getting into a group situation with other human beings.

With a variety of new and exciting products made with metals, mirrors (for people to look at themselves and discover how important it is to look attractive to a potential mate), hallucinatory drugs from various plants, new clothing materials (essentially to cover those parts of the human body that were likely to cause sexual problems in the opposite gender or to deliberately enhance sexual drive at the right place and time with the right partner, as well as for more practical reasons such as to keep warm, dry and better protect people from the consequences of war such as a metal helmet), and other services (e.g. sex) to meet the needs and wants of people at this time and so make life more bearable and enjoyable, trade had to exist. Where there was significant trade in a confined area, the propensity for humans to develop a large civilisation would have been great. The rest of what is needed to maintain a civilisation in terms of building houses, laying down roads and other infrastructure would come naturally in order to make the trade easier to take place and give people more of a reason to stay in one spot knowing the products and services are essentially there whenever they wished to walk outside the door to get them. In essence, a civilisation just makes life easier for everyone.

Already we see one reason why a civilisation would exist thanks to trade.

Similarly, the art of war can lead to the development of a civilisation. As people discovered, getting into a group situation helps improve the chances of all individuals in that group to survive when fighting against other humans. However, in periods when no fighting takes place, these fighting men needed other people to provide the food and various services to keep the "military" group alive and in return provide protection from marauding invaders. Hence the development of fences and later large, tall and very thick stone walls as a means of keeping the enemies outside.

Despite the reasons for creating a civilisation, there is the question of how long a civilisation can be maintained?

Or to put it another way, would the people of a civilisation become so successful in surviving that there is plenty of time to develop many of the more R-brain activities such as the arts? Or does religion become increasingly more important as people use up the remaining resources and soon contemplate the issue of death, why we are here, and what happens to us when we die? Or do the L-brain skills continue to dominate a civilisation to brutally fight on and conquer regardless of the potential benefit of other people to solve all world problems all for the sake of acquiring everything in the known world?

Or is there something else to maintain the civilisation?

Whatever maintains a civilisation, the people must have some kind of a belief to support the existence of that civilisation. People have to believe in something and one which had to be in common with others in the civilisation in order for the civilisation to be maintained and supported for a long time.

Otherwise without a belief, brute force must be used on ordinary citizens to keep them working under the rulers or leaders who have created their own beliefs. In fact, this latter approach is something we see in ancient Egypt.

For the Egyptian civilisation that first flourished nearly 2600 BC (or 4,600 years ago), great wealth, power and importance was thought to be the dominant theme for the leaders. Why? Certain rich individuals realised they could live longer by being rich and powerful (perhaps they were initially very wealthy traders succeeding in their own areas). Hence a belief was born that perhaps they could live forever by somehow being the richest and most powerful leaders in the known world and acquiring all that they desired just to maintain this irrational and ill-conceived belief.

We can sort of see how this belief might come about.

Just imagine it. We have certain Egyptian traders getting fabulously wealthy. With all this wealth came the opportunity to relax and enjoy life. All the traders had to do was employ others to carry on the business while continuing to benefit from the profits. As this helped to free up more time for the rich people, they must have contemplated the issue of death at some point and made some interesting observations. From these observations came certain interpretations. One of the observations acquired by these wealthy traders was how much longer they could live compared to ordinary folks on the streets (assuming these poorer people were not killed prematurely by others in terms of unexpected accidents, food poisoning or some other means). Somehow being rich by having higher quality foods and water, and having better protection from the sun by staying indoors for longer inside buildings made of stone instead of tents made of animal hide or basic wood, had some mysterious way of extending the life of human beings.

Thus an initial belief would be formed in the minds of these rich and powerful leaders suggesting the richer and more powerful you became, the more likely you could live forever.

Yet still the issue of death must have enter their minds as they observed their own loved ones eventually pass away no matter how healthy and enormously rich they were. Somehow these people could not understand the reason for death and why it exists in this universe. The fallacy of living forever must have ht home eventually when even the most powerful and richest leaders must eventually die. Something else had to drive these rich and powerful people to believe in a new way of understanding what happens after death in order to maintain the civilisation.

How do we get around this thorny issue of death?

At some point in the history of the first Egyptian pharaoh, a leader must have took it upon himself to believe that death is not much different than sleeping. Furthermore, as we all know, people sleeping will eventually have to wake up. Until that moment comes, how do we prevent the body from decaying too quickly so that the gods will have the power to bring them back to life or enter some kind of new afterlife (whatever actually occurs after death for these people)?

The obsession into the secret to true immortality by the first Egyptian pharoah has meant the belief was extended to not only include riches and wealth as a way of living longer, but also a means of preserving their bodies when they do fall into the ultimate deep sleep. So they gave other people what they needed (mainly food and basic shelter), and in return they asked the people to build the extravagant stone pyramids of Giza and other monuments and riches to help these dysfunctional leaders achieve their ultimate goal of travelling to the afterlife.

This is one religious belief we all know about after studying the lives of ancient Egyptians and their leaders.

Of course not all people of a civilisation will follow this belief.

In other civilisations (and possibly in Egyptian life), sex may be seen as a way to achieve immortality (especially among rich women in the upper echelons of society) as it made people believe they were younger (4). In some cases, women in these civilisations may work their way to become matriarchies (or leaders where the inheritance is transferred down the female line from mother to daughters). The men, however, are happy to perform work to produce the foods and have what they need and later provide the necessary sex to make the women think they will live forever young.

Or some people in other civilisations may simply see men and women as being equal with no need to create a hierarchy or an overarching belief system. They work together to achieve a common goal and perhaps become leaders in their own right in their particular area of expertise. And yet somehow manage to see each other as vital to each other's existence. An example of this is the group of Neolithic people living at the edge of a river on the plains of central Turkey nearly 9,000 years ago in a town now known as Catalhoyuk. In this society, men and women lived under the same roofs, performing similar tasks on an equal level, and were buried together under the floor at the time of death. In this ancient Turkish society, statuettes and paintings of a dominant woman with a wild seed lodged in her back and placing a hand on the heads of leopards together with statuettes of a dominant man or an animal with an erect penis or an association between a man with a wild animal, such as a bull, were quite common. Are these artefacts telling us women are important for agricultural activities and men for hunting animals or tending to livestock? Whatever the truth, it seems both men and women within this society saw each other as important and equal members in society from their elaborate artworks.

In other situations, temporary civilisations may suddenly appear around large stone temples and monuments marking important seasons in the yearly calendar. This is vital information in terms of knowing when to sow seeds for food, or keep a record of the animals in the local region at a time when the land was plentiful and green as a means of teaching the younger generation of humans to hunt for these foods when they arrived. A classic example of the latter type of stone monuments can be found in Gobekli Tepe in Turkey. Actually, these Turkish monuments are interesting in that these were carved out by humans more than 10,000 B.C., or around the end of the last Ice Age. The monuments are particularly well preserved raising questions among archaeologists as to how they were carved with such craftsmanship when no tools have been found. However, one thing that has helped with the preservation was the decision by the people at the time to bury the monuments in sand perhaps to avoid them being destroyed by other humans. And it may also suggest human civilisations may have an earlier origin. So the potential is there to say the oldest civilisations appeared around the end of the last Ice Age. More work is being carried out to determine how true this is.

In essence, no matter how we come together to create a civilisation, forming a group has to be seen as a natural progression and the beginnings of any civilisation. Groups form because there is a common belief (e.g. the need to survive, feel secure, produce food, have sex or anything else to help make ourselves feel loved or taken care of and so be able to give greater meaning to life and our existence) through the help of others in the group. Building roads, houses and other infrastructure is a natural outcome when people provide products and services to one another and receive something in return in order to make life easier for each other to obtain and remain healthy and so achieve certain goals (hopefully for the good of the group).

It is clear groups can form for a variety of reasons. Fortunately the majority of the reasons can be roughly explained in terms of whether the people can come together from a R-brain approach such as creating and selling new and attractive products on popular trade routes, or whether groups can form from a more rational L-brain approach such as acquiring (or plundering) existing things and selling them at higher prices, or when there is regular warfare and people had to survive by being in a group to fend off other humans. It depends on the situation and place and how people have learned the easiest way to survive.

If a civilisation can survive long enough without destroying its food supply and can look after its environment and its people, a combination of L- and R-brain approaches will ensure all problems get solved and new ways of thinking are created by a broader range of people within the group and so maintain the civilisation forever.

But as we shall see, many civilisations have not survived the test of time by taking this balanced approach. And now questions are being raised as to whether our modern civilisation will end in the same way? Or will a new civilisation emerge from the old and start a new way of thinking about ourselves, our universe and our purpose in it?

We can only speculate at the present time the future for our own civilisation.


Around 2184 BC, the ancient "Old Kingdom" Egyptian civilisation plunged into chaos as a result of catastrophic climate change.

Initial analysis of satellite images for the Nile delta region made by Dr Sarah Parcak of the University of Alabama suggested something abruptly stopped pyramid building followed by a significant collapse in the number of "Old Kingdom" settlements soon after the death of the pharoah Pepi II Neferkare (reigned c.2278 BC - c.2184 BC). Why the collapse?

The key to explaining the collapse has to do with the Nile River during certain weather conditions prevalent in Ethiopia and the temperature of the waters in the North Atlantic ocean at the time.

Running along the shores of the Nile River stretching from Aswan to the Mediterranean coast including the delta region lies a thriving agricultural centre. In fact, so important was agriculture that many Egyptian people clung to the Nile River for their dependence on growing or acquiring ready-made natural foods (relying on freshly killed and clean fish and bread, which is now understood to be low in iron given the amount of exercise needed by the Egyptian people to build the pyramids and tombs) and water at this time. The rich and fertile soils created by silt deposited by the Nile River during annual floods helped to feed literally tens of thousands of people who worked for the pharoahs as tomb and pyramid builders, as well as the people growing, gathering and supplying the food and all the various other services needed by the builders. However the success of the Nile River to provide fertile soils depended crucially on annual floods to continue depositing rich and fertile silt to Egypt.

However something would affect the annual floods from depositing silt for a long period of time.

Thanks to the work of paleoclimatologist/oceanographer Dr Peter deMenocal from Columbia University and the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, New York, USA, scientists now believe the cause for this was a catastrophic change in climate. Dr deMenocal analysed drilled core samples taken from the Gulf of Oman downwind from Egypt and noticed a two to six times increase in the amount of dolomite (or sand/dust) deposited over the ocean to fall to the ocean floor as sediment at around 2200 BC give or take 100 years (dated by analysis of carbon-14). The only other time this had happened was during the last ice age until about 10,000 years ago. This told Dr deMenocal there had to be a rather severe and century long drought affecting all of Egypt and other neighbouring countries.

Other drilled cores obtained from the "Old Kingdom" sites by Dr Fekri Hassan of the University College London would show a similar increase in the amount of sand present during this period of great drought compared to the long periods of silt deposits during the more prosperous years.

The only explanation: the annual Nile floods for delivering the silt to the shores and delta region had significantly diminished for an extended period of time because of no rains higher up the river in the Ethiopian region. In essence, the people of Egypt had experienced an extended and severe drought.

Scientists believe at least 80 per cent of the water in the Nile River had disappeared during the great drought. The severity of the drought would also coincide with the collapse of around half a dozen civilisations in Greece, Turkey and Iraq.

And in more recent analysis of drilled cores in the Great Lakes sediments of North America by Walter Dean of the US Geological Survey in Denver and a Peruvian mountain glacier by Lonnie G. Thompson of Ohio State University and his colleagues, there is indication the drought had a global impact at this time. But unlike the Egyptians, the native North and South Americans did have places to find or grow food.

Why was it so severe and widespread?

Dr deMenocal thinks he may have the answer. He believes the only way it can happen is for the natural conveyancing system of the North Atlantic for delivering warm water and with it a warmer and wetter climate to Europe had somehow stopped. The result was a mini-Ice Age in northern Europe and North America, and a severe drought in Egypt, northern Africa, Turkey and the Mediterranean coast.

The desertification of North Africa to form the Sahara desert is also thought to be the result of regular droughts made worse by humans extracting the last remaining vegetation for their survival. It is just that the drought of 2200 BC made the situation so much worse than expected.

A papyrus written centuries later after Egypt recovered (i.e. the "Middle Kingdom") gave indications of how bad things got for the people of ancient Egypt. It stated people had to eat their own children in order to survive the drought.

Further details can be found in the 2008 documentary The Fall of Ancient Egypt (produced by IWC Media Productions for the Discovery Channel).

3,750 - 3,500 YEARS AGO

An incredible story handed down through the generations by the Hebrews, and later written down in a scripture and eventually combined with other scriptures by ruling Christian patriachs to form what is now called the Bible would have its origins at around this time thanks to some rather persistent (yet very good) work by archaeologists and the efforts of a Jewish Canadian filmmaker named Simcha Jacobovici to find scientific clues to help support the story.

According to the Book of Exodus in the Bible and latest archaeological findings, it is claimed that sometime between 3,750 and 3,500 years ago (or 1,750 - 1,500 B.C), the Israelites known as the Hebrews led by a man named Jacob moved into a small fertile area in the Nile delta (possibly at Avaris, the capital for a group of mysterious foreigners called Hyksos arriving to the region, as discovered by Professor Manfred Bietak of the Austrian Archaeological Institute). It is not clear whether the land was leased to them by the Egyptians. Nevertheless, the land was fertile enough to grow an abundance of food for the people and soon they developed trade with Egypt and Greece. When Jacob passed away, his son Joseph took over the reigns of leadership where he soon became a powerful leader.

Closer to around 3,500 years ago, Egyptian pharoahs of the "Middle Kingdom" became afraid of revolutions as it could undermine their power and authority in the land. Eventually the pharoahs instigated a policy of drowning every Israelite male infant in the area to prevent a possible uprising against the Egyptian rulers at some point in the future. When news of the deadly scheme to kill their baby boys reached the Israelites, there was little time except for Jacob's great, great grandson, a baby at the time, to be placed in a basket on the shores of the Nile river and left to nature to take its course.

Luckily for the baby, he was found in amongst tall reeds on the shore of the Nile by the daughter of a rich and powerful Egyptian pharoah. Not knowing who it was owned by, she looked at the innocent and handsome baby. Did she think it was a gift from the gods? Or did she know the baby was an Israelite? It was probably the former case since the Egyptian woman decided she would take care of it. Remarkably there were no signs of disagreement from the Egyptian pharoah over her decision.

Not long after, the Egyptians rounded up the remaining Israelites and forced them to work as slaves.

Over the next 20 years, the baby was brought up as an Egyptian with the knowledge of how to read and write and all the etiquettes of upper class life while living a life of relative luxury.

Then one day, as the young man emerged into the real world, looked around, and tried to make sense of what he saw, he noticed how a group of foreigners consisting mostly of Hebrews were brought in as slaves and worked tirelessly for the pharoah. More importantly, he saw how badly these slaves were treated by their Egyptian captor. Based on his understanding of the principle of love, he knew this was wrong. Something had to change.

It is hard to tell at this point whether he realised this group of slaves was part of his own heritage and blood. All we know is that he witnessed the mistreatment and knew in his mind that it was wrong. For a young man seeing these terrible acts of cruelty by one human to another, hatred must have welled up inside of him. Eventually he plucked up the courage and conviction to do something about it. Even if it meant destroying whatever promising future he may have had in his adopted Egyptian family, he believed he would not be one of those rich people who would ignore and pretend everything is okay and things should be the way it is in return for living a comfortable life while these oppressed Israelites were being mistreated.

One day, the young man confronted the Egyptian captor after seeing more evidence of brutality with the slaves. Somehow a fight took place, the Egyptian was killed (perhaps it was nothing more than a firm physical push by the young man that caused the Egyptian to fall over and hit his head on a rock). Now the young man knew he could no longer remain in Egypt as such a crime was punishable by death. So he fled Egypt together with the people he saved to a place in the desert where the Egyptians couldn't find him.

Forty years would pass and the likelihood of any Egyptian remembering, let alone recognising, the old man was virtually gone. Yet something happened to the old man — now living a simpler and more frugal life — to make him come back to Egypt. Something drove him to complete one more task before he could be allowed to live his remaining part of his life in peace and happiness. This final task was to free the remaining Hebrews still working under the pharoah's rule. But what drove him to perform this task? And how was he helped to achieve this goal?

It is hard to tell whether this old man had outside help. The old man would later claim it was God who told him what to do and helped him.

