Forum

The oldest history of mankind is an area where there is no place for dogmatism. For example, not so long ago, the hypothesis about the "mitochondrial Eve" [1] was considered an indisputable fact, but now it is being questioned. The author writes these lines just a few days after the newspaper reports about the re-evaluation of the age of the Homo erectus skull fragment from the island of Java: it turned out that this fossil is 1.8 million years old! This suggests that Homo erectus already inhabited Asia long before its supposed migration from Africa. Evidence of this kind could have become public knowledge because, contrary to the expectations of some anthropologists, it delights others, and, most importantly, it does not call into question the fundamental postulates of the generally accepted picture of human evolution. But what if fossil remains of modern humans were found in deposits estimated to be two million years old? Would such a stunning discovery be considered credible? Most likely, its author would simply be unable to withstand the demands to revise the age of the find, attempts to cast doubt on his competence, and ultimately, to consign everything to oblivion. According to Michael Cremo and Richard Thompson, something similar has already happened in the past, and more than once. This is due to the dual approach to evaluating the available data. Evidence of ancient hominids and objects of their material culture is readily accepted as long as it fits into the traditional scheme of human evolution. However, no less reliable evidence that contradicts this concept is not only ignored but also deliberately suppressed. Publications about them cease surprisingly quickly, and the next generations practically know nothing about such discoveries, as if they never existed. As a result, alternative views on the early history of mankind are hardly recognized only because the data supporting them are unavailable. In their fundamental work, entitled "Forbidden Archeology," Cremo and Thompson present astonishing data that the scientific community was once aware of, but subsequently disappeared from the scientists' field of vision due to the so-called "filtering of knowledge" that does not fit into the dominant scientific dogmas. To bring this data to light, the authors, like detectives, had to perform a colossal amount of research and analytical work, the results of which are so impressive, presented so meticulously and in detail, that for this reason alone they deserve the closest attention. It is regrettable to note that relatively few professional scientists are willing to take seriously the evidence that contradicts the prevailing point of view, and even more so if it comes from sources outside official academic circles. This work, being a shortened version of the fundamental work, is intended for a wide range of readers, but I sincerely hope that it will also attract the attention of unbiased specialists, awaken their interest in a deeper study of the same evidence, but already in a much more detailed presentation of the full edition of this book. The authors frankly admit that they were driven by a desire to substantiate the idea, rooted in Indian Vedic literature, about the deep antiquity of mankind. Without sharing either the religious beliefs or the aforementioned goal of the authors, I nevertheless see nothing reprehensible in such an open statement of their religious worldview. Like all people, scientists have the right to have their own motives. They may also have their own biases that affect their conclusions, but the dogmatic materialism that guides many figures in academic science is capable of causing even greater harm to the truth, if only because it is somehow not considered a bias. Ultimately, what matters is not the reasons that prompted the researchers to search for evidence of a certain kind, but the results of these searches, which deserve to be made available to the general public and seriously considered by the scientific community. As far as I can tell, the data presented by Cremo and Thompson are highly worthy of serious consideration. The author of this preface did not set himself the task of supporting the evidence presented in this book, but was guided by the desire to recommend it to researchers engaged in a serious study of this issue. This is a very interesting, truly fascinating book. I would very much like to see whether the evidence presented in it will withstand an unbiased check by well-informed readers, who will probably be happy to have the opportunity to familiarize themselves with information that is not found in review articles and textbooks for students and high school graduates. Philip Johnson

Added 11 minutes ago

But why should we protect them? If our karma is destined for us to live well, then we will live well. Are some insignificant little people stronger than karmic will?

We should protect, not be protected. We must protect our children, women, and the elderly because it is our duty!

If a person does not fulfill his duty to those to whom he must fulfill it in accordance with the laws of nature, the universe, then in the future, his duty will not be fulfilled towards him.

4 natural needs of the body:
1) sleep
2) sex
3) food
4) and defense
Artificial ignoring of any of these natural needs of the body will not lead to a positive result.
But excessive satisfaction of these natural needs of the body will also not lead to anything good.

4 shortcomings inherent in an ordinary person (all of us):
1) our senses are imperfect
2) a tendency to deceive
3) a tendency to fall into illusion
4) a tendency to make mistakes.

karma - (literal translation from Sanskrit - action) - is the law of cause and effect, the law of justice.

The laws and mechanisms of karma are very complex; if you, me, us are destined to live well according to karma, this does not mean that nothing needs to be done! We must always fulfill our duty - only in this case will everything work out in the best way for us, only in this case will we receive the best karmic reactions (fruits of our activity) for us at the moment, only in this case will the situation work out in the best way for us.