Let's Hope "We Don't Get Fooled Again!"

MCP Editor's Note: This blog post refers to the article on MSN Entertainment which can be found here: http://movies.msn.com/movies/article.aspx?news=678294

Ken's blog follows.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

(with apologies to The Who)

It’s all over the media now – the newest debacle of misinformation about the Maya.

Not just misinformation, but a deliberate hoax.

A documentary alleging to “prove” contact between the Maya and extraterrestrials is enjoying wide circulation all over the Internet. Come on, MSN! You should know better!

The tale begins with a supposed stone monument discovered deep in the jungles of Guatemala back in the 1930s. Our dedicated documentarians quote a certain archaeologist named Senor Mejia as remarking that this is obviously thousands and thousands of years old. (Mejia is said to be an archaeologist from Mexico, which makes one wonder why he is commenting on an artifact that is from a different nation and that supposedly vanished long before he was in grade school.)

I am not familiar with Senor Mejia. If he really is an archaeologist, he must be positively blooming with rage at such a misquote.

1) First of all, the monument was supposedly found in the 1930s and mysteriously “vanished” shortly thereafter. Best of all, its disappearance was an American conspiracy!!!

2) This is quite interesting when one remembers that this date (1930s) precedes the invention of Carbon-14 dating. How was it determined that this unavailable monument was “thousands of years old?”

3) And even if standard archaeological dating methods had been in effect before said monument mysteriously left the scene, how could it be dated? If you employ standard methods of dating on a piece of rock, you will arrive at the geological age of the rock itself, not the date when it was altered by human hands. If there are remains of human detritus (e.g. a campfire or house posts) in the vicinity of the site which contain organic materials, these can be dated, which would allow us to make an educated guess about the carving – but only a guess. No such human presence is mentioned. The only way a stone monument can be convincingly dated is if the sculptor signed it with a date (which is typical of the Classic Maya c. 200-800 AD, but at no other time). This is not just a hoax, it is a painfully sloppy and misinformed one, making Chariots of the Gods and the Piltdown Man seem like the height of sophistication by comparison.

4) The media goes on to say, as if with bated breath, that the face doesn’t resemble that of indigenous Mesoamericans. That’s really cute, isn’t it? We know that “all them Indians look alike,” right? Wrong! The indigenous population of Mesoamerica is enormously diverse in terms of physical appearance. (I know. I’ve met many of them.)

5) Even if this blatantly racist piece of flap-doodle were remotely true (which it isn’t), there is still nothing to tell us that this was supposed to be the portrait of a local dude. Mesoamerican sculpture is rich in the depiction of supernatural figures and spirit beings. If you drew a picture of a ghost or goblin for your child’s Halloween party, would it look like your neighbors? Probably not.

6) Finally, this face bears a strong resemblance to some of the monoliths from Easter Island in the Pacific. The difference in lighting between the carved head and its surroundings is suggestive of Photoshop or some other image manipulation program. The head has been transposed onto a different setting.

If Mr. Mejia is indeed an archaeologist, I feel deeply sorry for the ridicule to which these hoaxers have subjected him. At least Stephen Hawking (supposedly an advocate) has refused to dignify these misquotations with a reply.