Like in the old days of structuralist psychology, most approaches in science entail an early stage where everything is broken down into bits and pieces and studied to the nth degree through specialization. It is an excellent method for appreciating the profundity of what makes up even the smallest of structures.

Unfortunately, this is often where 20th-21st Century science stops dead in its tracks. It adds one observation to another yet by some adopted ‘modern’ mentality (unlike that of science/philosophy greats of the past such as Plato, Bacon, Descartes, Newton) allows no room for exploration of meaning or even awareness of possible larger structures that extend beyond the sums of parts—like working a jigsaw puzzle with the unreasonable stipulation that one may look only at the pieces and not consider that there might actually be a picture.

Fig. 1. Numbering system used for the geometric studies of Bilzingsleben Artifact 2 as seen in Figs. 2-7. The “straight edge studies” presented at the XV UISPP Congress in Lisbon, 2006, were censored by the evolutionary community for five years. Prior to these studies—which mathematically demonstrated a coherent radial whole or Gestalt—all writers without exception described the piece as a series of “parallel” lines.

In psychology, the idea of looking at the whole picture is known as Gestalt. Similar to Plato’s Theory of Forms or Ideas, Gestalt goes beyond simple or even complex details to focus on the unified whole. Parts are regarded understandable only in context of the whole. Ever since bedazzlement by Darwin, this perspective has disappeared from the science community.

The 400,000-year old mammal-bone engravings from the site of Bilzingsleben in central Germany (Figs. 1-7, on Artifact 2 of six) are best seen as Gestalts. If one looks at them as [continued on page 12]

Fig. 2. Two essentially identical triangles in an asymmetric context demonstrating the Gestalt principle of “closure.” The numbers are simply abstracted from Fig. 1. See Fig. 7 for the complete Gestalt. Closure is where apparently isolated parts are perceived as complete figures often discovering a symmetry where asymmetry is expected. Study of Artifact 2, a 370,000-year old mammal bone engraving from Bilzingsleben, Germany.
 













Fig. 3. Inverse triangles in Artifact 2 showing a mathematical unity. From The Graphics of Bilzingsleben Part 2, Phi in the Acheulian. Zoom in for details.

Fig. 4. Four circles sharing identical bisector 1X. All such studies presented at the XV UISPP were attempted to be censored on the grounds that they had “no scientific merit.” Zoom in for details.

However, if one looks at the engravings in the context of their whole configurations something changes; they quickly reveal multidimensional levels of human ingenuity in the highest artistic, mathematical, and philosophical sense.

Fig. 5. Two rotational studies (left rotation; right rotation) of the same central sequence of engraved lines as in Fig. 2a only here interpreted as parallel as opposed to subtly radial. The test was to see how the central engraved lines related to the whole artifact. These particular studies were partly inspired by J.S. Bach’s “mirror fugues,” Contrapunctus 12 & 13, where one fugue is a retrograde inversion of the other—yet both work. Like in Fig. 2a (the 3D vertical z-axis; 2-11 and 3-10 are the x and y axes—not points X and Y which are a different study—the three axes meeting at what is essentially the geometric center of the artifact), the Escheresque 3D ambiguity in this test was a natural outcome of exploring geometrically without a goal. Further, if one draws vertical lines between like-numbered points one will discover that the upper points reproduce on the lower plane without any deviation despite an illusion otherwise. Finally, the parallel lines, e.g., 3-8, 9-15, transfer exactly without alteration and show the correlation in thirds between parallels and the enlarged three-part motifs of Level 3. This study demonstrates a unity of form in the whole artifact (as it was preserved) where a multidimensional Gestalt transcends the details.

When Mania and Mania first published their discoveries from Bilzingsleben in English, they unhesitatingly suggested that the artifacts demonstrated not only abstract thinking in Homo erectus but also a “concept of the world” (Mania, D., and U. Mania. 1988. Deliberate engravings on bone artifacts of Homo erectus. Rock Art Research 5 [2]: 91-107).

