7 Million Year Old MODERN MAN? Everything we were taught is WRONG? #GoXplrr Hutton Pulitzer

Where do we come from?  Why are we here?  What is our purpose?  Who has not pondered these questions and sought answers?  All of mankind has these nagging questions in common, but how are we to get any answers out of experts, when even the experts cannot agree?

What would happen if we really did find out that everything we were ever taught in any educational institution was wrong?  Never mind if it was private school, home school, Church school or current government run public school.  What would be the back lash?  Would there be backlash?  Would YOU even care?  Who mankind is as a whole, even care if we found out one day everything we were taught was TOTALLY WRONG?

3000000 yo proven man made artifact We have all been told at one time or another that modern man is maybe 6000 years old, and then that was updated to 13,000 years old and now recently that date of modern man has been moved up to 34,000 years old.  But why all the differences and disparity?

Who is right?  Who is wrong?  Why are they wrong?  What makes each one right?  The questions just keep compounding, but when YOU do some research yourself and YOU start to ask questions – YOUR OWN MIND comes of with even more different answers than the so called “professionals” get.  So who do you trust?  The Professionals?  The Academics? The Church? Your Mum and Dad?  Just what can you believe? 

I have always offered: “Do your own research.  Read the reports yourself and then YOU make your very own choice for belief!”  We do have full functioning brains and we can actually make our own decisions.  But what happens when ON OUR OWN we find things that challenge what we were taught?  The only advice I can offer is:  Dig deeper, share with peers you trust and see if your peers SEE the same thing you SEE.

Take for example the definition of what “modern man” is:  (abbreviated) Modern man is when man started communicating in words and art.  We have been told that modern man (this recent 6000-34000 year old development) became modern man when he/she could communicate verbally and with art. 

Why this definition?  Common sense tells us “one has a developed brain when they can communicate and they can create art.” Why this definition?  You have to use your brain to form words and sentences to communicate and to even to remember the words and their meanings in the first place.  Next, one cannot make ART unless one can appreciate FORM and then reason with ones brain to take that image the eyes see and reproduce it in art form to be appreciated.  Makes sense. Makes common sense.  So IF man., modern man is in fact 34,000 years old (give or take few 10,000 year units).



Look at the artifact above.  This is a professionally recovered artifact.  tested, proven and certified BY THE ESTABLISHMENT.  You might be thinking to yourself – “So what Commander! I have seen many carved stone pieces, what does that prove?”

Well, here is the kicker – the above artifact is….. (drum roll please)  THREE MILLION PLUS YEARS OLD!

It is obviously a depiction of some sort of man or mankind being.  The maker obviously knew to form the eyes, mouth and the rounded face.  Look closely at it.  Eyes, nose, mouth, cheeks, lips, skull cap and more. Obviously man made, obviously art and the person who made it had to of possessed a working, thinking and logical brain THAT wanted to create something special and something to be appreciated!

This was not just an accident!  Why would a man 3,000,000 years ago made this?  It is obvious isn’t it?  To show an image, to tell a story and to be a prized possession and appreciated.

Here is the issue:  If man is only 34,000 years old – modern man that is.  If fully functional – appreciative brains are what defined us only 34,000 (again give or take 100,000 year old increments if you want) – WHY DOES THIS EXIST?

Want another kicker?  Remember when you or your child was learning to draw or play with clay?  We are all Picasso’s then and NO I do not mean that in the amazing artist sense, I mean it in our common INABILITY to start coloring within the lines and making faces that really look human and not having lop sided eyes and noses where ears should be.

Remember how it started for all of us?  We had to have HUGE PIECES OF PAPER or CLAY as out medium and the strokes were HUGE, BROAD, without FORM and usually resembled nothing, but our parents still appreciated it.  It took us awhile to LEARN how to make art.  See, to make ART we have to be able to LEARN.

