Because there is the physical evidence of complex engravings, it can safely be said that human abilities such as reasoning, philosophizing, or simply being creative have never undergone any evolutionary change.

It can probably also be stated with a fair degree of confidence that the same is true for every representative of the animal kingdom. Whatever intelligence level any creature was at when it first appears in the fossil record is likely to be no different today.

It may sound humorous, but invertebrate sea creatures such as clams and snails which live in the water today are probably no more intelligent than they were 500 million years ago in the Cambrian seas. The fish that live in the sea today, no more intelligent than Silurian or Devonian fishes were. And in all likelihood your cat or dog friend is no more intelligent than the first saber-toothed cat or the first wolf.

So why stop there? What proof do we have that the human species is any different?

Fig. 2. This music-based study of Artifact 1 shows how the particular compound line (zig zag melody) taken from Fig. 1 has precise analogues in use today. Although there are other possible interpretations, the terms shown here account perfectly for the Indian scale, Raga Bhinna Pancama. It is a challenging scale playable just as shown or set up in “universal scale” degrees as 1 2 4 5 b6 7 which in the Key of C would be played C D F G Ab B. The raga is known for its special quality of containing no major or minor 3rd.

FIGURES 3 & 4

Fig. 3 is a study of Bilzingsleben Artifact 2 applying ratios as used in modern musical scales. The studies are not meant to imply that Homo erectus people necessarily used these ratios ‘musically’ but to demonstrate that the ratios engraved into the Bilzingsleben artifacts have modern analogues and to support the idea forwarded by Dietrich and Ursula Mania in their breakthrough 1988 paper, Deliberate engravings on bone artifacts of Homo erectus, that these ancestors understood rhythm, which I simply put into very specific terms, Fig. 4. The studies along with many others were presented at the XV UISPP Conference in Lisbon in 2006 to an enthusiastic audience only to be blocked from publication until 2011 not only by the UISPP but by Elsevier’s, Journal of Human Evolution, my last accepted censorship before taking a public stand against faith-based evolutionary science.

With more and more such evidence coming to light it is no longer scientifically prudent to teach the ape-man scenario as fact.

Where does this lead? Since the science community has committed to the evolutionary paradigm leaving itself no graceful way out it has been forced into the situation of using methods such as censorship to block new evidence from the public rather than facing it and adjusting for what the new evidence indicates.

Adjusting according to new evidence is how “normal” science works. So, what do you call a science that blocks new evidence and continues to promote an old view despite the evidence? It is something other than science.

The science community has decided to respond this way to the evidence from Bilzingsleben and other evidence we offer in this newsletter so as not to have to address the implications. By responding to empirical evidence in this way and not addressing the challenge in a true scientific manner the science community has lost credibility.

“Fifty” of these and similar studies were blocked from publication for five years by the XV UISPP International Congress even though I was requested to present the material being promised publication in advance.

The material was all then censored by the Journal of Human Evolution even though submission to that journal was suggested by a longtime anthropology correspondent since the journal was edited by someone in his own department at New York University. This censorship was quite ironic because I actually began correspondence with this professor when he called me on the phone regarding my first censored paper by Current Anthropology in 1995-97 (two years of anonymous peer review followed by censorship). He was one of the ‘anonymous’ reviewers who was intrigued enough by the ideas in the paper, The impact of fossils on the development of visual representation, that he chose to break the anonymity to hear more about it. His recommendation for publication was vetoed by a team

“It is no less scientific to presume high intelligence in early peoples than it is to presume low intelligence.”

So, one must ask, how does work which receives this type of response from leading authorities wind up being censored from the public?

After 15 years of such experiences plus discovering a pattern of submitted ideas not only blocked from publication but showing up in the work of competitive researchers, there occurred a loss of trust in scientific process so I finally hooked up with other researchers with similar experiences and together we formed the Pleistocene Coalition to challenge the mainstream science power structure.

In Part 3, I showed how information encoded in ancient artifacts might be decoded in different ways (see founding member Jim Harrod’s weblink for other methods of decoding extremely ancient artifacts such as Bilzingsleben). In this Part 4 (Figs. 1-5), I offer studies that were inspired by the work of Dietrich and Ursula Mania, discoverers of the engraved artifacts of Bilzingsleben, who noted the mathematical ratio in Artifact 2 (Figs. 3-4). Contrary to the standard paradigm used in anthropology, approaching ancient artifacts with the expectation that there may be deeper inherent meanings increases the chance that such meanings, if they exist, can be found. For those who question such an approach, I suggest that it is no less scientific to presume high intelligence in early peoples than it is to presume low intelligence.

Mania, D., and U. Mania. 1988. Deliberate engravings on bone artifacts of Homo erectus. Rock Art Research 5 (2): 91-107.

John Feliks has specialized in the study of early human cognition for nearly twenty years using an approach based on geometry and techniques of drafting. Feliks is not a mathematician; however, he uses the mathematics of ancient artifacts to show that human cognition does not evolve. One aspect of Feliks’ experience that has helped to understand artifacts is a background in music; he is a long-time composer in a Bach-like tradition as well as an acoustic-rock songwriter and taught computer music including MIDI, digital audio editing, and music notation in a college music lab for 11 years.