Fig. 6. Applying the Gestalt principle of “closure,” invisible triangle ABC was present in the mind of Homo erectus during creation of the radial fan motif of Bilzingsleben Artifact 2. This study (UISPP, 2006, Graphics of Bilzingsleben presentation Slide #40 and published Fig.12c after censorship) revolves around the idea that all human thought is based on associations between abstract points in physical space with the minimum unit forming a triangulation (a two-point line segment is only perceived as a line from a third vantage point) grasped intuitively by means of mental representations at any conceivable level of miniaturization, magnification, or reach (“reach” in the sense that whatever can be conceived of either already exists or will eventually). Triangulations are external or internal such as inverted representation on back of the human eye.

Instead, and unbelievably so, critics actually compare the profound Bilzingsleben engravings to the work of chimpanzees. This is despite the fact that the artifacts are from a context including such markers as: “microlithic” tools; wood, bone and antler tools; huts and campfires.

Fig. 7. A completed Gestalt interpretation of Artifact 2 as seen partially in Fig. 1 presented as Slide #46 of 112  at the XV UISPP Congress, 2006. Note that angles A, B, and C are all 15°. This study along with 50 similar was censored from publication for five years by the UISPP (International Union of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences) as well as by Elsevier’s Journal of Human Evolution—as the team of anonymous reviewers under physical anthropologist and editor Susan Anton, NYU, deemed it of no scientific value. Of course, their non-scientific motive is clear to anyone understanding the religious nature of the evolutionary paradigm. This study and all of the other studies presented in The Graphics of Bilzingsleben were not treated by JHE as empirical evidence which must be taken into account while assessing the intelligence of Homo erectus but as a threat to the paradigm. However, I wish to publicly state that I did not submit the studies to JHE to taunt them but because of recommendation by leading anthropologist Randall White, Anthropology, NYU, who was already aware of the corrupt actions of the UISPP. It was White who first mentioned anthropology’s problems in 1995 when my first geometries were censored by Current Anthropology. White was followed by other authorities. Since anthropology’s agendas have cultural repercussions outside of anthropology they must be fought especially since they include aggressive promotion of a religion as science.

The defense against challenging evidence is this crude because it is not seen as a part of scientific process but as a threat to the paradigm. Real science, of course, doesn’t behave this way. The evolutionary community is in trouble on many fronts despite how few realize it and evidence against cognitive evolution is not one of the fronts they were prepared to defend, hence, their only alternative—suppression of evidence.

Why is evidence against cognitive evolution so feared? It is because acknowledging modern-human level creativity in Homo erectus people releases them from their use as transitional ape-people; and once that happens the evolutionary community is left with little more than a few enigmatic bones of prehistoric apes and humans held up to support a six million-year evolutionary sequence. Have no concern regarding genetics either; since they have not been able to produce indisputable fossils they attempt to build cases analogically in bits. No scientist should ever accept atomistic proxies to fill in for missing Gestalts. When one ‘hominid’ is debunked, they simply change focus to another (See, Ardi: How to Create a Science Myth, PCN #3). It is part of a history of promoting an un-testable paradigm through diversion.

When The Graphics of Bilzingsleben provided systematic geometric evidence that the engravings were made by intelligent people the studies were immediately censored as there is little means to counter the idea of prehistoric geometers in the light of straight edge proofs. Lines created by use of a straight-edge are impossible to attribute to apes or even ape men. As quoted in Part 1, Proof of straight edge use by Homo erectus, it was predicted to the author in advance after the evidence was presented at the XV UISPP Congress that the archaeology community would do everything in it’s power to discredit the studies as they demonstrated by falsifiable means the community’s error in its assessment of Homo erectus.

One final word on Bilzingsleben Gestalts. The tolerances applied are not only transparent but many of the claims hold true even if the images are altered. If one goes so far as to change various line lengths or certain point position interpretations or otherwise distorts the images the special qualities are often simply pushed to another location. It is similar to how a fossil clam distorted through metamorphosis is still easily recognized as a clam. This is the concept of Gestalt. The unity of the configurations is high and possibly well-thought-out and tested on wood before committed to the archival medium of bone. Possible draft versions on wood might also explain why these engravings appear to have, for the most part, no errors or corrections.

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.