Who is God? We seem to come back to this interesting question.

Are we dealing with an encounter by an extraterrestrial civilisation visiting the Earth with a grandiose vision of influencing humanity towards a road of greater balance and love (the positive approach to social development as we understand it) by helping the old man to achieve this goal?

Certainly it would be far less frightening in our society for a human to be doing the task rather than an alien coming down from the sky and scaring the shit out of the Egyptian people. Even if the alien was humanoid in design, looking at a creature would probably still reveal certain physical characteristics considered different in appearance from any human (no matter if the alien might be prettier than us). At any rate, the alien would probably be more in danger of its own life if the humans decided to solve their fear by killing it. More of a reason to let a human do the job.

Nobody knows for sure exactly what happened. But it would appear the old man was shaken by an experience with what he called God and he knew he had to fulfil a promise.

Armed with certain secret knowledge acquired from this mysterious God, the old man returned to Egypt. He approached the pharoah (most likely to be Ahmose I of the XVIII Dynasty, son of Seqenenre Tao II). As he stood before the Egyptian leader, the old man demanded that the pharoah release his people. The pharoah looked at the old man who spoke rather well for an outsider (not knowing the old man was taught particularly well by his adopted Egyptian family more than 40 years earlier). This old man probably wore shaggy looking clothes from another country and had a long walking stick and a white beard to show his wisdom. He probably looked more reminiscent of a wizard from the Harry Potter books if he wore a pointy cone-shaped hat to complete the picture. But back then, this was an ordinary man. Just someone who should be given some respect given his age, and potentially having great wisdom.

The pharoah probably laughed at him as he listened. He couldn't see what the fuss was about or the obvious benefits of releasing the people in the manner the old man was seeking. Clearly this old man wasn't a threat to the pharoah as he could see the man was old and somewhat frail and didn't carry a weapon (except for his innocent-looking walking stick).

"It has always been like this, so why change now?" the pharoah probably thought. And anyway, the pharoah was enjoying a life of luxury and great comfort so why risk losing all this extravagance and richness in his life by letting the slaves go?

Furthermore, the pharoah felt a little challenged by the old man when he spoke of a Lord God of Israel. The pharoah must have thought, "Now who or what could have a higher authority than him and his gods?"

Maybe he wanted to entertain himself a little more with the old man's seemingly outrageous ideas?

At any rate, the pharoah did make a reasonable effort to listen to this old man (probably more so than the Egyptian captor who mistreated the Hebrew slaves forty years earlier). At least we can give this Egyptian leader some credit. However he wasn't entirely convinced of the old man's explanation. He stubbornly stuck by his beliefs and denied the old man's request. Even when shown some interesting tricks from the old man including his stick turning into a slithering creature reminiscent of a snake, the pharoah wouldn't budge from his position (did God provide the old man with a new type of technological stick? And did it have a camera and a microphone for God to listen in on the conversation in the Egyptian temple?).

Two experimental robotic snakes. This shows how it is technically feasible with modern-day technology to create a walking stick that can turn into a snake-like creature with realistic movements. Picture taken by Steve Jurvetson and made available under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license. Source:

Yet the old man was in an unusually confident position for it seemed he knew what the answer would be from the pharoah (not to mention the impending disaster that was about to befall Egypt). Whatever it was he knew (or how he managed to figure it out), he would then declare to the pharoah that if his people would not be released, the pharoah and his own people would experience a great plague, the Nile river in the delta region where the pharoah lived would suddenly turn red, the Egyptian people relying on fish and water from the Nile would suffer health problems, a great darkness would fall at a time when the Sun should be shining, and lightning and hail would come and other frightening events, unless the pharoah released the slaves. NOTE: It does make one wonder how tricky it would be for the old man to stop the impending disaster if the pharoah did unexpectedly agree to the old man's demands. Indeed, what if God could not stop the inevitable disaster from taking place? Just imagine what the old man would have to say to the pharoah if he got caught later and brought back to the Egyptian palace: "Oops! I'm terribly sorry. There was something else I forgot to mention earlier when we last spoke. I should have asked that you provide us with a boat to make our getaway more effective, and so avoid being caught and being brought back here to explain why we still had to have this disaster."

God had to be supremely confident in human psychology to know how the pharoah would respond. Perhaps an indication of the amount of observing and understanding of the way societies develop and grow and how this influences the way people think and behave in them that gives God the ability to predict the outcome with reasonable accuracy. Moses, on the other hand, may have simply acknowledged that God could predict the future. So all he had to do was hear the response from the pharoah and follow exactly as God had told him to say.

Anyway, the pharoah's highly rational mind and set ways of doing things as well as no record of a similar event in the past did not persuade the stubborn Egyptian leader to do anything different. Instead he thought this story came from a rambling old man carrying a magic walking stick who probably was losing his marbles. So he let the old man go and must have chuckled to himself how silly the whole thing was.

However, the events described by the old man actually did happen. An incredible coincidence perhaps?

As archaeologists in the late 20th and early 21st century have discovered, scientific evidence was found of what could be the biggest explosion of the last 10,000 years occurring on a Greek island of Santorini less than 200 kilometres from Egypt. It is believed around 1,500 BC, a sudden movement of the African continental plate as it slipped below the European plate caused a massive volcano to erupt (the equivalent to a pimple on the face of mother Earth which God has trying to pop open). It blew such a huge hole through the island that plumes of smoke, dust and ash were sent 40 kilometres high into the stratosphere. Just to make it more remarkable, the wind had just happened to be blowing the dust in a south-easterly direction straight for Egypt.

As a result of the volcanic explosion, an earthquake of magnitude 4 to 5 on the Riechter scale was felt 200 kilometres away. It was enough to topple numerous Egyptian statues. Soon afterwards, darkness fell on the Nile delta as the volcanic dust clouds moved over Egypt, just as the old man had predicted. It would be accompanied by intense lightning and a generous serving of volcanic hail (ash and water crystals) just to make the pharoah think for a moment.

Still, there was more to come. An increase in the number of bugs and bacteria was enough to affect the health of the fish as well as the people who drank from the water and later ate the fish. The Bible also indicated a red colour appeared in the water looking like blood due to a sudden release of carbon dioxide gas inside the Earth reacting with iron dissolved at the bottom of the water and the oxygen thereby producing a distinctly reddish iron oxide. Soon the fish died from a lack of oxygen in the water following the chemical reaction.

It this wasn't enough, an unusual number of insects and frogs were mobilised and, as they were trying to move away from the prolonged darkness, cold and lack of fresh water, came across the Nile delta to be witnessed by the Egyptian Pharoah and his people.

The Pharoah must have wondered at some point what kind of magic trick did the old man manage to conjure up for this calamity to become true.

Even today, it does make one wonder what kind of scientific instrument the old man had in his possession to help him predict this rather catastrophic event. Maybe he stuck his finger in the ground and pulled it out and saw the future for Egypt? Or maybe he noticed in the air the smell of sulfur dioxide on a mountain top where the winds had been pushing the gases from the volcano in the old man's direction? That's an enormous amount of rotten egg gas and yet no one else in this part of the world ever noticed it! Or maybe a number of men did notice the smell but apart from making jokes about it, the majority were probably blamed for it by their wives and that was enough for the men to keep quiet and not tell a soul. Still, even with rotten egg smells, one had to know the relationship between sulfur dioxide and volcanoes. And then this guy Moses had to predict the direction the wind would blow the volcanic ash at the right time. For the Old Man to predict all of this with uncanny accuracy and realise its impact on Egypt would be an extraordinary feat of genius, or an amazing educated guess. Unless the old man had experience with volcanoes at some point in his early life (no evidence to suggest he was aware of such a connection) it seems unlikely he could have known that a volcano was about to erupt much further away (presumably in a place he never visited in his life).

Or should we conclude that he had a truly amazing instrument by way of his finger?Certainly makes one proclaim the finger is mightier than the sword on this occasion, or any sophisticated scientific instrument available to scientists in the 21st century. A truly astounding feat.

Still, despite such remarkably accurate and insightful knowledge of the natural disaster, the old man had one more trick up his sleeve to impress yet again modern scientists in the 21st century. He returned to ask whether the pharoah agreed with his request. Still he refused. So the old man said that his first born child would be affected by the recent catastrophic event.

Knowing that the pharoah's first born is the most valuable to him as the child would help to take the reigns of power when he died, the old man somehow knew this was going to make the pharoah change his mind. Not so for the Egyptian ruler who, without being aware of the old man's knowledge he acquired from an unknown source, decided he would refuse the old man's request thinking his own gods would be more powerful and help him protect his first born. How wrong he was. Not knowing the science behind volcanic eruptions, earthquakes and rupturing deposits of toxic gases underground, something else was about to happen. And it would affect his first born.

As the Bible indicated, that very night, all Egyptian first-born males sleeping on low-lying beds on the ground floor were asphyxiated by a sudden outburst of a large amount of carbon dioxide that emerged from the water. Again the old man knew about this and how to protect his people by asking them to sleep in the upper floor (remarkable knowledge for a wise old man with unspoken experience in volcanoes and for which no one else was aware of at the time, yet we don't get the impression the old man had experience with these sorts of events, so how did he know what to do at this precise moment?). He certainly listened to God very well indeed.

When the pharoah's baby was fatally affected by the event, the pharoah's intense grief saw him cave in to the old man's request. The slaves were released. But not without the pharoah calming down and trying a trick of his own for the old man — as a form of revenge he would allegedly send 600 Egyptians on chariots to intercept the old man and his people and have them wiped out in a bloodbath. How's that for a magic trick according to the feeble-minded pharoah. Unfortunately for the pharoah he was again unaware of yet another magic trick the old man's had up his proverbial sleeve (he would have made any 21st century magician proud of his efforts). And more importantly timing and a little outside help was on his side. This time his people had reached the marshy sea which, surprisingly, was about to dry up that very moment.

According to the Bible, the Hebrews allegedly witnessed the water parting on either side of the old man at the right time (maybe he received a visual and auditory sign from God when he wandered away from the group one night?). They called the place Yam Suf (or Reed Sea and later renamed to Lake El Balah, which when translated from Hebrew means quite literally, "The lake where God devoured"). It would later be described by the people nearly 3,500 years ago (or 1,500 B.C.) in imaginative language as a wall of water being scooped up by God on either side of the old man and so allowing him and his people up to 3 hours to walk across an apparent land bridge previously hidden by the water.

What the Hebrews (and the Egyptian soldiers pursuing them) didn't realise is that a wall of water no less than 2 metres high was about to return and sweep across the valley. At first the water receded for a few hours because of the movement of the African continental plate allowing the Hebrews to walk across the valley. But once the old man and his people reached the other side and the African plate slipped back, the Egyptian soldiers decided to chase them across the land bridge. Not thinking and realising as to why the water had suddenly disappeared and whether it would return, the Egyptians continued on their merry way across the valley with only one thing on their narrow-minded and negative minds: to destroy the Israelites under strict orders by their pharoah. However, the decision to cross the valley at that precise moment was the Egyptian soldiers own downfall. When the waters did return, it would coincide remarkably well with the deaths of these Egyptian military men. The carnage and destruction would be witnessed by the people who stood safely on the other side of the valley.

Amazing. How could the old man have possibly known when to arrive and travel across the valley? It sounds too precise. Well, in fact, we find from the Bible how the timing to reach the Reed Sea was not exactly precise. Making the story sound a little more like it represented a real event in history, it is claimed that a mysterious cloud had descended and guided the old man and his people during the day and later glowed brightly at night to help him and his people see where they were. According to Exodus 13:21, it is claimed:

"By day the Lord went ahead of them in a pillar of cloud to guide them on their way and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light. Neither the pillar of cloud by day nor the pillar of fire by night left its place in front of the people."

The cloud was also witnessed by the Egyptians pursuing the old man and his people. In fact, we learn that the Egyptians had tried to get to the marshy sea to do their dirty deed on the fleeing people and there was every indication that these military men would reach the old man. But incredibly, there was hesitation on the part of Egyptians to continue on. Why? Apparently, this mysterious cloud somehow moved back across the sky to a position where it made the Egyptians stop and wait. The hesitation by the Egyptian army not to pursue until the cloud moved away was enough for the old man to do his apparent trick of "dividing the waters" so to speak and walk across the marshy sea. As the King James version of the Bible stated:

"And the angel of God [in the sky], which went before the camp of Israel, removed and went behind them; and the pillar of the cloud went from before their face, and stood behind them: {14:20} And it came between the camp of the Egyptians and the camp of Israel; and it was a cloud and darkness [to them,] but it gave light by night [to these:] so that the one came not near the other all the night. {14:21}

And the Egyptians pursued, and went in after them to the midst of the sea, [even] all Pharaoh's horses, his chariots, and his horsemen. {14:24} And it came to pass, that in the morning watch the LORD looked unto the host of the Egyptians through the pillar of fire and of the cloud, and troubled the host of the Egyptians, {14:25} And took off their chariot wheels, that they drave them heavily: so that the Egyptians said, Let us flee from the face of Israel; for the LORD fighteth for them against the Egyptians."

A rather interesting discovery. For a great story not to be exactly perfect by showing signs that something had to intervene in the events on the ground to make things coincide in the right way for the old man and his people, does make it more believable as a possible real event. However, it did require a third party to be involved (i.e., God?). Perhaps the only slightly incredible thing to have some rational people today question the veracity of the story could be the existence of God (or a god) in helping humankind in this way. Incredible. Whether God was present at the time to help out, it does make an imperfect story look more plausible and likely to be based on real-life events. Still, it is not proof the story is true. Are we dealing with an extraterrestrial connection here (could our understanding of God be actually explained in terms of advanced alien civilisation(s) guiding humanity along the right path of social development?). We can only guess and rely on the available archaeological evidence as it emerges (and why not reports of genuine UFOs and how they might appear in the sky).

Or else we must assume the story was nothing more than a classic example of the ramblings of an old man and his people trying to instil fear in their own children to do the right thing by conjuring up a remarkable story? Yet somehow the story would never be forgotten and was maintained over many generations and eventually included in the Bible. Today Christians, Jews and Hebrews believe this is among the best evidence available for the existence of God.

Or perhaps the earliest recorded evidence of ETs helping humans?

Fortunately the 21st century has arrived and latest scientific research into those mysterious flying objects we call UFOs (especially those observed at close range) has shown evidence of a technology capable of supporting the observations seen in the mysterious glowing cloud in 1,500 B.C.. For example, we know that air pressure can be reduced near the surface of a negatively charged metallic symmetrical flying object. Air pressure is reduced because the air is electrified by the electrons coming off the oscillating negatively-charged metal surface and made to move in accordance with the electromagnetic fields. When air pressure is reduced in slightly humid air, clouds are formed thereby allowing UFOs to be concealed inside. And as observations of modern UFOs have shown, some UFOs do come masquerading as a cloud under certain circumstances (see the UFO case from Finland in 1970 observed by two skiers). Hence descriptive words used to describe God in the Bible such as:

"God stretches out heaven over empty space, and hangs the earth upon nothing. He wraps the rain in his thick clouds and the clouds are not split by the weight. He shrouds his throne with his clouds." Job 26

could be explained using the latest UFO knowledge we have about cloud formations.

Also, the glowing nature of UFOs can be attributed to the charged metal surface glowing like an electric light bulb (i.e., the charge is oscillating and this means the object is emitting radiation). So when a heated glowing metal is surrounded by a cloud-like structure, it can give the appearance of a glowing cloud at night by observers on the ground.

We understand today that this technology is common knowledge and has been patented by Dr Thomas T. Brown in the 1960s (he has observed the glowing negatively-charged electrode and seen his devices move, including a remarkable pattern in the way the devices moved). It is based on the idea of distributing charge more to one end of the UFO than the other side in order to emit radiation of a higher energy density (and hence momentum exerted on the object) needed to make the object recoil in the opposite direction. The mathematical solution explaining this movement is derived from the Abraham-Lorentz formula for emitting large-scale radiation from the surface of a charged object. And we know the acceleration achieved by this emission of radiation from the charged surface is exponential. In other words, there is enough extreme acceleration to permit any living organism to travel enormous distances between the stars. So yes, it is potentially possible we could have evidence in the Bible of ETs visiting our planet. And it is the kind of electromagnetic technology and associated side effects that would never change over thousands of years. It's all a question of how refined the technology is by an advanced civilisation in implementing the electromagnetic concept in order for these objects to cover the distances more quickly.

