The Dentist and the Giant Mussel - [Le site d'Irna]

The Dentist and the Giant Mussel

Article published on 6 March 2011

logo imprimer

The “complementary”, “multidisciplinary university project” team described in my previous article seems to have decided to:
- on the one hand, revolutionise the world of archaeology (in the words of Pablito (it), aka Professor Paolo Debertolis: "Per me il problema è che queste grandi scoperte sono in mano solo agli archeologi che non hanno sufficiente competenza per gestire scoperte di questo tipo, mentre il tutto dovrebbe essere affrontato in maniera interdisciplinare" - “For me, the problem is that these great discoveries are solely in the hands of archaeologists - who do not have the competence necessary to deal with discoveries of this sort - when the proper approach ought to be an inter-disciplinary one”.
- on the other hand, to bring to the Osmanagic Foundation a veneer of the science in which it is so sorely lacking (a certain "Kingleo" (it), who seems about to join the "SB Research Group": "Penso quindi che il nostro ruolo possa essere quello di "appoggio" tecnico scientifico ( che mi sembra sia mancato sino ad oggi ). Si è scavato sinora con molta buona volontà ma con poche competenze tecniche e scientifiche. [...] Se invece si da l’impressione ( e non solo ) che vi siano dei ricercatori SERI che conducono le ricerche in maniera professionale ...bè, anche quello che si scoprirà sarà visto sotto un’altra luce." "So I think that our role would be to act as scientific and technical "support” (which seems to have been lacking hitherto). Thus far, a good deal of goodwill has been directed to the excavations, but not much in the shape of technical and scientific expertise. [...] If instead you gave the impression (and not just the impression alone) that you were serious researchers who conducted your investigations in a professional manner ... well, any future discovery would be seen in another light.")

Unfortunately for the "SB Research Group", and for Mr. Osmanagic, these claims would appear to be somewhat wide of the mark, and, given the absence of any geologist on the team, the SBRG might be well advised, or so it seems to me, to get into the habit of first acquiring some information on a subject before coming up with various theories about it. On several forums, Professor Debertolis, AKA Pablito, has just published a report (here in Englishhere in Italian) on the latest team expedition to Visoko, during which he and his colleagues took a closer look at some of the "megaliths" discovered in the Ravne tunnel. We learn that some of these "megaliths" (sandstone blocks for whose presence in the tunnel there is no evidence of human intervention, given that they might very well form part of the Lasva conglomerate through which the tunnel is dug) contained a sealed "groove", and would therefore not be "monoliths" but different kinds of lidded receptacles that Pablito unhesitatingly compares to giant bivalves [1]

Source

Certainly, there is nothing to prevent the imagination from running riot, and to prevent one from wondering, as does Pablito, about what might be inside the giant mussel ... but the SB Research Group never seems to have come across Occam’s Razor. Before inventing fantastical theories involving a totally unknown civilization hiding "something " in containers shaped like sandstone blocks and burying them deep in some tunnel, is it possible to find a simpler explanation for the presence of these "grooves", that also happens to be consistent with the present state of archaeological and geological knowledge? The answer is a resounding “yes”; what we are most probably dealing with here is simply the remnant of a bedding plane that has survived the erosion of the block, as shown in the examples below:

Source
Source

Examples of this sort of block, with “grooves” caused by stratification, are to be found amongst the “discoveries” of the Foundation (who, as only to be expected, describe them as “artefacts”!):

Un "pied votif" selon Nenad Djurdjevic - A “votive foot”, according to Nenad Djurdjevic
Source
"Objet en pierre", au premier plan au centre - "Stone Object", centre foreground
Source

Ah, but - argues Pablito - proof of these being artificial containers is provided by the presence on the "lid” of this:

Source

These "objects" he interprets as "fine metal tubes", which perhaps served to "sink" the lid in question (since, as far as he is concerned, there is no doubt that the sandstone that forms the "bivalves" is an artificial material). I suggest to Professor Debertolis that he present his theory to any conference or meeting of sedimentologists; he would be guaranteed to send the audience into fits of laughter at the spectacle of someone falling into the basic pseudo-scientific trap of interpreting simple concretions as metal objects …

Saint-André-de-Rosans, France
Source
Chaco Canyon, Nouveau Mexique
Source
Zion National Park, Utah
Source
Zion National Park, Utah
Source
Zebra Slot Canyon, Escalante, Utah
Source
Chaco Canyon, Nouveau Mexique
Source
Chaco Canyon, Nouveau Mexique
Source
Cape Arago Headland, Oregon
Source
Escalante, Utah
Source
Chaco Canyon, Nouveau Mexique
Source

At any rate, this is hardly what you would call getting off to a flying start for a “multidisciplinary university project” team composed of “serious researchers conducting investigations in a professional manner”, supposely providing the "scientific and technical" back-up in which the Osmanagic Foundation has been so sadly lacking!