So how does this relate to the carved stone image of a human above? First lets suspend truth and forget this is 3,000,000 years old.  Second lets remember what SCIENCE TELLS US:


7 to 6 million years ago.Sahelanthropus tchadensis. This creature is a good candidate. But we know too little yet about the species to be certain.  Ascertained by finding two skulls in the Sahel region, south of the Sahara, in Chad — a cranium, two jaw pieces, and some teeth. The braincase is like a chimpanzee’s but the teeth are more like ours (small canine). The face has brow ridges, a human feature not found on living great apes. The way the neck muscles attach to the skull indicates an upright walk. Maybe. One scientist thinks it may be an early gorilla. It’s hard to say with so few pieces.

6 million years ago.Orrorin tugenensis. Not such a promising candidate. Perhaps an early ape. We found pieces of arm and thighbones, lower jaws, and teeth in western Kenya. It was about the size of a female chimpanzee; perhaps bipedal and a tree climber. If it turns out that the creature was bipedal, then his rating goes up to ‘likely early man.’

5.5 to 4.5 million years ago.Ardipithecus ramidus. Fair candidate as an early man. Relatively large canine teeth, narrow molars, thin enamel. Just a few skull fragments found so far. Possibly bipedal. May have been a forest dweller. Probably ate leaves and fruit.

4.2 to 3.0 million years ago. Australopithecines. This group of hominids were definitely bipedal, had small canine teeth and, therefore, were early men. The Smithsonian Institute refers to them as the first humans.

We’ve found fossils from various species within this group — the most famous, of course, is Lucy, a 3.5- to 4-foot (1.1 to 1.2 m) tall woman who lived about 3.2 million years ago.

Early men of Lucy’s species (afarensis) had low foreheads, bony ridges over the eyes, flat noses, and no chins. Protruding jaws, large back teeth — their skulls were much like those of chimps except for the teeth. The canine teeth were smaller than apes and not so pointed. The legs and pelvis, however, were definitely like modern men, but better suited to walking than running.

2.4 to 1.5 million years ago.Homo habilis. Bipedal and similar to the australopithecines but with smaller back teeth. Definitely an early man. Possibly able to talk, judging from a bulge (Broca’s area) in the cranium (visible in only one skull) that is essential for speech. Habilis was about 4 feet (1.2 m) tall.

SO THIS ARTIFACT ABOVE FALLS into the last category – AN APE, not a man, but well on its way to man, but certainly cannot talk, think, communicate, reason and DOES NOT MAKE ART.


Amazon Best Seller

1.  You agree the above artifact is an actual carving, right?   YEP!

2.  You agree that modern mans requirement for being part of real mankind is the ability to speak, reason and make art right? YEP again!

3.  Then way does this artifact come from 3,000,000 years ago?  I CAN’T ANSWER THAT?  Maybe a baby step early example of mankind when their brain was not too developed and they were just crawling into mankind-ness?


4.  How did this 3,000,000 year old carve this artifact, with perfect eye-hand coordination – WHEN THIS PROVEN ARTIFACT IS only a WATER WORN PEBBLE?

How did a fumbling infant of a mankind like ape, use his or her hand and hand to eye coordination so precise with then is less than the size of a modern golf ball?


Footnote to understand:  The academics who support the theory that man is young state this is a natural formed pebble, naturally shaped by water.  However, those who study the pebble state the eyes are drilled and the mouth was in fact started by a drill hole and the stone was subjected to “Shaping”.  Will the experts agree?  NO, why? If it is man shaped then the short term experts are WRONG.  If it is just a water worn feature, then the MAN HAS BEEN HERE LONGER group is wrong.  So it may never be settled.  But what science does know the “artifact” is made of a certain stone that does not even occur naturally at the “dig site”.  So, once again WHO IS RIGHT?  No one in science or academics wants to be wrong.  YOU DECIDE.

Water made or man made?  What say you?


First acknowledged “art” object: Waterworn pebble resembling a human face, from Makapansgat, South Africa, C. 3,000,000 BCE. Reddish brown jasperite, approx. 2 3/8″


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s