So what we see today in the UFO reports could easily have existed 3,500 years ago.

At the moment, all this sounds too incredible. So, until the experiment is done to confirm the electromagnetic concept, let us be conservative and say that the mathematical solution is an interesting, but poorly understood area of electromagnetism found in only a few advanced textbooks of electromagnetism. In the meantime, observations in the Bible of glowing clouds moving on their own in different directions will have to be seen as a fancy image for story-telling. Or perhaps it is nothing more than the presence of glowing ionised gases in the atmosphere which had lingered just at this precise moment for many hours (or days). Of course, we are talking about a cloud of ionised gases that can move forward and go backwards on its own as seen by the old man, his people and the Egyptian soldiers to affect human events on the ground. Quite a remarkable feat for any natural object in anyone's language. It kind of makes the ET explanation sound a little more plausible compared to this natural explanation.

The truth is, no one knows for sure what we are dealing with here. The quotes in the Bible are not quite detailed enough for scientific purposes to reveal precisely what it is that people saw in the sky. Even the story itself has not yet been proven to be true beyond a shadow of a doubt. Only that it is highly probably based on geological evidence of a massive volcanic eruption at the right time and for the subsequent aftermath mentioned by the Bible to be scientifically well-supported. Of course, it would help if we have corroborative evidence from someone independent. Why not the Egyptian ruler? Unfortunately not even the Egyptian pharoah at the heart of this story made an effort to record from his perspective what happened on a stone wall in one of his temples. Probably understandable considering the pharoah would not want Egyptian people to remember him as a failure and hint at the possibility that he is just an ordinary mortal with no powers to control people since he couldn't physically stop Moses and his people from escaping Egypt. Better to keep quiet and get the military leaders to swore secrecy in order for the people of Egypt to remain ignorant. So all we can do today is remain astonished by the story and keep finding more evidence to see if the story could be true.

As for the people who remembered and later wrote down the story, it was something that was probably seen by them as a real event. Consequently, ever since this remarkable natural catastrophe occurred, the old man would go down in the history books as written by Jewish and Christian scholars as the legend of Moses (the name given to him by his Egyptian princess turned his adopted mother), in memory of the man who saved his people from incredible oppression and cruel mistreatment under the rule of an Egyptian dictator and who seemed to have the uncanny knowledge of knowing when a certain catastrophic event was about to beset Egypt and what to do about it and when. A truly amazing story if it is true.

The story doesn't quite end there. Three months later, we learn how Moses came down from what people would later describe as a holy mountain in the desert claiming he received a set of rules on two stone (or some very lightweight and tough material looking like stone — well, we don't want Moses to work too hard carrying these tablets down to his people after all he had done so far) tablets from, you guessed it, none other than God, of how people should live. Known as the Ten Commandments, Moses revealed a series of practical rules on how to live socially while minimising harm to other people (e.g., not killing people out of jealousy or any other reason, and learning to stay with the partner you are with because of the way L-brain types are usually preoccupied with outer appearance and tend to be highly social creatures and, therefore, need to be told and shown they are loved all the time to avoid pain and jealousy etc.). In summary, the rules are all based on the fundamental principle of love when brought to their very essence.

Think of this knowledge as a form of evolution of the mind so as to accelerate the learning of humans on how to interact with other human beings in an appropriate way while minimising interference in the affairs and experiences of others so that other people can learn and evolve. In fact, one could broaden this concept to encompass all living things if we so desire. Well, let's face it. The process of evolution itself is bad enough and has been quite tedious with all living creatures vying for an opportunity to stay alive by determining whether you are the solution to their problems in terms of seeing you as a source of food or not. Now, at last, we have a brain and the ability to think through the problems raised by our evolutionary past. We are at the crucial point where we do not have to kill people or even other animals in order to solve our own problems. As for other living things, we should know why they have to kill (because they are trying to survive and with no sufficient memory and frontal cortex development to see other ways of reaching the same goal). Once we know why, there is much we can do to change the situation and show true love by ensuring we all have what we need to survive and be happy and how this can be obtained by working together.

However, if this concept still remains too difficult to understand, the following commandments may be seen as the first important steps to helping a L-brain society to do the right thing and practice it in reality everyday:

  1. I am the Lord your God. You shall have no other gods before me
  2. You shall not make for yourself an idol
  3. You shall not make wrongful use of the name of your God
  4. Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy
  5. Honor your Father and Mother
  6. You shall not murder
  7. You shall not commit adultery
  8. You shall not steal
  9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor
  10. You shall not covet your neighbor's house, and you shall not covet your neighbor's wife.

NOTE: Evolution is not just a physical thing involving the brain and body. It is also evolution of the mind in terms of the type of knowledge we acquire through education. We need the right education in order to function properly as individuals with other living things. We need the education to know how to solve problems and understand the reason why we must show our love to all living things, or at the very least to all humans when living in a society.

With these rules finally etched into the stone (or some other durable material) tablets and now allegedly physically available for L-brain people to see with their own eyes, people would call this holy mountain where God allegedly revealed the laws to Moses as Mount Sinai. (5)

Thanks to some interesting investigations by Canadian filmmaker Jacobovici, the mountain may have been tracked down. Assuming a daily walking distance of 15 kilometres and using the Bible to give an indication of how many days it took to reach the mountain from three locations (one of which is Lake El Balah or 15 days to walk to the mountain and the other two known to the archaeologists as Timna where Moses tended to his flock and was allegedly no more than 45 kilometres from the mountain, and a 11-day walking trek south of a place called Kadesh Barnea) together with some interesting geological features considered extremely rare for this mountain (such as a former fresh water spring on top of the mountain) and a natural geological ampitheatre, it seems the filmmaker may have finally found the landmark. He claims the mountain is likely to be at Hashem El Tarif.

Now if only we could find the Ark of the Covenent containing the Ten Commandments to help complete the picture and provide the final proof of the story of Exodus (and maybe even proof for the evidence of who or what God is if we could analyse this material depending on its purity and combination of elements and whether such a material could be made 3,500 years ago. In fact, a simple determination of how the information was etched into the tablets can tell us if the right tools were available in those times, or something more exotic). Interesting to see how we can no longer find these pesky tablets at the present time. Bummer.

How convenient.

Rather unfortunate considering this would be the kind of evidence scientists need for this story to be given a really serious look and be accepted as completely and historically correct.

Before Moses disappeared into obscurity (with only his people and the Bible to remember him), the old man wrote one other story of the first time God had a relationship with man. He began the story with a beginning as L-brain people can appreciate. He claimed "God created the heaven and the earth" but there had to be light for all this to happen. As the story goes, Genesis 1:3-4 stated:

Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light. God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness.

Perhaps this is a metaphor for God meeting humans for the first time and lighting the world with knowledge about the principle of love? Or, in a scientific sense, this could be an accurate way of saying radiation is the key to understanding how matter in the universe is created. Without radiation (or light as we generally call it), there would be no matter and nothing to observe and that would mean total darkness. So when we hear God say, "Let there be light!" and there was light, it kind of neatly sums up the reality of our universe in one simple statement. It certainly avoids having to explain to simple-minded people back in these times about certain scientific concepts such as quantum fluctuations, dark matter etc. Keep it simple would have been the order of the day back then.

Then the story attempts to explain how things were created in a kind of rough order. Although one does get the impression the things God does during this creation period seems a bit long-winded. We have to wade through more than two dozen sentences via Genesis 1:1 to 1:31 to describe how things came to be. If one had a little more knowledge, Moses could have simplified the whole beginning of the story by saying that God brought light into the world, and then all matter in the universe was created and came together to form the earth and all the things we see in the heaven, and later the animals and plants, and eventually man who, incidentally is made in the image of God (funny that Moses would include this tiny piece of detail considering God could have looked like anything except he just so happens to look humanoid in shape — did Moses see something during his encounter with God to suggest God really is shaped like a human, and perhaps may have looked not too dissimilar to us?). By simplifying the story in this way, it does help to make it more understandable from a scientific viewpoint. For example, scientists do know that the universe does need to have light (or radiation) first before it can be compressed to form self-perpetuating rings of energy needed to build atomic particles of electrons and protons. And then these particles must come together to form atoms of different elements inside stars. And once these elements are released into the cosmos by a supernova explosion, they can help to create planets, life, all the creatures in the sea and eventually on land, and finally the creation of a humanoid creature we call man (well, at some point two limbs will have to be freed to manipulate the environment and build tools and for the other two limbs to do the walking, so this could be a universal feature of the cosmos for those able to build a technology). Certainly fits in with the way evolution has taken place here on Earth with man created at the very end of the evolutionary road.

Looking further into the story we see Moses puts a timeline for all this creation work by God. However, people in these times would have enormous difficulties understanding the length of time needed for all this creation to take place (a billion years is too hard to imagine, let alone the passing of 10 years for a human living around 1,500 B.C.). It was better to introduce the days of the week as it makes it easier to visualize and would certainly make God a truly all-powerful omnipotent being capable of doing amazing things and how we should listen to God if he speaks to us. So the story ties all the creation events within 6 days, and on the 7th day we learn that God would rest and look upon his creation as "good".

Fascinating to hear God needed to rest on the 7th day. Again it is hard to imagine God being tired after all this work. Yes, it is a big job, but God shouldn't be tired.

Or perhaps the idea of resting is a clever way of saying how humans need to spend a little free time to think about things while relaxing when they are not constantly preoccupied physically with other activities. In order to know where we are going and ensure our path is one that shows true love, we need time to relax and quietly contemplate the past, the present, and where to go next. A rather subtle concept that may not have been understood properly back then and may need to be elaborated somewhat in the future with the help of another wise man. But for now, this was just the beginning to help the Hebrews understand and remember the story.

Moving on, we see that Moses also mentions all the various people who once existed and died and the descendants of those people right up to the present time (i.e., 1,500 B.C.). Today, religious people try to estimate the timeline for when all this began:to approximately 6,000 years ago. It is a numerical figure based on the ages of various people revealed in the Bible and certain events that took place in human society in this part of the world. When added together, it is probably around 4,000 years before Moses walked the Earth. Some religious people may take it too literally this figure to think this is when the universe came to be or at least when the Earth was created. But in reality, this very rough timeline of events presented by Moses in his story probably goes back to the time when Noah was alive and had just received word to build his famous boat. However, Moses adds that God created man and his companion (a woman) in the Garden of Eden. Perhaps Moses was referring to two other individuals who received special treatment by God somewhere in the ancient valley where Noah lived? Or maybe it is just a simple message about how people become corrupt when receiving too many temptations? Because as the story goes, God wanted to test the two individuals to see if they would follow God's commandment of not eating the apple on a particularly pretty and splendid sacred tree. However, it seems the woman was first tempted by the sight of the apple and she needed the man to support her in trying out the apple to see what it tasted like (as if there weren't enough food elsewhere to satisfy their needs). Then they both took a bite from the apple. From then on, we quickly understand how easy it is for humans to be corrupt through temptation (because if humans succeed in being tempted and enjoy the experience, what would stop them from doing it again and again? There has to be a limit to how far humans can go when it comes to taking whatever they want or else the universe will not be big enough to hold a greedy species hell bent at colonising everything and taking whatever it likes. Humans have to learn to let go and be happy with the things they need, not want).

From this story we probably learn about the corrupt nature of people living in the ancient valley. Then Noah makes his grand entrance into the story, another message from God to tell Noah to build his boat, followed by the great flood, and how important it is to do good things (i.e., follow God's word, which is just another way of saying, "follow the principle of love").

So any numerical figure calculated from the Bible may actually refer to the moment when God first had a relationship with humans, and not as some people in the 21st century take literally to mean when the earth was formed. There are some gullible people out there even with today's knowledge and technology.

The story of Noah effective ends there. It would later require the writings from other people in the generations after Moses to gather more details about some of the events that took place, who else received messages from God, and uncover more knowledge about the principle of love through various stories told over the generations.

However, something else was clearly missing from all of this knowledge of following God's commandments to do the right thing according to Moses in order to promote this principle of love. Even today, too many fundamentalist Christians take the Bible and its stories too literally to the point where they think the universe was created 6,000 years ago and humans lived among the dinosaurs soon thereafter. It is starting to look like some religious people are getting the Bible confused with those cartoon characters in the Flintstones. And there is also an expectation by these people that if we follow God right to the letter that this mysterious entity will "help us" again. As for the principle of love, if other people don't seem to be doing precisely what the Bible says, Christians are quick to treat these people differently and even deny them love and possibly categorise them as "working with the devil" (or are non-Christians and hence should be discriminated — you see this easily among Christians who reach a position of power) when in reality this is not the true concept of love. These Christians follow too closely what they are told by the Bible and even by their own religious leaders who are assumed to be experts in the principle of love according to the stories presented in the Bible.

What's missing in all of this?

It is simply for people to be able to think for themselves and make their own decisions as to what the principle of love should be about and to show it to the world. In other words, be your own leader in your area of interest and expertise. Follow your passion, And use any new knowledge you acquire to make a better life for all living things. Don't always follow what the authorities tell you you should do. When you are a child still figuring out the world, it can help to listen to someone of authority. When you are an adult, you don't have to constantly follow authority. You decide what is best and brings love into this world. And don't wait for God to come around and solve all your problems. You need to think about what you are doing and what it is that other people are asking you to do (or more likely, would like you to do). Is it the principle of love that they are asking? Does it help other people and not just yourself? Does it avoid the harm people may experience from what you do or get asked to do? Or is there a better way to achieve things? In essence, we must learn to think about our actions and if we know those actions will bring love, go ahead and do it. Don't wait or hesitate. Get it done now.

Unfortunately for this "next step" knowledge of being an independent "thinker" with a solid grounding on the principle of love to come through and give us the confidence that we can solve things on our own, we would have to wait another 1,500 years before the next wise man to give us more confidence in what we can achieve on our own. This time a much younger person with sufficient knowledge and solid understanding of the principle of love would emerge to challenge the authority at the time. He would appear unexpectedly in his early thirties among the people with remarkably clear and insightful knowledge about the principle of love. He would use parables and stories to teach those who were willing to listen, visualise, and eventually see the answers, and so let them know they don't have to follow the authorities all the time or be restricted in what higher authority tells them they must do. Just think for yourself and you will see the path with a heart. More importantly, people should not have to fear their own lives if they want to do something different that is more closely attuned to the principle of love. This was the biggest problem in those days (and to some extent, even to this day). We all don't want to die. So we tend to stay where we are, not rock the boat, and just generally follow the status quo, even if we see things we know it is not right. Yet it would take this great young man to prove a point about death using his own body to achieve it.

Hence the real why this one man was prepared to sacrifice himself on the cross and ro be seen as risen again with the help of God.

The message is simple: death is not meant to be the end, but the beginning to a bigger adventure. All you need is people power and with enough individuals to think for themselves and apply the principle of love and not even the most corrupt or ruthless authority and its military might can stop it. Too many independent thinkers with the knowledge of how to get around the oppression. It will be too hard to stop by any authority. But for those who do fall down initially, they will come back and enjoy the fruits of the labour of everyone else who do understand the principle of love and are implementing it in the real world, the way it should be forever.

If we still do not understand this after all this time, what will?,Would it take another courageous wise man (or woman) to come along and tell us again how to do things properly?

If you ever need some inspiration about this extra knowledge missing from people's lives today, just read the New Testament. It is a compilation of writings made by the disciples who were "chosen" by the wise young man to record certain events and present certain essential concepts as well as anyone else who seemed to have understood something about the principle of love after the death of the wise man. But, of course, all this depends on people centuries later knowing how to compile all these writings. In other words, those in a position of power in the Christian religious hierarchy do not selectively chose gospels because of their own views of certain writers. And there is something more we can learn about Mary Magdaleine and her relationship with the wise man which is more interesting than we can hope to imagine.

Or to put it simply, the Bible we have today is clearly not the complete works containing every single written piece made by people in those times.

Even so, what we do have already gives us a tantalising glimpse of the knowledge this wise man was trying to reveal to us. For example, in it you can see how he was trying to say to us that "we are gods" in the sense that we can change ourselves and influence many other things as if we are God, but we are not God. There is only one God. Our aim is to approach God. And to do that requires us to think about our actions, to learn new skills and listen to people, acquire new knowledge, and to implement everything that we have learned to what we believe to be the principle of love when solving problems for the benefit of everyone. Sure, we will make the occasional mistakes. But that's life. Learn from them and we will become a better person. And from there we get closer to God through our knowledge and experience.

