Sweden
Before we get to this astonishing news report I have to admit I laughed out loud when I read the sentence, “One theory is that the bodies were possibly discarded as some sort of ritual”. If we had a pound for every time archaeologists used the “ritual” explanation we would all be millionaires by now. It has almost become a joke these days – if you can’t explain something then say it was part of some kind of ritual.
And then there’s this masterpiece of archaeological deduction:
““The people who were deposited like this in the lake, they weren’t average people,” co-lead researcher Fredrik Hallgren, an archaeologist at the Cultural Heritage Foundation in Västerås, Sweden, told Live Science. “But probably people who, after they died, had been selected to be included in this ritual because of who they were, because of things they experienced in life.” ”
What a load of utter bollocks. Anyway, moving on….
The astonishing elements of these skulls being found on stakes are as follows: Only the Mexica culture (Aztecs to the layman) mounted skulls on racks or stakes in great numbers (that we know of, excluding individual incidents; warfare spoils; death warrants). Also the incredible date of 6000 BC brings in a whole new perspective on ancient humans in Europe. Skulls that have been cut, potentially for cannibalistic purposes, have been found in Gobekli Tepe in Turkey (10,000 BC), and archaeologists have given the term “skull cult” to the inhabitants, although I am forever annoyed that such a broad and idiotic name (which fills readers minds with ridiculous ideas) would be put forward by so-called professionals. The problem here is that most sites I have visited which date to pre-Bronze Age do not have massive stone walls protecting the inhabitants – they tend to be farmsteads or small villages with no high walls at all. I was beginning to formulae the theory that humans weren’t running around killing each other as much in those days since no defensive walls were being built, but this new finding puts that idea firmly under the executioner’s axe. Or does it?
I do not personally like the ideas being put forward by the archaeologists involved. For example, in this article we read, “The skulls showed signs of blunt force trauma that was “probably the result of interpersonal violence” “. Quite frankly there is no evidence of this whatsoever. Again these are just the regurgitated theories that archaeologists come up with to give the impression they know what they are talking about. But they don’t. They are just guessing. And their guesses are based on no evidence. We cannot give any probabilities with such findings. This could have been warfare. This could have been something else. I’ve said the same thing every time this argument comes forward – maybe there was illness or disease and these people were actually doing their loved ones a favour by putting them out of their misery. For example, note that the female skulls were damaged at the back. This implies a certain amount of empathic thought may have gone into the act of hitting them on the head, if that was indeed what had happened to them. We also read that some of these injuries had started to heal, which suggests killing these individuals, or at least ascertaining certain death, was not a part of what was going on. There are far too many inconsistencies to make any definitive announcement, especially regarding murder. However, the skulls on stakes would make you believe this contradicts some of the other findings, but I find it hard to believe that the “empathic” nature of the female head wounds and the fact some injuries started to heal had anything to do with conflict. I think there was something else going on here.
For this reason my theory that there was a lack of murder in the form of warfare occurring prior to the Bronze Age is still alive and kicking.
What is far more disturbing than heads on stakes is archaeologists using the same “ritual” theory over and over again.

https://www.rt.com/news/418715-sweden-skulls-smashed-stakes/

Absolutely devastated to hear of the passing of John Anthony West.
John single-handedly forced everyone to start looking at ancient Egypt in a completely different way when he re-evaluated the work of Schwaller De Lubizc. He was also credited with (along with geologist Robert Schoch) proposing a much more ancient date for the Sphinx of Giza based on solid scientific data, throwing sand in the face of Egyptologists who have been left rather red-faced at their own incompetence.
John’s eight-part TV series, Magical Egypt, is a revolutionary take on the structures of ancient Egypt, and adequately displays NOT the advanced technology and architecture which everyone else considers, but the spiritual meaning behind their construction. His controversial work may not be totally correct but that’s not the point. The point is when a person like John Anthony West makes an entire generation look at a problem from a completely different angle, one that has not been considered previously, then he can be considered a genius.
Have a safe journey to the Duat, John

Mexico
The discovery of the Millennium

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-42916261

India
And another.
They are coming thick and fast now, but still Darwin hangs over these findings with not a single one of them asking questions.
All they do is change the date.
“Modern humans left Africa shortly after evolving.” Haha! You can only laugh at such a ridiculous sentence. But no one questions it.
“Right boys and girls, we’re fully evolved now, pack your bags, we’re leaving Africa!” Can’t wait to see these memes!

https://theconversation.com/indian-stone-tools-could-dramatically-push-back-date-when-modern-humans-first-left-africa-90867