July 14, 2013
from Eden-Saga Website

Spanish version






Homo erectus our oldest ancestor? Science says yes, but this answer is not science: just an opinion, not quite justified indeed. Several Homo sapiens' fossils could be much older.

Darwin, son of the capital, father of the struggle for survival, said,

"How old man is - we cannot even faintly guess. One thing however is a biologically certain fact: he is by no means of recent extraction, but of extremely ancient age. (...)


Man's descent is shrouded in mystery: it is an unbroken succession of missing links! The lateral branches of the primates were lopped off on some half a dozen occasions in the Earth's history; and only these reveal to us their earlier forms."

(Bellamy - Moons, Myths and Man)

That is the summary of our scientific knowledge.


This text was written more than seventy years ago. But in this long period of time the state of scientific knowledge about our origins has progressed little. Sooner or later, a theory that does not work must be abandoned. This is a scientific law as well as a bloody evidence.


I mean if you care about efficiency, which does seem to be the case for followers of Darwin... who doubted the validity of his own theory!

Did man know dinosaurs? This Ica stone, Peru, seems to attest it.






360 Million Years Old Biped Skull

The extremely ancient descent of man, based on facts and fossils, is a cat among the pigeons for paleo-anthropologists.


Some snipers, challenging Darwin and his theory of evolution, think that Hominidae are posterior to 'modern' man. To them, our origin is way older. We keep on going further.

"Everything has been said, and we arrive too late for 7000 years that men has been existing and thinking" said La Bruyere.

Two centuries later, Homo sapiens sapiens' age jumped from 7000 to 150,000 years.

This way, we became billion years older in three centuries.

La Bruyere on the heath

Despite the cult of Darwin, numerous fossils of Homo sapiens have been found in geological layers aged several hundred thousands of years.


But because of the cult of Darwin, as age of those fossils went against the dogma, they have been lost or given to collectors. David Childress cites fossils of modern man 300 000 years of age, 500 000 years and even one million years.


Other authors as,

  • Andrew Tomas

  • Michael Cremo

  • William Corliss

  • Frank Edwards,

…talk about five million years and more.

The website Impossible Discoveries, faithful to its dedication as a pioneer, gave us this new scoop:

"In 1842, a human skull, badly preserved, was found in a 15 to 50 million year old lignite. This object is part of the collection of Freiberg's mining academy in Germany.


In July 2005, M. Mohammed Zaraouit discovered in a marble quarry at Tafilalet, Morocco, in a devonian geological layer, a little fossilized crane belonging to a primate, who must be a biped and aged of 360 million years."




200 Million Years Old Modern Shoes



Fossil of modern sole,

200 million years old...



Magazines like Nexus or Top Secret regularly broadcast such information. Like those 200 million years old human footprints.


The fossil shows the sole of a modern shoe. We can distinctly see the deeper mark of the heel. Those amazing imprints are still visible at Paluxy River's site, Texas, USA.


In 1988, Dr Hans Zillmer cites some disconcerting discoveries of the same type, so did Michael Cremo in his book Forbidden Archeology.


Guess what anthropologists said about these books? Nothing...

However, when facing such evidences, we feel dizzy. And shocked.


Not only did Darwin make a mistake on our origins, which are much older than he thought, but we are even more amazed to see history repeating itself:

Soles of modern shoes 200 million years ago!

  • So when did history really start?

  • Will science move our origins back in time more and more, until reaching its limits, those of matter?

So that we can assert than man comes neither from ape, nor from any known Hominid, what has already been said.

Darwin couldn't have made mistakes everywhere, neither could his paleo-anthropologist fans for 150 years now.


Dates of other Hominidae's apparition may be right. In which case, neither Homo erectus nor Homo faber would be our ancestors, those are distinct species that appeared much later than us.


Was it at a time of highly developed science?


The shock we feel at the sight of those modern shoe soles with distinct mark of the heel seriously incite us to review the old clichés about prehistory.


Fossilized in the same mud,

the footprint of a man the one of a dinosaur

clearly show that they were contemporaries




How old are we, anyhow?

Long time ago, a very developed worldwide civilization asked brilliant geneticists to create intelligent beings.


They needed hard workers in fields and mines, says the Sumerian genesis.


The 'gods' (the Anunnaki) created a variety of lower beings to serve them. According to Sumer's tradition, we are those flunkeys. If there is a real danger in taking for granted theories and beliefs of science, the danger is bigger to follow any myth literally.


The understanding of any particular myth supposes a vast experience and a real knowledge of hundreds of extremely ancient - and odd - mythologies.


Example of blinders

worn by a creationist scientist



These amazing stories question us concerning our origin, the presence of giant hominidae, and of course the real age of man.


Of course science remains totally silent on these topics, because the only valid theory, i.e. Darwin's evolution, grew with many contradictions and creeds, in a similar and equally ridiculous process as creationist's theories.

  • Will paleo-anthropology perform its quantum revolution some day?

  • Soon or later, will it join metaphysics through the quantum field theory?

  • Will it dare to venture further through always more vanishing ages, through always more ontological times?


Remember You Are God Inside

Once upon a time when time didn't exist, at the dawn of the world, when spirit was first embodied, feeling dizzy with the new powers given by matter. The creating spirit took different physical bodies, sometimes mixing man with animal, and often using huge sizes.


And you are, I am, we all are part of the creating spirit.

'There is no difference of nature between man and god, just a difference of degree.'

(Stephane Kervor)

Remember you are god, you are the same nature as gods, and by you everything was created.

Even if we often forget it, we are made of light, and this light is not known to science. Edgar Cayce evokes these times on Earth before Adam, when men were spirit projections, when the body, less material than the present one, had both sexes inside.


He gave a date of ten million five hundred thousands years to this first incarnation.


So where do these 200 million years old footsteps come from? How could we trust these dates? Let's explore these tracks in the next pages, be patient, answers will come soon. From yourself.

Facing such gaps of eternity, no doubt that reasoning reason is not the best investigation tool. Neither is scientific process, nor any dogmatism.


But another method has been existing for millennia.

"To discover something about man, we must not go to the geologist, who can only show us a couple of jaws and an empty brainpan or two, reliquiae of unlucky wretches who perished in the last stages of the cataclysm, the Great Flood or Deluge, or at the time when Luna became the new moon of our Earth.


Is really the origin of man

the subject of anthropologists? One wonders...



We must rather go to the mythologist, the quiet collector of 'cosmic fiction', who has not been taken seriously up till now, for the true meaning of the reports that have been handed down to us for time immemorial."

(Bellamy - Moons, Myths and Man)

From the time this text was written, the status of the mythologist, alas, has not improved. Worse, the all-powerful neo-Darwinians violently criticize mythologists.


Fantasy and bias would be mythologists' dogmas, they say.


Sure to be more scientific than these new priests, mythologists will therefore stick to their specialty.



Pass for an idiot
in the eyes of a fool
is a delight of gourmet.
Georges Courteline,

auteur dramatique français