Until this extra knowledge arrives to give people the power to do things for themselves and become their own leaders, all the people in Moses' time could do is remember well the story of Exodus and the great flood in Noah's time, the lineage running down from the earliest people in history, and how important it is to listen to God and follow what he says (understandable considering that it had saved Noah and Moses at a time of a great catastrophe).

Today, we no longer have to simply remember the stories. We can act on our knowledge and create our own stories for generations who want to listen. We can effectively change our destiny.

Whether everything that has been said about Moses and the great exodus is true, let us just say that a compilation of all the latest evidence about Moses and the story of Exodus (not including the possibility of extraterrestrial intervention in human affairs) can be found in the 2006 film by two times Emmy award winner in investigative journalism named Simcha Jacobovici titled The Exodus Decoded. The film also contains new interpretations for some archaelogical artefacts which is likely to keep scholars busy debating for many years to come as to whether or not they have finally got the evidence for the Exodus, the most famous story lying at the heart of Christianity, Judaism and Islam.

As for the latest in UFO research, please refer to the work.

NOTE: Should scholars find universal agreement on the site for Mount Sinai as being at Hashem El Tarif, can there finally be agreement between Israeli and Palestinian people on how to live in peace? For example, why not give the Palestinian people a new state in this area? It will be far enough away to stop Hamas fighters sending rockets into Israel and so stop Israel bombing the Palestinian people. And at the same time it will give the Palestinian people responsibility to look after a Holy place. In return, Israel can share Jerusalem with the Palestinians and the Palestinians can give Israelis access to Hashem El Tarif. And if they still can't live in peace, perhaps God will make sure the sea levels rise high enough by the end of the 21st century to ensure there is no Israel and Palestine to live in. A very simple solution to what people claim is a complex problem.


The Iron Age is well and truly upon us when the Greeks developed their own formidable army and iron weaponry. This was the time when Greek legends were born such as Achilles, the greatest Greek warrior, who fought in the 10-year war against the Trojans at the city of Troy near the Dardenelles in Asia Minor in the 13th century BC.

The Greeks relied not just on a strong sense of social skills to stick together and fight the enemy but also in unusually intense and brutal male competitions at home (which later gave rise to the idea in the modern world of starting up the less violent Olympic Games). The competitions helped to physically bring out certain individual traits and skills (e.g. throwing spears at seemingly impossible distances, showing signs of remarkable endurance and strength, and much more) that eventually saw certain Greek men reach almost God-like status among their own fellow country men and women and spawned amazing tales.

Some of these legendary skills may have been seen by those outside of Greece as "a gift from the gods".


World human population reaches 100 million.

2,500 - 2,000 YEARS AGO

Despite some people gaining important knowledge of the principle of love and living a more balanced and simple life, certain L-brain societies would arise after intense and regular warfare or as resources dwindled or became a valuable commodity. These L-brain societies tended to be large, highly organised, specialised, hierarchical in structure, highly communicative and usually brutal and conquering in nature in order to get what they need and want. One can, therefore, surmise that such "rational" skills in creating a L-brain society is a trait well-suited to men with nearly all leaders being exclusively male-dominated. Of particular note in this regard were the Greeks in 231 B.C., and later the Romans from Italy.

For example, the Greeks were coming to the end of their world domination. But before this would happen, the Greeks continued using the power of the spear, regular sporting events at home to maximise muscle strength, and shear numbers of fighting men and horses as the deciding factors in the outcome of most, if not all, battles with other nations for a long time. As a result of this knowledge, one man became particularly obsessed by the riches of the world and wanted the power to dominate the known world, His name was Alexander the Great and he would use the technology of the spear as well as manpower and cunning war strategies to defeat Egyptian, Syrian and Persian military forces around 231 B.C.

Even the Romans found the Greek army to be a formidable military opponent.

In one extraordinary legend, 500 Greek soldiers allegedly managed to stop a Roman military ship from reaching the Greek shores. How? By turning their shields around and using the highly reflective and smooth concave surface to concentrate solar radiation on the ship to the point where it presumably caused the sails to catch fire above 400 degrees celsius. The idea for this originated from the Greek philosopher Archimedes.

Still, the might of the Roman empire should not be underestimated. Here, the great "testosterone-smelling" military machine of the Roman civilisation saw men push their horses, soldiers and new and highly organised fighting techniques and weapons to the limits as they expanded and conquered much of the known Western world. Only those nations that held a powerful military force or provided something of value to the Romans succeeded in surviving and maintaining their own unique cultures.

The latter approach is one thing Cleopatra of Egypt understood all too well. During her reign as the Egyptian pharoah, she used her feminine beauty, the power of sex, and her position as ruler of Egypt, to influence the great Roman leader, Julius Ceasar, and the General of the Roman military machine by the name of Anthony (also known as the Lord of the East) to spare Egypt from almost certain occupation and destruction by the Romans. Together with other Egyptian wealth, Cleopatra's ability to provide carnal pleasure to the two crucial virile masculine leaders of this strongly L-brain society from Italy made it possible for Egypt to survive for quite a long time.

It was only after the strongly L-brain Roman Octavian (who later changed his name to Augusta Ceasar) saw through Cleopatra's power did her great dream to become the new rulers of the world die with her and her lover Anthony.

After the death of Cleopatra and Anthony, Octavian became the emperor of Rome and the great city of Rome continued to flourish for another 400 years before eventually ending in the early centuries after the death of an unusually "balanced-thinking" young man with an outstanding knowledge of the power of love and how this man essentially sparked the beginnings of Christianity throughout the Western world.


A young man appeared in the Middle East to bring ideas and ways of living based on the principle of love to, yet again, an oppressed people in Israel (it was a time when Roman occupation still manifested itself in this part of the world).

Of course, some readers might be wondering who was this religious and social leader to emerge into the troubled world in the Middle East?

What we do know about this new leader is that he came from Bethleham and was born on 17 April in 6 BC based on latest astronomical analysis of the sky where scientists have noticed an unusual event consisting of a sudden appearance of a bright light in the northern morning sky under the constellation Aries by Jupiter as it past out of the lunar eclipse; no such unusual event existed in or around the 1 AD mark, as revealed in the BBC documentary Son of Man). This would explain the observations made by certain people at the time according to the Bible when this new leader was born.

Why was he considered more "balanced" and knowledgeable? Did he get outside help? Or did he learn for himself the right way to do things? We may never know. But it seems he understood why people fought and accumulated wealth and power, how these people were more likely to become corrupt in their thinking and ways of doing things, as well as build pyramids in Egypt and statues of different gods. From these observations he could see a solution as well as something else he learnt about the issue of death. Part of the solution involved breaking the power held by the authorities by way of the Jewish priests, in providing basic medical help such as gaining access to clean water controlled by the priests in the temple and bathing people at night (and even on the Sabbath) to solve many medical ailments (perhaps even an understanding of plant materials could have aided in his treatment of common human diseases), teaching people the principle of love through various stories, giving people the power to think for themselves and apply the principle of love as they have understood it from his teachings, and finally to make a brave point to all regarding the nature of death.

Essentially this young man understood something about the importance of keeping things simple and learning to be happy with what we have and need to survive. In that way, all people can be happy too, and this increases the security and enjoyment of life when everyone has what they need. It is not about trying to grab everything we want thinking this will bring us greater happiness. Instead, you live simply, help one another, develop deeper and more meaningful relationships, and treat people well. If you do, he realised there would be no need for war, and people would be genuinely happy and live in harmony with one another. People would forever live in peace (and hence more time to think and come up with original and great long-term solutions to any problems set before them or wish to pursue for the benefit of everyone else) so long as we all understood death was not meant to be the end, but just the beginning to a new adventure. God will take care of this aspect, as well as letting God (helped along a bit by us through our knowledge and efforts) provide everything people need (i.e. recycling and growing foods) as well as to resurrect those who have died, and everything will be in peace, balanced and in abundance in what is effectively a heaven if we so choose.

In other words, this man — known simply as Jesus Christ — understood the principle of love in its fundamental sense, so much so that those individuals who others despised or were seen as the enemy were treated with dignity and love by this very open-minded and independent-thinking individual.

But he wasn't the only person to emerge with some understanding of the power of love.

On the other side of the world, we learn of another balanced individual who also became disenchanted by the wealth accumulated in what was essentially a complicated, hierarchical and profit-driven L-brain society and the subsequent warfare by those in power and the ordinary people who suffered when this happen as well as when wealth was accumulated. Then one day, he decided to let go of his own material wealth, walked through the forests of India and meditated. After about a couple of years, he re-emerged from the forests. What he saw about life and the universe and the simple technique he developed to understand our purpose in life and reach a more balanced mental and spiritual state in a process known as enlightenment would see hundreds of people support him.

His name was Siddhartha Gautama (ca. 563-483 B.C.) and his ability to reach a more balanced state without the use of drugs (i.e. through the power of meditation) as the key to breaking free from the shackles of human conditioning or pre-programmed patterns in the mind learned from other people in society (including human language itself) and so lead ultimately to the experience of true freedom from all suffering would quickly see him get tagged the name of the "Awakened One" or simply "the Buddha" by some of his slightly more L-brain followers who wanted to give him a name.

Here is the story of how Siddhartha became a balanced and more spiritually-enlightened individual:

Siddartha Gautama was born in the fifth century BCE.

Siddhartha's father was a Hindu king and his mother died when Siddhatha was still a baby.

When he was born, Siddhartha's parents had his horoscope prepared. This said that he would either be a great ruler or a great spiritual leader. Naturally as his father was the king, he was keen for Siddhartha to be a great ruler so he made sure that while he was growing up he never saw anything to disturb his mind or encourage him to think about things in a deep way. As Siddhartha reached adulthood his marriage was arranged and some time later he had a son. But he had led a very sheltered life within the Palace estate. As the time for him to become King approached he began to wonder what the world was like beyond the palace, so since he knew his father would disapprove, he arranged to go out secretly, with his friend Channa who was his charioteer.

Siddhartha was enchanted by the world outside the palace, but then he saw something very strange. A man was coming along the street, but he was bent and walking slowly, using a stick. And his hair was grey. Siddhartha had never seen an old man before and when Channa explained that everyone grows old, he was really shocked and upset. So they went back to the Palace. Next day Siddhartha went out again with Channa. He hoped that he would not see another old man, and he did not - but he saw someone lying down, moaning and covered in sweat, breathing with difficulty. Siddhartha was curious and keen to help the man in some way - but Channa urged him to stay away, explaining that the man was sick. He was suffering from pain and a high fever. Siddhartha was upset, especially when Channa explained that he might catch the sickness if he went too close, and that everyone gets sick once in a while.

On the third day, Siddhartha asked Channa to take him a different way. He did not want to see any old people or sick people this time. All was well until they noticed a group of people approaching. Some people led the procession playing sad music and then some people passed by carrying a narrow bed. A man lay on this but he was covered in cloth which was piled up with flowers. Siddhartha could hardly see the man at all and asked Channa why this man was all covered up and why people were carrying him. Channa explained that this was a dead man. Siddhartha did not understand. When Channa explained about death he was horrified. Everyone has to die? Even his beautiful wife and sweet little son would die? It was unthinkable.

Again his day was ruined and when they went back to the palace Siddhartha was in a very quiet mood, thinking about all the things he had seen, the old man, the sick man and now the dead man. He was deeply shaken up by finding out about all these things.

They went out again next day and this time Siddhartha said he wanted to go somewhere right away from everyone. He just wanted some peace and quiet. So Channa took him down by the river where they could walk together enjoying nature's beauty. And there, by the river, sitting under a large tree, Siddhartha encountered another unusual sight. He saw a Hindu holy man sitting in deep meditation.

Siddhartha asked Channa who this strange man was and what he was doing. Why was he being so lazy? What was he doing with the beads he held? Channa explained that he was a holy man. He was repeating the name of God, using the beads to keep track of his chanting and praying for infinite peace, infinite bliss.

Siddhartha wanted to know what the man was doing. He wanted infinite peace, infinite bliss, himself. But Channa said that they should not disturb the holy man, so they returned to the Palace.

All the things that Siddhartha had seen occupied his mind from that day onwards. He could not go back to his old unconscious life of pleasure. He realised that he must find a way of ending suffering not just for himself, but for his wife and child too - indeed for everyone. Siddhartha decided that he must leave his family and the Palace. No more the life of luxury, he would renounce his former life and embrace the life of an ascetic, a wandering holy man, owning nothing, begging for his food and spending his days in prayer, meditation and spiritual discipline. He had to find a way of overcoming suffering.

After six years of travelling and studying at the feet of the wisest people he could find, practising exercises and disciplines to develop control of his senses - including fasting and practically starving himself, Siddhartha decided that enough was enough. He sat under a large Bodhi tree at Bodh Gaya in Northern India and vowed that here he would either discover the truth or die in the attempt.

Siddhartha entered into deep meditation and remained there for days if not weeks without moving from the spot. A woman who lived nearby was impressed by his sincerity and intensity. She brought him food each day and he accepted it. He came to see that everything should be done in a balanced way. It is not necessary or helpful to starve the body any more than it is necessary or helpful to live a life of luxury. The middle way is by far the best.

The Buddha never spoke about God but he did describe the demons that attacked him while he was meditating under the Bodhi tree. They were desperate to distract him from his quest for the truth. But he was able to remain in his deep meditation and ignore them completely. As he reached new levels of awareness and understanding, he broke free from the shackles of human ignorance and limitation. He touched the ground and called on the Earth to witness his victory over the demons and his inner achievement.

Siddhartha was now enlightened. He felt that for the first time he could see the world as it was, with a new clarity and understanding. He said it was like waking up. 'The Buddha' means 'The Enlightened One.'

The Buddha was not sure if it would be possible to share the insights he had discovered, but he met some ascetics who he had known before he was enlightened. They could tell that something special had happened to him, they could sense the new wisdom and light that radiated from him and they asked him to teach them, so there, in the Deer Park at Sarnath (near Varanasi, in India) he began his teaching.

The Buddha spent the rest of his life teaching his philosophy and setting up 'The Sangha' a community of Monks and Nuns whose lives were dedicated to following his teachings.

After a very full and fruitful life, at the age of eighty, The Buddha died and entered into his final Nirvana. His students cremated his body and took his ashes to places which were important to them. They erected memorials there and these are still places of Buddhist pilgrimage.

The leading Buddhists met and collected together all his teachings. These were memorised and passed down by word of mouth for many years. Much of a Buddhist Monk's time would be spent in learning the teachings perfectly so that they were passed on unchanged until they were eventually written down.

The religion this ordinary man would create and eventually affect over 50 per cent of the Indian population 2000 years later (around 1500 AD) is called Buddhism.

Unfortunately not everyone agreed with the enlightened one. Some of the L-brain people with power, lust and greed and always trusting of what they saw with their eyes as the only reality and how to cope with this reality thought it was better to destroy this early group of Buddhists. It didn't work as word reached a number of leaders and followers of the new religion. The religion would survive after many of the supporters and their leaders quickly escaped the impending warfare. These people eventually settled in various parts of India and later the rest of the Asian continent.

Need another example?

In the mid-1800s, we had another male individual named Mikao Usui in Japan who decided to not only practice martial arts but later entered a Zen monastery to study the ancient texts of Buddhism known as the Sutras where he noticed the healing practices of an ancient religion called Reiki or Usui Shikiu Reiki Ryoho. At some point in his life, Usui made the climb to the sacred Mount Kurama to fast and meditate for 21 days.

As a way of counting the number of days, Usui collected 21 stones. Then, something unusual happened after he threw the last stone. It is claimed a "brilliant light" approached Usui as he was meditating. He felt an energy came over him and had intense feelings of well being. He then saw certain symbols and methods of Reiki which gave him confidence he was on the right track with Reiki before he lost consciousness. He eventually awakened and realised he had received the power to heal.

Today the religion of Reiki continues as a handful of Reiki leaders attempt to re-kindle the positive side of the ever-flowing light energy of the universe as a healing method (most probably electromagnetic radiation concentrated by our bodies and emitted usually through the hands to hopefully produce a sense of warmth and so help enhance the healing process within living tissue). It also teaches the importance of the principle of love during the healing process (perhaps by getting the body to emit the right hormones and other biochemicals for raising the immune system response to fighting infections).

Or merely exercising and massaging the tissues regularly can also help to generate the same level of warmth and extra blood flow to help with the healing process?

