Why They Would Hide It

Gösta Lindwall and Mikael Kindborg, July 18, 2020

Findings that go against the current narrative are hidden in The Great Archive of Inconvenient Facts

Findings that go against the current narrative are hidden in The Great Archive of Inconvenient Facts

It's interesting to follow the various conspiracy threads existing in our field.

The Smithsonian is accused of executing all sorts of cover-ups like hiding giant skulls and other spectacular artifacts. The Vatican library is also in this line of fire; ”If we had access to their archives, we would find truth hidden from us.”

We are in the process of finishing our book about ancient mysteries, and we are doing a lot of research, verifying facts and reading scientific papers. We are also trying to connect dots, like Sherlock Holmes, following logical thought where the evidence takes us.

So, when did the giants show up and became allegedly hidden? The answer in many cases is, approximately a hundred years ago.

A lot of the news articles on the subject that are referred to were published between 1885 and 1930.

The question is what happened at this time? Were there any conflicts that put pressure on an institution like the Smithsonian to hide sensitive objects?

The answer to this question is Yes.

"On the Origin of Species" by Charles Darwin was published in 1859. The book was a spectacular statement. Science became popular in wider circles and the growing interest sparked a debate between religious and scientific groups lasting for more than 50 years. Theories and views published by Darwin quickly spread to other fields.

In geology uniformitarianism and gradualistic change became the dominant perspective. "The present is the key to the past." Changes in the past have followed the same processes that can be observed today. Large scars in the landscape could not be explained by saying that Noah's Flood did it. The explanation was that ”a river carved the large canion and it it took millions of years”.

Science had a burst at this time and logic itself became more popular. The novels of Sherlock Holmes by Arthur Conan Doyle is one example of this. Secularity started to spread across the western world and the religious powers were beginning to lose ground.

The church was of course hitting back. People were accused of heresy. Strong debates started in printed news media and later in broadcasted media. This was a time of conflict between representatives of the church and scientists.

This was also a time when universities and institutions grew. Money was channeled into education and the government agencies had a strong build up.

In the beginning of the 1900s, the two parts needed strong arguments for supporting their case. Any archaeological or geological finding, like findings of giants from the bible or evidence of Noah's flood, would be an argument for the religious faction. If evidence pointed to ancient use of metallurgy, written language, or other advanced knowledge, it could be taken to support the notion of pre-Adamites, and so on.

Any evidence or news that did not fit the new scientific paradigm would be contradictory, and shift the balance towards the religious powers. Representatives of science and rational knowledge had a strong incentive to suppress certain findings.

Another strong motive for hiding sensitive artifacts is the heritage of colonialism. For centuries, vast land areas had been confiscated from indigeonous people under the notion of bringing them civilization and salvation in the name of the true religion.

Any findings pointing to the natives having once been part of a greater and higher developed civilisation would challenge the power, and open up for questioning the current leadership. There could also follow uncomfortable discussions of moral rights and ethics, should certain findings become known.

Then there is a more general reason for the powers in charge to hide and suppress alternative facts and views. Maintaining control of the narrative is top priority for any state or organisation with ambition to stay in control. Totalitarian governments and dictatorships go to great lengths to silence opposition and remove dissidents.

If people would learn that an advanced culture would have existed way back, they could start to question current leadership. For one thing, they might ask "why have we not known this previously". Evidence of cover-ups might surface. And people would know there could be an alternative to the current system.

Furthermore, if the ancient civilization uncovered would prove to be more advanced than we are today, and also more developed mentally, well, then that could totally undermine the credibility of today's system.

This article has also been published on Facebook in the group Forbidden Archaeology and other Mysteries.

Blog Menu Start Page
Copyright © 2019-2021 TrueRealityNow