1.) 'Straight edge theory.' The
engraved bone artifacts of Bilzingsleben have long been known to feature
straight lines. Until the proofs offered in
Musings on the Palaeolithic Fan Motif, however, no one had considered the possibility that these lines might have been
created with a straight edge. This is because of the long-time working assumption in anthropology that the engravers,
Homo erectus, were essentially ape-men unable even to speak, let alone use a straight edge. The proofs for straight edge use (
图2 and
图3 above, and
图4 & 5 to the right) are unambiguous and are characterized by
perfectly-referenced and perfectly-straight
radial lines.
The figures for Straight edge theory were
deliberately set up so that the reader could instantly test the
radial lines for themselves right on the printed page, thus bypassing
the need to be either
convinced or unconvinced by any scholarly argument or argument from
authority. Prior to these studies, all writers in anthropology -
without exception - have referred to the lines on Bilzingsleben
Artifact 2, for
instance, as "parallel" lines. The straight edge test shows that
the lines are, in fact, "radial" lines referenced to a point well away
from the artifact itself (
图2 above).
The straight edge engravings from Bilzingsleben are
securely dated
320,000-412,000 years old
and show that just because an engraved line
is ancient we can no longer simply assume that it was necessarily done
freehand.
Resistance to straight edge theory, especially in this year
of Darwin, is due in large part to the fact that use of a straight edge
is proof of unambiguously sophisticated behavior. In and of itself, and without
need of any other evidence except its already-established association
with the remains of
Homo erectus, use of a straight edge demonstrates
completely modern intelligence 400,000 years ago.
In other words, straight edge theory demonstrates that there has been no change whatsoever in human
cognitive ability for at least 400,000 years.
The final proofs of
straight edge use in these artifacts were presented at the
XVth UISPP Congress in Lisbon, September 7, 2006 during the
Pleistocene Palaeoart of the World session in a program called
The Graphics of Bilzingsleben.
Censorship of these uncontested final proofs began within one week of the Congress.
The data, which has been studied by scientists in every field
(archaeology, psychology, neuroscience, linguistics), as well as
by engineers in Europe, the United States, and Australia, has been held
back from the public for two and a half years while those who have had
privileged access to the data have been quickly altering their
publication course both online and in print without citing
Musings on the Palaeolithic fan motif or its follow-up,
The Graphics of Bilzingsleben.
How straight edge use by Homo erectus proves early language
and representation:
Any
line engraved with the aid of a straight edge is directly symbolic of
the straight edge itself, being a "representation" of the edge.
|
2.) 'The earliest motif duplicated on two separate artifacts.'
This is the first unambiguous geometric and linguistic proof of
early
language (
图3 above).
Duplicated
motifs (such as written or spoken words) are the hallmark of language.
Prior to recognizing these two motifs as either duplicates or
variations of each other, most proponents of early language used
unrelated references to "infer" language in early peoples, e.g., "If
they could get from
here to there then they must have had language," or "If they had the
right vocal tract or the right genetic traits, they probably had a
simple language." The
association between these two motifs and similar associations between
other motifs at Bilzingsleben were fully
demonstrated with final and unambiguous proofs in the censored data presented in
The Graphics of
Bilzingsleben.
3.) 'Representation of angles theory.'
Angles represented in the bone engravings from Bilzingsleben are shown
to revolve around those angles most commonly observed by everyone both
past and present, namely, those of
the outstretched human hand (
图6 at right). The point is
made that the engravings do not necessarily represent the human hand
per se but rather an awareness of
the abstract concept of angles.
The case is made that signs of abstraction in the early archaeological
record may say more about the intellectual capabilities of early people
than the more quickly-understood forms of iconic representation.