Such fascinating stories of men once living a rich and comfortable lifestyle and then suddenly changing to a more frugal and simpler life after seeing the injustices and/or inequalities of modern society are not unusual.

Before the Western world was ever influenced by the ideas of one such man born to a humble carpenter and his young wife in a place where Palestine and Israel now exists (so what in the heck are the people in these countries fighting for today?), a man named Moses nearly 1,600 B.C. claimed to have given away all his wealth and power in Egyptian society after understanding the principle of love in an equitable and more fundamental sense. As a young man, Moses saw how slaves were mistreated under Egyptian rule. But in trying to stop the brutality, he inadvertently killed an Egyptian captor. And death of an Egyptian is punishable by death irrespective of who might be right under the circumstances.

When Jesus was alive, he already lived a simple life. With time on his side, he would observe, think and learn something. He would gather stories that helped to under the human condition. He then learned how to be a good teacher where he would preach and practice the very same principle of love as he understood it from his more humble beginnings and the knowledge we had acquired. His knowledge was presented in simple laymen's terms through a more compassionate approach using effective story-telling techniques. His understanding of love and God is more a reward-based psychology as revealed in the New Testament where ideas such as living for eternity and how death is not seen as the end formed an integral part of his thinking. He also believed in the existence of a kingdom of heaven where we can all strive for and experience if we do the right thing under the principle of love. And he also taught people not to be afraid to think for themselves and do things that are right and with love.

Today, in the 21st century, we have no such highly influential world religious leader of the likes of Jesus or Moses. The nearest might be the Dalai Lama in Buddhism. Unfortunately he has no effective means to influence other leaders, including the Chinese government. His skills to understand all aspects of modern life and to see the interconnections and present them simply and with authority all that he sees and the solutions to all the problems is just not in the same league as those in the past. Something tells us we need another leader to really set the world on the right track

Will we, yet again, need another person to teach humanity the principle of love? Given how few people today are listening to the wise men of the past and their knowledge of the principle of love, perhaps humanity needs a woman to do the job properly? The question is who will do the job?

Unfortunately most men in the Middle East don't allow women to become leaders, so it seems there is a fat chance of that happening. And knowing that some men may claim to have listened to the words of wise men, are still continuing to misinterpret the knowledge to serve their own selfish power-struggle aims. We only have to look at Islam today to see how some leaders continue to misinterpret the scriptures from their own religious book with the sole aim of getting poorer people to do the dirty work of harming foreigners (or so-called "non-muslims" or the "infidels").

It is starting to look like only another and perhaps more direct intervention by an extraterrestrial civilisation with all of humanity will solve this problem. The problem is, will our brains be big enough to remember and apply the knowledge for all times?

Or why not throw down an asteroid or two on Earth and then maybe people will quickly get their priorities right?

1,600 to 1,500 YEARS AGO

Around the year 426 A.D., a young teenager living in a rich English family was taken away by pirates to be sold as a slave among a group of poorer Pagan people of Ireland. Many years of hardship through hunger, cold, rain and loneliness in a foreign country taught him to rely more strongly on his Christian faith for a sense of stability in a new world that seemed to lack the necessary understanding of love.

One day, as he tended to the sheep of his captors, he realised how the one true God in the things he observed in nature was sustaining him and keeping him alive despite all the suffering (the sunshine for warmth, the fresh water satisfying his thirst, the foods he found for additional sustenance etc). Then he heard a voice in his head suggesting he can return home in a ship if he followed his faith.

After 6 years being held against his wish in a foreign land, his creative and defiant spirit finally took over and he followed the voice in his head to see where it would lead him. The young man decided to escape on foot across Ireland despite the risk to his life if he was captured, relying simply on the water and food of the land for sustenance and his intelligence and creativity to avoid detection.

Miraculously he managed to reach the Eastern coast of Ireland where he found someone who was prepared to take him back to England after observing how this strange man was able to pray like a Christian. Clearly this was no ordinary Irishman.

On his return to England, he was welcomed with open arms by his family and the people of his own township. Soon everyone learned of the man's incredible story of capture, living in Ireland, and how he escaped the land. It was considered at the time the first person to ever do so as a slave.

It wasn't long before his remarkable story and strong Christian faith would see English priests sufficiently impressed to allow the young man to become a priest himself and later a bishop. Yet his life's work had only just began.

The voice of God seemed to call him once again saying the people of Ireland needed him. It would take him some time to resign himself to the fact that he had a task to perform in this foreign land. Understandable considering the hardship he went through. Yet somehow he must have realised the people of Ireland were missing something in their lives. The multiple gods in this ancient and brutal Pagan society was not helping the people to see a better way of living.

The lack of love in a nation yearning to be loved eventually brought the man back to Ireland.

Over the next few years he convinced an incredible number of Irish people to follow the one true loving God by using a simple language spoken in the native tongue of Ireland which he had learned during his time as a slave. The ideas of God and love and in solving many social problems in an alternative way helped the people to understand life more clearly and to reach for yet another higher level of existence through the Christian faith.

In return for this knowledge, the people of Ireland gave him the love and the things he needed to survive and live peacefully.

Back in England the Christian king and some of the bishops were getting jealous of the man's increasing fame and success. They wanted to pick on his weaknesses in a vain attempt to see him as a sinner. The man had to return to England to answer charges that he had sinned unto God.

The man tried to convince his fellow Christians in England that what he did for the people if Ireland was right. For example, he did not speak Latin to the people of Ireland and his methods were somewhat unorthodox. Yet this should not have made a difference when speaking the language of love.

Unfortunately the behaviour of his colleague priests and bishops still weren't in keeping with the Christian faith and the true principle of love as he understood it.

The man felt disillusioned by the Christian leaders in England. No longer could he stay in a country that forget so easily the true principle of love and which became more preoccupied with following specific rules from the head of the Church in Rome. Instead he left the place he once called home for the last time to return to Ireland where he felt the people could benefit more from his teachings than he could ever achieve from his so-called Christians in England. He wrote letters explaining his strong convictions, how God spoke to him, and gave a clear account of his entire life story in vivid detail.

His courage and persistence in writing eventually saw him left alone by the religious authorities in England. Perhaps the man felt abandoned in Ireland by the English religious authorities. Yet the Irish people made him feel at home as he continued to help them until his death.

The man's incredible strength, sacrifice, determination to survive, conviction and support for his own understanding of the principle of love as taught by the original religious leader in the Bible, appreciating the simple life, realising how nature was supporting him, to allow his mind and body to acutely be sensitive to his natural environment, to think about problems and be an excellent problem solver, and his tremendous love for the Irish people, even those who the English Christians thought could never be helped, had turned him into a Saint.

Today the Irish people remember the man as St Patrick, which is celebrated on 17 March every year.

1,150 to 1,519 YEARS AGO

The time of the Aztecs would reign supreme in central Mexico.

It began around 1150 AD when as many as 175,000 people came into the Valley of Mexico — a fertile valley containing a plentiful supply of water and rich fertile lands. Any wars that may have existed between feuding tribal groups prior to this time — probably over food and territory — had vanished as if by agreement, or the realisation that in a land filled with abundance there was no need to fight each other.

As more people came to the area, some of the original people who owned the fertile land decided it would be better to lease it to others to do the work of growing food and so free up the land owners time to do other things, enjoy more luxuries from society, increase their wealth, and develop greater power when making decisions for a greater number of people (does this remind you of any modern civilisation?). As the population swelled to around 1 million in the late Aztec period of 1350 to 1519 AD, people were placing considerable stress on the environment. By early 1500 AD, all available fertile land and surface water in the valley were virtually exhausted. Why? Because the land was being frivolously and carelessly cleared of the trees, rain washed the valuable nutrients away from the soil making it harder to grow food, and the swamp was drained of its waters to create raised fields and places for some of the inhabitants to live which in turn increased evaporation of the water to the hot Sun.

In an increasingly resource-limited and population-expanding society, a hierarchical system of powerful Aztec rulers, religious leaders and elite overlords began monopolising power in the city. As the leaders got richer through the early abundance of food and other goods and later leased the land to other people, a separate class of people called the commoners created their own markets free of state control. People could produce their own goods consisting of growing water-thirsty cotton crops and making cotton textiles, as well as pottery, statuettes and offering other kinds of services.

Yet no matter how much richer the rulers got, or how many people worked the land, the environment wasn't getting any better. The rains became increasingly infrequent and the crops were not as plentiful as they once were.

The rich and powerful with their lack of environmental knowledge probably passed laws into Aztec society making it a requirement for commoners to work harder and for longer or pay the upper class more money as well as food as if the leaders thought too many commoners were dole bludgers and were not providing adequate contribution to society to help explain the low resource situation. The truth, however, was that some of the rich and powerful were probably locked away in their own world of luxury that made them oblivious to the environmental destruction, or thought things will return to normal some day (the modern day equivalent of rich R-wing people who don't believe in climate change). While others, namely the religious leaders of later generations immune to life on the land and thus no understand of hard work in growing food, had no practical knowledge to give to the commoners and were increasingly resorting to religion for a solution as people sought answers.

But why did a civilisation had to rely on religion as the way out of their predicament? Weren't the commoners given practical (more scientific) knowledge of how to look after the environment and recycle everything they produced? Part of the reason was that giving too much knowledge to the commoners is a dangerous thing. It could undermine the power of those who were rich and supposedly leading society along the right path. The other reason could be to do with the way some rich and powerful Aztec rulers and overloads became obsessed with death.

Some of the questions that may have filled the minds of the rich and powerful at the time could have included, What's the purpose of life? Is there a greater meaning to our existence? Is it really to fill one's belly with food that the whole meaning of our existence and the purpose of life and the Universe can be understood? If it is was, why do people still die? Why is death so much a part of this Universe and life cannot escape from it? And why do people continue to suffer?

This fatally flawed obsession consumed the life of the Aztecs, especially among the rich and powerful and eventually the religious leaders whose job it was to support the elite in finding a solution to this great problem.

Eventually human knowledge of the practical things like how to grow food would be supplemented or perhaps, after a period of time, replaced by religious knowledge. Once the Aztecs made religion the dominant feature of their lives, the scene was set for the destruction of a great civilisation.

Towards the end of the Aztec empire between 1500 and 1519 AD, the commoners became very poor as they tried desperately to resort to non-food products such as cotton and increasing the production of textiles to sell to whoever could afford to buy it and so help them pay the elite overlords for the land as well as import any food from towns and villages far away. Soon religious activities increased as a way for the people and the leaders to solve the food shortages. Soon a reason was created for the hardship: the gods were unhappy. To make the gods happy again, somehow they must be nourished and maintained like those of the elite in order for the people to be nourished and maintained with an abundance of food.

It seems the religious leaders found a way to appease the gods by observing how the dead buried in a plot of land after a period of time and receiving some water can suddenly grow a abundance of vegetation than in an area not containing the dead as if somehow the bodies were helping to restore the land and bring back fertility. So a religious idea was born: why not sacrifice some blood to the Earth as this may somehow nourish the gods? As crude as the idea may seem to us today, it does provide a primitive way of understanding why death exists in the Universe.

We know without death, life in the Universe would not exist. No one could survive in an infinite population of the living. Death is an inherent part of this Universe in order for life in the Universe to exist and with reasonable comfort (depending on the population levels). But only if the natural recycling systems of the Universe including our environment are allowed to work in order to restore balance. Thus one could create a story to help explain this inherent nature of the Universe by saying death is a way to make God happy and restore balance to the Universe for life to continue.

Unfortunately some religious leaders in Aztec society took the idea too far.

As first some blood letting performed in rituals under these leaders may have coincided with some periods of rain to help reinforce the idea. But when the rains stopped again and would not return for a longer period of time, the leaders thought it was necessary for more and more blood to be spilled to make the gods (i.e. the environment) happy. Soon many people had to die in these sacrifices to help bring this sense of balance to the Universe and thus hopefully appease God, or the gods (whoever or whatever is responsible for controlling the production of food and water in the valley).

To further add to the woes of the Aztecs, the constant war between the Aztecs and Tarascan people eventually saw enough weapons cross the border from Tarascan and into the hands of the commoners through the Aztec market system. The time was ripe for a major revolt.

Indeed, the tipping point finally came when certain religious leaders were asking too much from the commoners. And too many people from outside the Aztec community were being sacrificed (including babies because of how some religious leaders were developing a psychopathic view of blood and tears of the babies representing the rain in the eyes of the gods) in order to appease the gods. Soon the elite in the Aztec civilisation could no longer be paid properly and too many people were beginning to starve for food as society began to descend into self-destruction.

The rich and powerful sensed something terrible was about to happen. Yet the stupidity continued. Rather than meeting with the people and searching for alternative solutions, the leaders hid themselves in their fortified and luxurious homes. They may have even tried to bring in loyal soldiers into specially designed stone barracks built next to the leaders homes thinking the army would protect them. But they would not save the leaders.

Eventually the massive population of commoners saw through all the religious crap and made the final decision to bring back some balance and to deal with the rich and powerful and religious leaders that led society along the path to hell. The decision was to end the civilisation for good no matter what the military or Aztec leaders would do to stop it. In fact, it was likely the military men joined with the commoners knowing they had no chance to protect themselves or anyone else. It was better to join with the people. Now the people had the power to change the future. No longer would they continue working for the leaders and supporting the outrageous religious rituals. The final act was really a bloody end, followed by looting and a great fire consuming all the resources and representations of deities and gods held by the rich and powerful. What could have been a prosperous and peaceful society if it took a balanced and more frugal approach to living and had understood the power of recycling everything including the biggest natural recycler of all — our environment — instead the civilisation took the road to self-destruction.

NOTE: Today, modern society has become obsessed with profit or economics and Western religion (perhaps to again defy death and rely on God to save us). Will our neglect of the environment put an end to our economic and religious system once more as if we have not learned from our past?


Around 900AD, Easter Island was once a place of remarkable beauty in the eyes of the formerly gentle and friendly Polynesians known as the Rapa Nui when they arrived. The island had a seemingly unlimited supply of trees and fresh water (an attitude not unlike what we see in the business community and most consumers of modern Western society). Together with the abundant supply of fish in the oceans acquired by the fishermen in boats made by the trees on the island, it seemed the place was of absolute paradise.

Then some time around 1,100AD, either food supplies were going down, the population was too large, greed and power had taken over in the minds of a handful of L-brain Polynesians (primarily males), or a combination of the three, but eventually some people had to take over positions of power and create a L-brain hierarchical system not unlikely what we have today in the Western world.

These L-brain leaders were driven by a religious view (not unlike what we see in the US today with US President George W. Bush at the helm with the religion of economics). It was a view that they had to appease the gods (or the gods of the financial tables in Western society) for the increasing hardship falling on the population of Easter Island. It is either that, or the leaders wanted to maintain power by claiming they were God to the less than inquisitive people of the island for the sake of greed. Either way, work was created for the men in return for rewards (i.e. a priority slice of the remaining food and other resources).

And what was so important that had to be done on the island to keep people preoccupied? To build the massive statues of Easter Island (or in today's modern world, to fight the war on terrorism or perform some other useless activity not related to looking after the environment). Yes, that's right. It wasn't to look after the environment by growing more trees so they can build and replace their old boats (or build a better boat that won't break so easily). It wasn't to collect the seeds and grow the food they need on land again. It wasn't even to find a way to get off the island. Instead it was all about the leaders controlling the people of the island to do as they were told by performing work in return for carefully rationised resources to make the leaders look more valuable to the group, stay rich and powerful, and to help them achieve their own narrow-minded religious beliefs that things will get better if people stick to the way things should be.

This is how most of the wood on the island got used up: the logs became the wheels for transporting the great rock statues to their current positions with the help of thousands of men (not unlike how the Pyramids in Egypt or the great skyscrapers of the Western world were built). In the meantime, the canoes for hunting the fish were few and far between as the trees for building the canoes were hard to come by. Another lethal combination was the fact that the population (already too high to be supported by the land) became increasingly more reliant on fish as a source of food because nothing by way of trees and shrubs was protecting the fresh water supplies from evaporation and the trees and shrubs weren't growing fast enough in the drier soil to help feed the population.

A time came when the last tree was cut down. This was a dangerous time. No more trees meant no more replacement canoes. And no canoes quickly saw a large number of the population suffer starvation.