Update - March 6

My little article has given rise to some controversy on a forum (it) where Professor Debertolis posts. It began with a post from Kingleo [2], who looks as if he might well be about to join the "SB Research Group”, and who accuses the French of collectively stealing the Mona Lisa :-), perhaps forgetting that the painting was brought to France by Leonardo himself, and sold on by his heir to King François I. On a more serious note, another contributor to the forum mentioned (it) the fact that, besides the "metal tubes" on the surface of the lid, inside the "megalith K4" is a round metal object: "In precedenza nel K4 è stato rilevato con l’ecografia un oggetto metallico rotondo alla testa del megalite". I imagine that he is here alluding to this Foundation website article (bs), which describes the use of GPR in April 2010 in the Ravne tunnel. If that is the case, then it should be noted, first, that the Foundation article speaks quite definitely about radar, and not ultrasound: two completely different sorts of waves! And, secondly, it should be noted that the references in the Foundation paper were to "megalith” K2, and not K4. Whatever … Yet again, before considering the possibility of an artifact being deliberately buried in the sandstone block, one should have begun by first eliminating the possibility of a naturally-occurring metal concretion. If there are concretions adhering to the surface of the block, then there is no reason why there shouldn’t also be some on the inside! And as for the comparison that that particular poster makes between Mr. Osmanagic and Heinrich Schliemann, I’m not sure that it is really flattering to Mr. Osmanagic :-) 

Notes :

[1Or even "mussels", "cozze", according to his friend Kingleo (it)...

[2Kingleo is in fact an architect named Vincenzo Di Gregorio, a keen photographer (it), who also runs a website (it) devoted to archaeological "mysteries", and discoverer of "pyramids" in Lombardy (it) about which he has written a book (it)... Remind you of anyone?


Forum
Comment on this article
The Dentist and the Giant Mussel
valtervalter2000 - on 20 March 2011

Cara Irna anch’io, che non sono professore, credo che le piramidi siano del tutto naturali, e l’ho anche scritto sul sito di Pablito, ma senza insulti sul piano personale. Sono stato con Pablito nel primo viaggio a Visoko (leggi report sul sito e in particolare la mia opinione sul monolito) ma, come tutte le persone mediamente intelligenti, sono pronto a cambiare idea di fronte alla dimostrazione del contrario. A questo proposito ti ricordo la storia di Konrad Lorenz, scoprirore dell’impriting nelle oche selvatiche. Per dimostrarlo, Lorenz si era immerso in un laghetto dove aspettava che le neonate oche lo vedessero e, impressa la sua immagine, lo riconoscessero come "madre". Alla notizia, la scienza ufficiale si dibatté sul dilemma se rinchiuderlo in manicomio o ignorarlo del tutto. Nel 1980 gli fu conferito il premio Nobel per la medicina. Dunque, se come dici tu da un lato è meglio fare tutte le indagini prima di pubblicare, dall’altro e meglio aspettare la fine delle indagini prima di condannare. Un invito atutti i frequentatori del blog: sosteniamo con forza le nostre idee, ma riserviamo lo stesso rispetto alle altrui che non condividiamo.

The Dentist and the Giant Mussel
Irna - on 24 March 2011

Hi Walter, sorry for the lack of answer, I’ve been quite busy. As you wrote below a text in English, I’ll assume that you understand that language.

So you are the Slovenian interpreter who accompanied Mr. Debertolis in his first trip to Bosnia? I read your comment on his first article in October (http://www.salviamoci2012.eu/forum/news.asp?id=52), interesting. May I ask what is your opinion now? Did your friend succeed in convincing you?

Just to be sure: you seem to imply that I insulted Mr. Debertolis. What exactly do you consider insults? The fact that I called him a dentist (http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dentista)? I hope not, or I wouldn’t like to be in your place the next time you meet your own dentist :-)
Or maybe the fact that I called him a pseudoscientist? Just to make things clear: Prof. Debertolis is probably a very good scientist in his own area, or he would not have obtained such responsabilities at Trieste University. But I stand by my opinion that he acts and writes like any pseudoscientist as far as archaeology and geology are concerned. He acquired some preconceived ideas on the "pyramids" just by looking at them, and began to make some far-fetched interpretations of what he saw without bothering to wonder how geologists would interpret what he saw, or to search for simpler explanations. His narration of his first trip with you is particularly revealing. And unfortunately he is more and more entangled in these fantastic interpretations, to the point that he cannot anymore consider the possibility that he could have misinterpreted, and that he will rant about some imaginary Serbian plot including every forumer who criticises him (see http://contact.forumfree.it/?t=52777109&st=60#entry445488834) rather than trying to address the points I or others raise.

Let me say that the openmindedness is not on the side of Mr. Debertolis and his friends from various alternative forums. The openmindedness does not consist in jumping on the most fantastic interpretation without having studied first the, let’s say "classical", ones, and in refusing, as they do, to consider the arguments of the other part...

As for the fact that I should not judge before the "end of the investigation", I don’t agree. If Mr. Debertolis feels entitled to publish, on his own website or on the Foundation website, various "scientific reports" (see http://www.piramidasunca.ba/en/index.php/MISTERY-OF-THE-RAVNE-TUNNELS-.SCIENTIFIC-REPORT.html for instance), moreover when he presents these reports as emanating from "an inter-university and inter-disciplinary team established by Universities of Trieste and Milan", everyone is entitled to read, analyse and criticize these reports, and to point to their total lack of scientificity. I noticed that Mr. Debertolis is frequently, as is Mr. Osmanagic, announcing various analyses, but that after the first announcement we never hear anymore of these analyses. So that I fear that there will never be an end to these investigations...

Cordially, Irna



bullet pointSite map bullet pointContact bullet pointEditors area bullet point

RSS Valid XHTML 1.0 Strict

2006-2018 © Le site d’Irna - All rights reserved
Site created with SPIP
with the template ESCAL-V3
Version: 4.0.99
amélioré par Pigédius
Host: L'Autre Net