Did the religious leaders continue to pretend everything would be okay if the people simply maintained the system and kept the gods happy through whatever rituals they performed? Or did the leaders try to ignore the plight of the people as they enjoyed the remaining riches of the island? Whatever the truth, the religious aims of the leaders soon collapsed. As people became too desperate, the leaders were eventually rounded up and burned in a ditch together with their now irrelevant religious views. Then the people themselves divided into groups and fought each other to reduce the competition and use each other as a source of food. Cannibalism became highly rampant. Eventually all the people died out either from the fighting, being eaten alive, or from starvation.

Now nothing survives on Easter Island except for the grasses, and a handful of birds and insects finding a tiny niche in this part of the world.

About the only sign of human habitation we can see on this lonely island are numerous large statues carved out of the local rocks and the flock of tourists who come to see the statues (and wondering what they all mean).

Will the people of Western society today go in the same way as the people of Easter Island?


We see battles continuing throughout history between people of different religious faiths as if some people are trying to prove one faith is better and presumably is closer to the one and true God compared to other faiths. The classic example is the battle of Vienna on 11 and 12 September 1683.

In this battle, Vienna was besieged by the Ottoman Empire led by a well-respected Turkish warrior and leader named Grand Vizier Merzifonlu Kara Mustafa Pasha. No less than 90,000 and as many as 300,000 men under the rule of Mustafa had amassed on the grounds outside the walls of Vienna. The aim of the Turkish leader was to take back the territory the Ottoman Empire had once occupied for a brief period over what was effectively a long and bloody battle lasting over 300 years between the Christian believers of the Holy Roman Empire living in Europe and those who believed in the Islamic faith, as can be found among the people of Turkey and some parts of Eastern Europe.

The battle ended almost as quickly as the Turkish leader arrived when Mustafa made the fatal decision just before the battle began of not securing a mountain ridge nearby despite one of the leaders of an alliance group recommending this should be done. As a result, an ageing Polish General saw an opportunity to inflict considerable damage and casualties to the large numbers of men that Mustafa had concentrated on the ground. With agreement of all other leaders from various supporting Christian-based European countries, the Polish leader ordered his men to lift a number of heavy cannons into position at the top of the ridge during the night and in the rain. By the following day, the battle for Vienna quickly swung around in favour of the Christians thanks to the terrible damage caused by the cannons on Mustafa's army. Then most of the remaining soldiers on the ground who were now in disarray were taken care of by Polish forces and the various other groups forming the European alliances.

It was a humiliating defeat for the Turkish leader. And since Islam does not believe in forgiveness as Christians do, Mustafa had to pay with his life by being strangled by two men as a witness to the rest of remaining army of what happens when leaders fail to deliver.

Over the next 16 years, European armies largely removed any remaining pockets of the Ottoman forces, thereby ending any dreams of leaders in Turkey of occupying much of Europe.

But why should a battle of different faiths have to take place at all?

What people don't seem to realise is that the way certain individuals express their faith in a God does not make their God any different from anyone's else's faith in a God. There is only one God. What are we trying to prove? All the names we may give to God and the places we may worship (whether it is a Moslem temple or a Christian Church) are what men have created for themselves in order to help them better understand this one God and to get closer to understanding this entity. But no single faith people have created represents the true faith or religion of God. This is something we must work together and approach to find this ultimate faith that combines all faiths into one. and so make it easier for everyone to see the same God.

So when we fight over a question of faith, we are simply fighting for the one God. Such a realisation should make us see the pointlessness of war if the reason for such battles is purely a question of faith. Fighting for the same God should make our enemies the same as our brothers. There is no enemy under the one true God we should be promoting.

In reality, the real reason for these battles over so-called faiths in a God are non-religious. In fact, leaders often hide their secret agenda behind the veil of religion. Usually this agenda is merely for materialistic gains in terms of acquiring wealth or territory, or love for another person, or a lack of understanding of God by showing a hatred to another person without really truly understanding the principle of love. What leaders often forget is that bringing religion into wars is not the true religion of God. The one and true God never teaches us to fight battles against other living creatures. The true religion has no place in any war. Instead it promotes the principle of love, even to our greatest enemies.

So when we hear of a battle of people's faith, it is not a battle of God, but rather the narrow-minded and earthly beliefs of those leaders who feel it is necessary to fight these wars just to prove they are more right, or they need to acquire something of importance to them (probably of a survival-based nature).

A true religion does not create wars. It is men who use it as an excuse to have wars, especially if it means encouraging people of the same faith (in terms of the way they pray, the names they use for God) to come together to fight a common cause (i.e. based on their faith) thinking that perhaps their faith is in jeopardy or they simply need to save their "brothers" who believe in the same things. But we all believe in the same God no matter who approaches the issue. Whether they are people on "our side" or people on the "other side", the belief in a God is the same God we are all striving to get closer to.


The last of the big flightless wingless birds were hunted to extinction on the islands of New Zealand by the Maori. Known as the Moa, these birds stood up to 3.5 metres in height. Now scientists believe they know why they disappeared. After analysing the growth rings in the stored bones of extinct Moas, scientists discovered the two Moa species may have taken several years to reach reproductive maturity and up to a decade to have a strong enough skeletal frame to defend itself and run away from the humans as well as support their offsprings.

Even so, at the end of the day it is really humans who are the idiots when it comes to thinking about their stomachs and egos. Blame it on the males of the human species whose egos and food demands are suddenly inflated every time they kill an animal much bigger than themselves. Such a macho thing to do, is it?

For an animal having the largest brain in comparison to its body, we are acting more like we have the smallest brain in comparison to our body.


The grand 300-year solar cycle lasting up 50 years (as opposed to the standard 11-year cycle) reached the Sun's lowest output of heat and light between 1650 and 1700, leading to particularly long-lasting and severe winters in England and Europe. The coldest was in 1683 when the river Thames froze.

NOTE: Europe and England can also experience colder winters than usual during periods of global warming. This is because as the ice melts in the Arctic ocean, the winds from the Arctic do not come down to stop the flow of cold winds from Siberia moving in from the East. But if the warm ocean currents from the Caribbean reaching Europe stops flowing, the cold weather in Europe will be much more severe. On the other hand, during the summer times, temperatures can rise quickly. Snow and ice across Europe and England will melt and create massive floods in low-lying areas and along major European rivers. The summer will also bring more rain. For other parts of the world, global warming will see continents experience severe droughts. If the droughts don't occur, it is only because the warm ocean currents are able to reach the coasts for extra rainfall. But once the ice in Antactica and Arctic regions fully melt, these ocean currents will significantly reduce.


The Industrial Revolution commences in Europe around the early 1800s. According to the United Nations InterGovernmental Report on Climate Change, global warming increased when human's began burning wood and coal for energy, but quickly accelerated as the demand for wood, oil and coal by businesses in the industrial age increased. As business professionals and their workers got paid, the population naturally increased thereby placing further demands for businesses to expand and produce more items and services for the people.

The high demand for energy is a combination of inefficient products needing large amounts of energy to run, the size of the products needed to be produced, and the number of people demanding those products. Making the products expensive may have reduced the demand and restricted its use to the rich members of society. But as the scale of economies allow the products to reduce in price, more and more people were able to afford the products.

Another thing that also went out the window at this time was the idea of working only so much as needed to survive. Rather than "work to live", the motto for a growing number of business people became closer to "live to work" as individuals realised materialism was the key to building untold wealth and business people could become rich by selling as many products as possible to customers. Workers in the early days would be forced to work longer hours in poor conditions and age was no limit to who could work for these business people. It was a time when the principle of love was not high on the agenda for a number of business people (except for their own families, friends and like-minded business people).

Not surprisingly, we see many of these early businesses run by males. And their strong L-brain skills helped to improve the efficiency and complexity of various products in an attempt to meet demands as well as provide unique selling points to the products for the more discerning buyers.

As humans applied more L-brain skills of the Western European world to the rest of the world, the arrival of the first Europeans to Australia saw the introduction of many traditional "non-recycling" ways of farming the land, hunting for animals, and gathering other resources as needed not only to survive but also to become famous, powerful and rich. For example, the new settlers effectively stopped "patchy" burning by Aborigines. Eventually the fuel loads on the ground built-up and the appearance of massive broad-scale and intense fires have become the norm in modern Australian life.

As for the hunting techniques employed by white settlers in Australia, this has effectively wiped out 20 mammal species weighing between 35 and 5,500 grams in size. All we have remaining are a few small animals and only a very few large potentially "high breeding" mammals like kangaroos and emus to survive on the remaining tough, more fire-resistant vegetation of the Australian continent. As a result, the Australian continent combined with increasing carbon dioxide emissions from the growing industrialised world would see the land dry up significantly.

By the time the 21st century would come around, the pressing issue on many Australians would be where to find enough fresh water and how to allocate the remaining resource in an efficient way to maintain their way of life including how to continue with current economic principles.

Sure humans may enjoy the occasional and rare climatic conditions known as the "El Nina" to bring back some of the rains and give a false sense of security to the Australian people as they say "She'll be right, mate!". But unfortunately it is all too short lived. Australia is just one of those countries where it will experience longer spells of more intense and extreme droughts conditions under global warming.

Perhaps the Australian people should concentrate more on rebuilding the environment, re-establishing the great inland sea, and focus more on developing fully recyclable products and services as the key to solving all the water issues including making this natural commodity more reliable and in plentiful supply over the long-term? Or will profit drive the ambitions of many Australians in the 21st century towards self-destruction?


The possibility that something alien could be travelling around in the skies of Earth inside glowing symmetrical flying objects surrounded by a cloud on occasions especially during the time of Moses may have returned. Are we encountering another similar scenario?

All we know so far is that humans have began to develop primitive balloons and airship technologies in the late 19th century to help lift people off the ground. Soon sightings of glowing disks started to emerge and get reported in some newspapers (around 1890s). These objects would reappear during World War II as foo-fighters only to move away and reappear again in northern Europe where they would act like rockets coming down from the sky and occasionally more close up views. They would disappear and suddenly make their presence known in the lower south-western corner of the United States where a lot of testing of new aircraft, the first atomic bomb, and other military and scientific activities would take place.

Once World War II ended, UFOs would be seen in the USA and other parts of the developed world in far more detail than ever before. The most logical and rational explanations by scientists are based on what we are already familiar with, which is mainly either secret US military experiments or natural phenomena. And if the observations are a little too unusual, why not categorize them as hallucinations or hoaxes?. So much easier to solve the problem using these rational explanations while the more unusual and close-range UFOs continue to remain elusive to most scientists.

Whatever some of the more unusual close-range UFOs are according to some civilian witnesses who reported them to the authorities, the rapid technological developments in the US would become a prime focus for a series of intense UFO waves between 1947 and 1964, including a remarkable event in New Mexico of something symmetrical and metallic with unusual small and very thin bodies with large heads crashing near Roswell on 2-3 July 1947 and where the U.S. Air Force and Army have decided to do everything to cover it up to this day. Yet more and more cracks in the cover up would emerge as the observations get more closely analysed and some scientists discover important discrepancies in the official explanation given by the USAF (the people responsible for allegedly recovering and analysing the original crashed disk materials and bodies).

>If UFOs are meant to be natural phenomena, the US military are acting odd after the Roswell event by continuing to cover up the materials and object they had found to this day and to deny any possible alien explanation. This includes the discovery of a dark-greyish titanium-based shape-memory alloy that never existed in 1947 or prior to this time and the technology to make the alloy pure enough to reveal the shape-memory property was not available, not to mention the leak reports from an anonymous geomagnetic expert of a supposedly electromagnetic technology behind the UFOs after analysing the alleged crashed disk. If all this is untrue, it is hard to imagine a meteorite or some other natural phenomena could create such continued and heightened secrecy over UFOs. And if UFOs are secret military experiments, why is it that we are not privileged to learn about these experiments which we presume were conducted as early as in the late 1940s? Too many people have seen them and some have experienced radiation-poisoning in the presence of these objects. Eventually someone is going to have to explain what is going on.


On 30 June 1908, an object was seen hurtling from space at approximately 7.15am. The object entered the Earth's atmosphere and turned into a bluish-white ball of fire as it raced across the summer sky, leaving behind it a trail of multicoloured smoke. Soon afterwards, at 7.17am (Siberian time), it exploded at an altitude of 16 kilometres above the ground with a blinding flash of light and releasing the energy of a thousand Hiroshima atomic bombs in a desolate region near the Podkamennaya Tunguska River, in remote central Siberia.

As a result of the massive explosion, over 3000 square kilometres of pine forests ignited and continued burning for days, ferocious winds rattled doors and windows of people's homes and 600 kilometres from the epicentre, and tremors were recorded at Irkutsk's seismographic centre nearly 900 kilometres to the south. The explosion was of such tremendous proportions that almost all trees within a radius of 64 kilometres around the blast site (approximately 80 million trees) were flattened outwards like match sticks.

The accompanying thunderclaps could be heard up to a distance of 80 kilometres. Dirt and burnt debris was sucked-up and thrown 20 kilometres above the Tunguska region to fall as a shower of 'black rain' within 24 hours. Massive glowing silvery clouds suddenly appeared over northern Europe and Siberia, which became so bright during the next few nights that in some places it was possible to read a book at midnight without the aid of artificial lights. When Russian scientists finally investigated this remote and mostly uninhabited area notably Leonard Kulik, a mineralogist nearly 20 years later, no crater or meteor rock was found.

Further discussions with witnesses near the scene of the explosion reported a blinding flash, expanding shock waves, black rain of debris, and an apparently mushroom-shaped cloud formed immediately after the blast. This made some scientists think that perhaps it was a nuclear explosion of some sort. However measurements of radioactivity in the Tunguska soil using sensitive equipment were performed some fifty years after the incident. Scientists found little sign of radiation, but radioactive caesium-137 was traced in much higher quantities than normal in the inner rings of living trees that would coincide with the 1908 explosion. Consequently, some people have proposed that a nuclear-powered spaceship went out of control and crashed in this sparsely-populated area of swamps and forests.

Today scientists have opted for a natural explanation: that an icy comet fragment (or possibly a small asteroid covered with ice) previously lost in the glare of the Sun weighing between 100,000 to more than a million tons, and measuring up to 70 metres across, collided with the Earth at a speed of perhaps 100,000 kilometres per hour, leaving no trace of itself after impact. Or if it was a rocky asteroid, the size would be about 10 metres across.

Whatever it was, scientists are confident it is of natural causes.

95 to 60 YEARS AGO

Conflict between nations in Europe would reach a climax with the advent of World War I between 1915 and 1918. More than a million soldiers from up to a dozen countries would be sent to their deaths by their leaders to fight a war that could have been avoided in the first place if the knowledge from certain wise men in the past were heeded.

People would naively describe World War I as "the war to end all wars". But we know this is untrue. As if we have not learned anything about setting a brighter future for generations to come, World War II began in the 1930s among essentially the same nations (e.g. Germany, France, the UK, Australia and Russia) with assistance from the United States over what was believed to be economic hardship placed on Germany by European nations after the previous world war and how a German leader emerged with delusional ideas of becoming the greatest nation on earth through an invasion of various other nations.

Again this is an issue of so-called male leaders thinking they can become the most powerful and richest people on earth. And at what cost to achieve this stupid aim?


Another man emerges into the world with, yet again, the same realisation as some other male leaders in the past of how important the principle of love is and why we should focus more on the spiritual adventure. He was born in India. And over many years of personal experience and in watching his own people be repressed and controlled by British rule in India, as well as plenty of time to think about the issues of the day, he would develop the moral behaviours and discipline based on the principle of love which he believes would help his people to solve all their problems.

His name would be Mahatma Ghandi. A quietly-spokened eccentric individual with a unique way of dealing with the repressive and profit-focused British authorities in his time by making it as expensive and difficult to manage as possible when putting many Ghandi supporters as well as the man himself into prison, as well as showing to the media the worse side of the British authorities when they want to protect their position of power.

For some people, in particular those in Britain, it seems there was this view that the Earth contained a seemingly infinite amount of materials and how the power of economics as a means of getting rich in order to improve living standards and extend lifespan had allured many to its glory. And for a while it looked as though it would continue to march on unimpeded as if there is no tomorrow no matter what could be happening to the environment and to other people. The power of love was not going to stop this kind of thinking. it would take World War II to nearly bankrupt the British Government to eventually force the authorities to let go of India and let this nation become independent and so fulfilling a lifelong dream Ghandi had for his homeland.

But then came the religious tensions between muslim and Hindu people. The separation of old India into a new India and Pakistan (the new and secure home for muslim people) was not to Ghandi'a liking. He continued to fight for equality, this time among the muslims living in India. But this ended up being too much for one man who felt strongly against the muslims and the dividing of old India to see Ghandi get assassinated.

People have a lot more learning of the principle of love to do.

When will we finally learn?


Something interesting occurred in the deserts of New Mexico, USA, on 2-3 July 1947 which would forever change the attitude of the highly male-dominated and strongly L-brain U.S. military so soon after World War II.

According to witnesses at the time of the incident, a strange symmetrical and metallic glowing object allegedly flew over the city of Roswell and headed straight for a thunderstorm that was sweeping over New Mexico. A couple of hours later, an odd explosion was heard by a rancher in the midst of numerous lighting strikes over one particular area of the desert. It looked as if something had been hit by the lightning.

Yet the entire object somehow managed to remain in the air as it flew at high speeds (probably a wrong decision by whoever had flown the object) in an attempt to escape from the thunderstorm, but not without materials falling out of one end of the object where the damage was greatest after the lighting struck it down and allegedly up to three bodies fell out and hit the ground approximately 30 kilometres from the initial fatal lighting strike.

The next morning, the local rancher who heard the odd explosion went on horseback with a young boy from a neighbouring farm to help him check on his sheep, especially considering all the noise of the lightning strikes on his property and how this may have affected his sheep. He found this sheep, apparently avoiding a particular area. They seemed to be fine. But when he looked in the area, what he found were materials that excited him to no end because of how unusual they were in terms of their toughness, extremely lightweight characteristics, and behaving in a manner for the newspaper-thin metallic foil that he could not forget because nothing in his experience of seeing similar foil in his part of the world would behave in the way he observed the foil he saw. Today, we understand this foil to be a shape-memory foil capable of returning to its original shape.

As for the object itself, it is claimed a civil engineer and some archaeologists and students came upon the object and additional bodies some 200 kilometres to the west on the same morning that the rancher first discovered his unusual debris. The only thing linking the two, apart from the bodies, is the dark-greyish metallic skin found on the disk. Is this the disk that dropped dark-grey metallic foil and other debris over the rancher's property? And who were these unusual occupants?

All the materials were picked up the U.S. Air Force (at the rancher's property, including the three bodies) and Army (the rest of the materials and remaining bodies).

While the witnesses who touched the materials from the first crash site are certain they observed what appears to be a new shape-memory metal and other odd materials, we learn that the USAF had a sudden interest and need to manufacture a titanium-based (the element of sudden interest to the USAF after the event and the ones to request new technology to increase the purity of titanium alloys) dark-grey metallic alloy known as nitinol after 1947 with assistance from scientists at the Battelle Memorial Institute in Ohio. However, the shape-memory effect was not officially detected until after 1958 by U.S. Navy metallurgists, and since then the world of shape-memory alloys began to interest scientists in other developed nations.

Together with the unusual bodies, it would appear that the US military had quickly realised the importance of the find and have decided (initially for fear of creating a mass panic) to keep it a big secret.

The reason for keeping the event secret can be understood by looking at the history and the way the public would behave about anything weird reaching the Earth. In particular, the US military generals, intelligence chiefs and US President Harry S. Truman were deciding behind closed doors whether or not to reveal the truth to the public as several documents released under US FoI and discussions with retired top military brass have shown. But as soon as evidence of panic and social chaos emerged from events such as the CBS radio broadcast of Orson Welles War of the Worlds, Truman decided it was in the best interest of his people and the rest of the world to maintain the secrecy at all costs.

We know the Roswell materials were sent for analysis at Wright-Patterson AFB (the place where nitinol was first studied in pure form immediately after 1947 with assistance from Battelle scientists) before the evidence was eventually moved to another more secret location. Some scientific reports from the period may exist in secret vaults held at the air base. But it would take a major Congressional hearing and a courageous U.S. President to order the vaults open for public scrutiny as well as forcing the USAF to reveal the evidence they have kept of the momentous event.

Did any other president learn about the event?

There are indications that President Dwight D. Eisenhower had a personal glimpse of the evidence during a secret trip he made one night with assistance from the CIA and the military. But that was believed to be the last time any president would get the privilege to see what was recovered. Rumours have it that his reaction to the materials and bodies was enough for him to visit the church the nest day (not something the president was noted of doing on a regular basis) and to never speak again of what he saw. Since then, the CIA has chosen to go at it alone by not telling other US presidents of the discovery.

Only US President John F. Kennedy posed the biggest security risk for the CIA and the U.S. military (in particular, the USAF)with his official request in a memo he wrote to share all UFO secret intelligence files with the American space agency NASA and Russia. At the time, Kennedy was not only interested in seeing the first man on the Moon, but he also wanted to make realistic and achievable efforts for greater co-operation and peace with Russia when he asked in a formerly Top Secret memo dated 12 November 1963:

"SUBJECT: Classification review of all UFO intelligence files affecting National Security.

As I had discussed with you previously, I have initiated [unintelliigible] and have instructed James Webb to develop a program with the Soviet Union in joint space and lunar exploration. It would be very helpful if you would have the high threat cases reviewed with the purpose of identification of bona fide as opposed to classified CIA and USAF sources. It is important that we make a clear distinction between the knowns and unknowns in the event the Soviets try to mistake our extended cooperation as a cover for intelligence gathering of their defence and space programs.

When this date has been sorted out, I would like you to arrange a program of data sharing with NASA where Unknowns are a factor. This will help NASA mission directors in their defensive responsibilities.

I would like an interim report on the data review no later than February 1, 1964.

/S/ John F. Kennedy." (Original copy is with Robert and Ryan Wood, investigators of UFO-related US Government documents (originally available from as of 1 July 2012. If the web page is moved, another copy can be found at as of August 2011.)

President Kennedy's request for release of UFO information came at a time when he succeeded in getting broad agreement in top level dialogue with the former Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev to work together on all future space and lunar projects and to release classified UFO files held by the CIA to NASA to show UFOs were not examples of Cold War psychological warfare plans.Unfortunately, he never succeeded in his aim to release UFO information, let alone receive a response to his request. No UFO secrets would ever be shared despite skeptics and the USAF under Project Blue Book in the 1960s claiming UFOs are nothing more than ordinary natural and man-made phenomena. The highly sensitive nature of UFOs (or should that be Identified Flying Objects, or IFOs, if we go along with the U.S. authorities recommendations?) to certain people was made evident when at 12.31 p.m. on the hot, sunny afternoon of 22 November 1963, President Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, Texas. Who assassinated the president has remained one of the most controversial in history as the man allegedly responsible for the shooting, Lee-Harvey Oswald, was very soon after killed by Jack Ruby, a nightclub owner with Mafia connections, before Oswald could ever reveal his knowledge to the public.

As history tells us, Mr Oswald was led vulnerably by two policemen from the county jail on Houston Street in Dealey Plaza through a crowd of 75 reporters and numerous policemen and civilians when somebody shouted "Do you have anything to say in your defence?" Probably a good time for Oswald to admit if he did it. However, Oswald didn't have time to reply. Mr Ruby suddenly pushed himself through the crowd, pointed a handgun at Mr Oswald and shot him. Mr Oswald later died in hospital.

Before Mr Oswald was led along his final walk through the crowd by the policemen, he did attempt to state briefly to reporters previously as he was escorted in the corridor of the Dallas Police Department that he denied killing the president (and a Dallas police officer named J. D. Tippit on a local street about 45 minutes after the president was shot). He said:

"I don't know what dispatches you people have been given, but I emphatically deny these charges. I have NOT committed any acts of violence."

Yet somehow his fingerprints were found on the rifle located in the Texas School Book Depository. Everything would seem like an open and shut case. Mr Oswald must be lying. Up to three bullets must have been fired from what appears to be his rifle (which he did own a very similar if not the same weapon). It looks as if Mr Oswald had pressed the trigger in an attempt to kill the president. However, what complicates the matter is that no one can be certain the rifle was definitely owned by Mr Oswald, and it would appear that Mr Oswald was not alone in the room. Whether he was asked to fire the rifle under duress by someone else, or he was on his way to leaving the library (6) but was unaware a similar rifle to his own was being used to kill the president and it just happened to have his fingerprints all over it, an additional fingerprint was found on a cardboard box in the room in a position next to the window where the rifle was fired out of it. At first the fingerprint seemed to match a man named Malcolm "Mac" Wallace (he had killed a man some years earlier for having an affair with his wife and his fingerprints were recorded and kept by the police). An experienced ex-Marines sniper and marksman. If anyone could fire at the president at that distance, Mr Wallace had a better chance than Mr Oswald. Yet investigators could find no good reason why Mr Wallace would need to be in the room despite witnesses placing him (or someone looking very much like him) in the building at the right time. Or was it someone else who looked very much like him? According to Joan Mellens, a closer look at the fingerprint on the box is looking like it does not match Mr Wallace's police record. And there seems to be an alibi claiming Mr Wallace was at his home. Or did someone else look like him and stayed at his home while Mr Wallace did the shooting? If so, what was his intention? And could he have fired on the president, and not Mr Oswald?

Another concerning issue is the third bullet that actually killed the president. This bullet appeared not to be of the type fired from the rifle in the Book Depository room. Furthermore, Italian weapons experts using the same type of rifle found in the Depository Book room (the same type also owned by Mr Oswald for up to 7 months prior to the assassination) was unable to fire, reload, aim and re-fire again in under 19 seconds to account for all the bullets fired at the president as well as the problem of waiting for the president to appear from behind a large tree for a reasonably clear shot. And even then, it would require an expert marksmen to fire at that distance. Mr Oswald, on the other hand, was a mediocre gunman (7). Just to add to the strange nature of this event, not even the couple of witnesses who allegedly saw two men come up to policemen Tippet and shoot him could confirm that Mr Oswald was present and had been one of the men involved. Yet a person of similar body build was linked to Mr Oswald. Mr Oswald knew at the time Tippet was shot that something had happened to the President. After his employer let all the employees go home, he decided to watch a movie. But he was picked up by police after a tip-off from a member of the public. Unfortunately the FBI-backed Warren Commission went to extraordinary lengths to establish that all the bullets came from this one rifle with Mr Oswald's fingerprints on it. Together with knowledge that Mr Oswald did own a similar (if not the same) rifle, and had used it in the past in a failed attempt to kill Major-General Walker, the simplest solution was to point the finger at Mr Oswald as the only person who could have killed the president.

It seems too convenient.

Was President Kennedy and later Mr Oswald taken out by the CIA with the help of the Mafia to avoid sensitive UFO information getting through to the public? Or was it the crazy antics of a lone gunman as the CIA and FBI-backed Warren Commission on the assassination in September 1964 wanted to conclude?

For more than 55 years, serious questions remained unanswered while the majority of the American people remained skeptical of the "one gunman" theory. For example, an unidentified man in the crowd was observed opening up the only umbrella on a sunny, hot day and holding it high above his head just before the assassination began and then closing it after the shooting, how the bullets hitting the President seem to come from two different directions (there was a puff of smoke from behind a fence on top of a knoll more in front of the president's car which confused some witnesses into thinking someone was firing on the president from this direction; or was it more the fact that someone was using cigarettes to create smoke to help add to the confusion for the public?), and the missing autopsy report, photographs and actual brain samples from the President's head all added to the conspiracy theory that Mr Oswald was not the lone gunman we were all led to believe. Someone else appeared to be involved in the killing of the president. (8)

Could it be the CIA?

All we know is that the CIA has used the Mafia in the past to do its dirty work. For example, the CIA hired the Mafia in a failed attempt to kill Cuban leader Fidel Castro during the Bay of Pigs fiascoe. So any involvement by the Mafia in stopping Mr Oswald from revealing evidence to the media or the independent commission if paid enough money or other rewards could be easily linked back to the CIA.

And certainly the CIA would have the motive to take out Kennedy after his revealing memo on UFOs.

Perhaps we may never know.

Whatever really happened, we do know the need to maintain secrecy behind UFOs is a matter of national security by the top echelons of the US spy agencies and the military community (in particular the US Air Force). Initially it was to avoid public panic. But now it is more to do with maintaining power and staying rich under the current economic system so long as other people are made to believe all UFOs are IFOs or to at least get people to be preoccupied in areas that would force people to maintain the current economic system and hence be kept in the dark about the true situation regarding UFOs and what was discovered in 1947.

The key is to keep people preoccupied with making money and surviving (or fighting the war on terror and other earthly issues), or believing in something else. Never on understanding the true nature of UFOs and the possibility of a new electromagnetic technology. To those in the know, it is just not in their nature to be honest. Where money and power is at stake, it is the only way certain people in the know can maintain their facade and perhaps introduce certain technologies slowly to help maximise their power and being rich.

A few cracks in the US policy of extreme UFO secrecy would emerge. For example, we find evidence in the old metallurgical journals of how the US Air Force was involved in nitinol research between 1948-49 and showed interest in other shape memory alloys (with properties corresponding remarkably well to observations of the shape memory metallic foil seen by witnesses near Roswell in July 1947) with the help of scientists at the Battelle Memorial Institute, which raises serious questions as to how the military created the alloy in 1947 at a time when the technology for making pure titanium in adequate quantities to reveal this property was not available to help explain the witnesses' observations. Another serious crack would occur after 1975 when citizens against UFO secrecy successfully forced the US Government to release a few thousand pages of UFO information under the US Freedom of Information Act (FoIA). Some of those documents would mention at least one crashed disk in New Mexico.

To counteract this situation, a decision was made to sanction the records of Project Blue Book (which closed down in 1969) for public scrutiny in the hope the public will be convinced that UFOs are IFOs, and through the release of anonymous and somewhat dubious US UFO government documents such as the Majestic 12 document, photographs and films of dead aliens, and fake employees from Area 51 to keep UFO investigators and researchers busy and away from critical areas of research while ensuring the scientific community would never be open-minded enough to study the subject.

In the meantime, certain well-paid individuals in the US either directly involved in the big secret or others who don't know the secret but were willing to do as they were told for enough money would infiltrate key positions of power in the US military, secret intelligence and a few civilian organisations (and politically through the US Administration in more recent times). These individuals would wield enormous power on the local, national and international scene by promoting many strong L-brain (i.e. R-wing) ideas needed to keep the big secret going for as long as is possible.

Among the attempts to stop the public and the rest of the world from learning the great truth include:

  1. debunking UFOs at every turn;
  2. getting the skeptical scientific community to support the idea that there is nothing to be advanced from the study of UFOs;
  3. paying government scientists in the 1950s to support a way of life that is unhealthy (e.g. mainly to eat more carbohydrates to supposedly reduce fat and make us more healthy, when in fact there is no real scientific basis to support this idea and could well be making us more fatter and unhealthier), making people as lazy and uneducated as possible and/or too busy making money and therefore not curious enough to learn new ideas, while influencing as many people to participate in mainstream "uncreative" L-brain jobs considered generally "safe" in the eyes of the US military (e.g. join the Army or support the current economy). (9)

During the creative public period when people considered the possibility of ETs existing somewhere in the universe, these R-wing ideas would be accelerated after 1980 with the help of the US government, with subtle influence from the US military and intelligence organisations. It is thought the war on terrorism is just one approach to stopping the truth from coming out.

The rest of the world, on seeing this superficial situation and in believing UFOs are nothing out of the ordinary, would merely follow the US lead in order to maintain their place and relevance on the world stage, enjoy the benefits of maintaining the system, and so be seen as though they are "part of the global team" (i.e. non-terrorists).

We are certainly not a sufficiently creative bunch today to see through the US military and intelligence aims.

This will have to change in the 21st century.

25 October 2017

As U.S. President Donald Trump is under investigations for alleged contacts with Russian leader Vladimir Putin and links to Russian interference in the last U.S. elections, he decides in the interest of openness and showing he has nothing to hide to order the CIA to release files it has kept in relation to the assassination of former president John F. Kennedy. Initially he wanted to release all the files. However, it has turned out that someone else with connections to the CIA has convinced Trump to be circumspect about what can be released. Certain CIA files remain too sensitive.

So on Friday 27 October 2017, the CIA gathered 3,000 files and sent them for "release", of which only 2,800 were actually handed over. As a further measure of the sensitivity of the matter to the CIA, heavy redaction of the information can be seen. Unfortunately such heavy-handedness by the censors will only fuel the public controversy surrounding Kennedy's death.

The files generally try to paint Lee Harvey Oswald as the prime suspect, together with various reasons why it may have happened. For example, we see in some documents a link between the Soviets and Oswald. In fact, in one CIA memo, we learn a KGB defector was aware of this link. It was clear Oswald had lived in Russia a decade earlier, and just 6 days before Kennedy's assassination he visited the Cuban and Soviet embassies in Mexico City. The KGB defector further added that the Soviet spies were unaware of Oswald and what he was up to. This would suggest to the person that Oswald may have been "an agent of the KGB".

And in another document we learn that the Russians thought Oswald was a "neurotic maniac" to the point where they did not want to get involved with him.

However, because of the event that took place with the death of John F. Kennedy, the Russians learned about Oswald and became more concerned about the U.S. starting a third world war against the communist country should the link between Oswald and Russia be made. Just like the Cuban missile crisis where the Russians stepped back from the brink of nuclear war, Russian officials were afraid of the repercussions should this information come out. Interestingly certain information did come out and was kept by the CIA but never released, even when the Warren Commission into Kennedy's death was taking place. Apparently the documents were being gathered to probably help protect the CIA at some point in the future should enough evidence be found to implicate the agency in the assassination.

At any rate, thanks to this Russian connection, a whole new conspiracy theory has been established to keep the American public busy wondering who really killed Kennedy.

As far as the reason for the assassination are concerned, the documents indicate that there are many and varied. Strangely not one document tries to question the CIA in the matter. Not surprising, Why would any document implicating the CIA in Kennedy's death be kept? It just would not give the perception the CIA is looking for of being a good guy trying to protect American citizens.

So, was it really Lee Harvey Oswald who killed Kennedy? The CIA, and now President Trump, would like to think so. Rather convenient for Trump given his own difficulties at the present time, and it would get the CIA off the hook too. Unfortunately, too many flaws exist in the Lee Harvey Oswald "one man" theory. Sure, he was present at the time of Kennedy's death. And a bullet was fired from a rifle that appears to be his own (because of the fingerprints) and did reach the president and later got lodged in the driver. But this was not enough to kill Kennedy. In fact, the bullet that passed through Kennedy's neck was not fatal as Kennedy spoke calmly to his wife and driver telling them he had been shot. He still had his faculties in check, and there was every chance he could survive it. Unfortunately someone else did not want to see Kennedy survive. The most recent analysis conducted by a retired Australian police detective with experience in homicides has shown quite convincingly that Oswald could not have been the guy who achieved the ultimate destructive outcome with the president. His position in the building, if it was hime who did it, was not at the right angle, and he already struggled to get the precision and accuracy needed with his rifle to aim for Kennedy's head in such a short window of opportunity that he had and distance away from the target. If Mr Oswald really did fire a shot, it was really more out-of-luck that a bullet had reached the President. But even if the bullet from Oswald could have hit Kennedy's head, it would not create the kind of damage revealed in the official video (and hence the reason why the autopsy report has never been released to the public). The bullet that ultimately killed Kennedy was of a special type designed to explode and destroy whole organs in the body. In the case of Kennedy, much of his brain had been totally destroyed, and the explosion caused a significant amount of the skull over one side to be blown out. Also the angle of this final fatal bullet came from a different direction. The work by the retired Australian ex-police detective and careful analysis of the scene and available evidence is now pointing to one of the bodyguards in the vehicle behind Kennedy's car. Furthermore, it has been revealed that only one bodyguard had the high-powered weapon with the right bullets to do it. Why it was necessary for this bodyguard to carry this type of weapon is unclear, but everyone else in the secret service who were meant to be there to protect Kennedy were issued with standard weapons with bullets that would not cause the level of damage done to Kennedy. However, without video evidence to show the bodyguard actually firing on the president (apart from the smell of gunpowder noted by some witnesses in the crowd nearest the vehicle where the bodyguard had been riding in) and with no one actually being able to see exactly who it was in the vehicle (as the other two bodyguards in the car on either side had stood up at the right time and covered for the guy with the special rifle), the confusion among the public of what happened and being more concerned about the president's well-being had effectively avoided the bodyguard from being singled out by anyone in the public as being responsible for Kennedy's death.

Even without the remaining 300 files not yet released by President Trump (and perhaps never will), including the original autopsy report, there is already strong enough indirect evidence to show who it was that fired the fatal shot despite how the CIA files have been presented to suggest Oswald was the only man to have done it and a myriad of possible reasons as to why he might have done it. The American public on the whole are generally convinced it cannot be him even though he does have some responsibility (e.g., why did he need to own a rifle in the first place whether or not he was in the book repository room firing on the president?). Indeed, this is not so much about how or who probably did it as there is enough tantalising clues on this matter. Rather, this is more a case of why.

in other words, why was President Kennedy killed? What was so important that he had to be taken out? Would could be so sensitive that the president knew about and was doing at the time to warrant such extreme measures on the man? And did he really deserve it?

Today, we have further tantalising clues as to why it happened. Was it really to do with UFOs and how sensitive this is to the CIA and the U.S. military, or something else? Already there is enough to show it has something to do with UFOs (and the CIA is doing all it can to avoid mentioning UFOs and itself in association with the death of the president and yet is happy to point fingers at anyone else who could have been involved). However, without definitive proof (such as a confession from the bodyguard, the man who is apparently still alive but choosing to keep quiet), it remains yet another conspiracy theory to keep the public wondering. Until the true reason is given (and so far the CIA is doing all it can to avoid any responsibility), this final part of the question will remain a mystery.

Or maybe the thing that is closest to the truth is the one that the CIA chooses not to say anything or mention in any of its documents released so far. If this is the reality, then it may not be far fetched to imagine a scenario involving UFOs as the cause for this tragic death.

One thing is certain. Any attempts by future American presidents to ask about the UFO situation will probably not face the same fate. It would be too obvious. Instead, the aim would be to deny the existence of UFOs and any possible links to alien life at all costs, even if scientific observations of the universe are telling us life can and should exist on other planets beyond our solar system. And if the technology is there to cover the immense distances, we should expect the technology to be used and other life to already be here, watching and learning about us and our planet.

As an example of the latest preferred approach to stopping the inquisitive minds of an American president to ask about the UFO question, Mr Gerald Ford expressed an interest in UFOs while he was the Republican House Minority Leader of Congress. He said in 1966:

"I strongly recommend that there be a committee investigation of the UFO phenomena. I think we owe it to the people to establish credibility regarding UFOs and to produce the greatest possible enlightenment on this subject."

His statement fell on deaf ears. When he did get into the White House and asked again, it was necessary for official U.S. authorities to show a flat out denial on any UFOs as possibly having an opportunity to advance science, let alone could represent something alien. Luckily for President Ford, he did not pursue it. This preferred approach to denying UFOs at every opportunity by those in the know is supported by UFO director of MUFON in New Jersey, Major George A. Filer III, when who wrote to Ford asking about his interest. Ford wrote back saying:

"During my public career while in Congress, as Vice President and as President he made various requests about UFOs. The official authorities always denied the UFO allegations. As a result I have no information that may be helpful to you."

Or better still, as a final legacy from the former president who died trying to do the right thing by the world (because he felt it was in the interest of the world to know), we should all carry out his final request. As the official authorities keep saying to the public, if UFOs are nothing out-of-the-ordinary, then we could at least give the former president that wish, and let us see how many people in the CIA and the USAF decide to complain about it. Any complaints and we would have every reason to believe that UFOs represent something far more significant. In which case, it must surely be in the interest of the world that we all find out the truth right now.


For ordinary people to take seriously the idea of recycling our energy and all of our waste products in the industrial age, we see the call for such change to the current economic system having its origins around the mid-1950s. And, incredibly enough, in the US of all places. Yet for some reason we find governments and business professionals would pooh-poohed the idea.

This is particularly important for the US military and intelligence communities as any emphasis on recycling concepts could reveal the secret to recycling electromagnetic energy via Albert Einstein's Unified Field Theory and the potential for a new technology (i.e. the UFO). It is better to emphasise jobs and the current economy and just consume to our hearts contents and don't worry about recycling. Just throw the waste in the ground in the old proverbial sweeping under the environmental carpet and hope no one would see it and things will return to normal. In the meantime, use up as much oil as possible while maintaining the status quo. And to pay for all of it, get a job in the economic system and everything should be fine.

But there are consequences for humankind in taking this non-recycling approach.

For a start, human population is increasing rapidly. We are living on this planet quite literally in the billions. Combine this with a powerful technology considered more than capable of putting every other competing predator in its place (including other humans although it won't necessarily stop all humans from trying to hurt other humans if they are disadvantaged in some way) while transforming vast areas of land to suit the belief systems of so many L-brain people without necessarily giving back to nature what we take and the impact humans are having on Earth's climate and the natural environment is starting to reveal its ugly head. Without some form of significant recycling, the human population is heading towards an irreversible disaster.

Something has to give.


There is good evidence to suggest that the USAF have understood the technology behind the UFO by the late 1970s. Because by late December 1980, the USAF would test a prototype for one of these UFOs in the state of Texas and to see what would happen if observed by civilian witnesses.

On the late evening of 29 December 1980, fifty-one-year-old business woman, Betty Cash, was driving home in her car with two other occupants: fifty-seven-year-old Vickie Landrum, an employee of a restaurant owned by Betty Cash, and her seven-year-old grandson, Colby Landrum. They drove along Highway FM1485 - only used by people who live in this sparsely-populated area because of its isolation — to get to their home in Dayton, Texas, USA.

At around 9.00 p.m., Colby Landrum was the first to notice a brightly-lit UFO moving over treetops that bounded the highway on both sides. Betty and Vickie, who could not ignore Colby's state of jubilation and excitement, looked in the direction Colby's finger was pointing. The distance between them and the UFO at that time was about five kilometres. Then the object approached the witnesses, until it straddled the road ahead of them, forcing Betty to slam on the brakes.

The object was described as diamond-shaped with blue lights centered around its outermost rim, and it glowed intensely. A large, intermittent flame could also be seen underneath the object, keeping it aloft. Despite the bright glow, it looked as if it were made of dull aluminium; and the object itself seemed to be devoid of sharp points and edges.

All three witnesses got out of the car in full view of the object hovering only fifty metres away: Vickie standing just behind the open door on the right-hand side with her left hand resting on the car roof; Colby next to Vickie for protection; and Betty walking around to the front of the car. For the next three minutes or so, Vickie and Betty stared intently at the brightly-lit object ahead of them while Colby pleaded with Vickie to get back inside the car. Seeing the object rising in the air, Vickie called out to Betty. She responded, but noticed when she got back to the door of her car just how painfully hot the handle was. Betty successfully opened the door with her leather jacket. As they entered the car, all three witnesses felt the intense heat of the interior; they were forced to turn on the air conditioner.

As they watched the UFO depart, a group of black helicopters suddenly arrived on the scene. 'They seemed to rush in from all directions,' Betty recalls, ' seemed like they were trying to encircle the thing.'

The last they saw of the UFO was when they drove off and joined a larger highway, where they could just make out what looked like a small cylindrical object lighting up the surrounding area and the helicopters following it closely. From this new vantage point, they counted 23 helicopters — some of the double-rotor (CH-47 Chinooks) and others of the single-rotor types.

By the time the witnesses arrived home, they all noticed their skin turning red as if badly sunburnt (especially Vickie's left hand), and a collection of blisters had appeared (especially on Betty's face). Other medical symptoms included headaches, diarrhoea, swellings on the neck and eyes, feelings of tiredness, and all had experienced hair loss of varying degrees of severity, with Colby being the least affected. After examination by doctors, it was concluded that the witnesses had probably been exposed to radiation of some type.

"This is a very important case providing physical evidence of the existence of UFOs," said John Schussler, a NASA aerospace engineer who investigated the case. "A radiologist who examined the women's records said they were apparently suffering from the symptoms of radiation poisoning."

As for proving whether or not the United States government was directly involved in the incident is extremely difficult, if not impossible. For as the New York Times reported on 20 January 1981: "Finding out what goes on in the CIA [and other clandestine organisations] is like performing acupuncture on a rock."

Unless, of course, one can apply the traditional blow torch of intimate scientific knowledge about how UFOs work right up the proverbial backsides of those in the know at the CIA and the USAF. Then the scientific wedge will widen the cracks in the secrecy and eventually force the truth out.

Until then, which isn't too far away, it would appear a small band of isolated US scientists had been forced under oath to maintain complete secrecy while working to reverse-engineer the crashed disk and all their knowledge gathered from UFO reports and have made a crude example of a UFO for themselves. The use of a chemical propulsion directly below the glowing diamond-shaped object suggests a backup system should the primary electromagnetic propulsion concept fail in any way. Thus the reason for why UFOs glow and its relationship to electromagnetic propulsion has finally been worked out.

After the close call the incident in Texas created with the public, the USAF has moved over to a more secret and isolated location known as Area 51 to test more prototypes of the UFO technology. We learn about this from U.S. citizens who secretly try to get close to the site and use binoculars to observe what is going on. And here we learn of glowing objects performing some remarkable feats in the air near the USAF base.

It is about time the rest of the world try this technology out for ourselves.


While UFOs might be considered too controversial for some people until evidence of a more direct nature is found (either to build the electromagnetic technology to take us to the stars, or to have just one alien civilisation make the decision to present the evidence to the scientific community), there is one area no one can ignore mainly because of the mounting direct scientific evidence to support the observations. It is the evidence supporting the view that humans are affecting the planet in ways that are not entirely helpful to the future of all living things, including ourselves. Of great concern are the greenhouse effect (the trapping of heat from the Sun) caused by the release of carbon dioxide and other pollutants from the burning of natural forests from land clearing and coal-fired power stations, the sudden release of stored methane under the oceans and in permafrosts to further raise world temperatures, greater levels of pollution in fresh water supplies and in the air from chemical factories, natural fish in the oceans becoming increasingly decimated from overfishing and being slowly poisoned by chemicals, massive glaciers melting and the beginning of what will almost certainly become massive sea level rises beyond the current predictions made by computer modelling, and so on.

Among the scientific evidence in support of the "greenhouse gas" problem (or global warming, researchers at the University of Alaska have discovered an alarming increase in the rate of melting of ice after surveying 67 major glaciers. It has already been known since the mid-1950s that glaciers were melting. However, a study has found in the five years to 2002, the rate of melting has almost doubled to nearly 52 cubic kilometres a year compared to the rate of melting from the mid-1950s to the mid-1960s (10). And the process is accelerating. The consequences are clear: pure ice from the glaciers are turning into water which eventually flows to the sea and this in turn raises the world's sea levels, putting coastal cities at higher risk of being flooded. The researchers came to this conclusion after measuring on an annual basis the changes occurring to the surface of glaciers using a laser system transported in an aircraft.

And now some scientists are claiming the greenhouse gases in the air is in greater concentrations than for the last 400,000 years and increasing at a rate more rapid than at any time in the history of life on Earth. The warning bells are ringing.

Even the economic costs to deal with this problem will escalate and eventually even the richest nations on Earth will struggle to raise enough taxes to cover the costs. At some point the economic system will collapse under the weight of the environmental problems and there will not be enough resources to manage the problem. A major and new social world order will have to begin.

Are the brains of humans big enough to solve the biggest environmental problems of our times, and do it quick enough? Or has greed and power taken over the most powerful leaders of the world and their supporters (i.e., the people who support the system), And can we afford the USAF to continue hiding all it can about its knowledge of UFO technology from the rest of the world?

Or are there too many Christians in the world who believe the Bible story in Genesis still applies in the 21st century and we can still continue to multiply and use up the resources without recycling? As we find in the Old Testament:

"Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over every living thing that moves upon the earth." (Genesis 1:28)

Continue with this thinking and soon the environment will have dominion over humans in a negative way once the resources are depleted and we have thrown our waste into the atmosphere. It sounds like certain people in the world will be reliving the Aztec experience very soon.

Should we reach this drastic crisis, there will definitely be no religion for people to practice.

Maybe it is time we start practising the principle of love in its most fundamental sense with all living things and not expect to always "multiply" at the expense of other living things. Just learn to live within our means, and let people find innovative and long-term solutions to solve all problems without having to pay people with money. Instead give them love through the food and shelter they need, and give them access to knowledge and the essential tools, and the rest will be taken care of by the people. Because then we will all do the right thing by one another.

The truest sense of the word "love" has yet to be understood and experienced by all in the new world order.