The myth of the Australian aborigines, recorded by Catherine Langlo-Parker, tells about the origin of the Southern Cross constellation: “At the very beginning of time, the heavenly ruler created two men and one woman, teaching them to eat plants. When the drought hit, the first people began to starve. One of the men killed a marsupial rat. He and the woman began to eat animal meat, while the other man, despite all the persuasions, did not touch the unusual food, although he was mortally hungry. Having quarreled with his comrades, he “went towards the sunset”.
His companions soon finished their meal and followed him. “Approaching the edge of the valley, they saw their friend on the other side, by the river. They shouted for him to stop, but he ignored them and kept walking until he came up to a large white eucalyptus. Here he fell dead to the ground, and next to him people saw a black creature with two fiery eyes. It lifted the dead man up a tree and threw it into the hollow.
While hurrying through the valley, the people heard such a deafening thunderclap that, struck, fell to the ground. When they got up, they were surprised to see that a giant eucalyptus was uprooted from the ground and rushing through the air towards the southern side of the sky. They noticed fiery eyes sparkling from the tree … “Finally, the tree stopped near Warrambool, or the Milky Way, which leads to where the heavenly gods live. Gradually the tree disappeared from sight, and only four sparkling fiery eyes saw people. Two belonged to the spirit of death Yovi, the other two were the eyes of the first dead person. " Langlo-Parker adds: "For the tribes of this part of the country, the Southern Cross is still known as Yaraan-doo, the site of the white eucalyptus."
Here's a story supposedly happened to the ancestors of the indigenous people of the Australian continent. Don't you think that the second part of this myth depicts some not at all mythical event that vividly rises before the eyes of contemporaries of the space age? Let's imagine: three were walking along a deserted area, and suddenly they see in the distance something high, straight, light. "Big White Eucalyptus" - how else could the Australian aborigines describe the rocket at the start? An indication of color is especially valuable, since the hull of space rockets is indeed coated (for thermal insulation) with white paint.
One of the Australians, coming close to the launch pad, either from hunger or from fear, loses consciousness, and a crew member drags him through the hatch ("hollow") into his ship.. The rocket starts. Both the terrible roar and the sight of a flying tree (the accuracy of the figurative comparison in this situation could be enhanced by the similarity of the flames at the end of the rocket with powerful roots) - all this plunged the involuntary spectators into a state of shock.
However, they noticed and then informed their fellow tribesmen one more detail, perhaps the key one for us: instead of a rocket that disappeared in the distance, four luminous points flashed in the sky, which resembled the four bright stars of the Southern Cross. This is exactly the kind of spectacle witnessed by the launches of Vostoks, Voskhod and Soyuz! The four stars are the four separated, but not yet finished operation of the engine of the first stage of the launch vehicle, assembled according to the so-called packet scheme.
As we could see, everything reported in the "eucalyptus" myth, down to the smallest details, coincides with the real picture of the launch of a spacecraft. It coincides so much that this similarity is most likely false. "(Quoted from the book by Yu. Morozov" Traces of ancient astronauts "published by" Knowledge ").
Most likely false, of course. Where in those days can a rocket made according to a packet scheme come from - that is, not capable of flying beyond the moon? From another planet? But after all, before taking off, this structure must land - but this multistage "packet" rocket does not know how.
Promotional video:
On the other hand, explaining this myth by borrowing details from the modern world would be, I think, an even worse decision, especially considering that it was recorded much earlier than the appearance of space rockets. Therefore, either this is an accidental coincidence, or … Venimir Khlebnikov's words should be recognized as prophetic: “The birthplace of creativity is the future. From there comes the wind of the gods of the word."
The question of the origin of man is one of the most difficult questions that we can imagine, despite the fact that the main line of evolution of his ape-like ancestors has been worked out in more or less detail. However, in the picture that has taken shape today there are a number of points that can call into question all these graceful constructions, and let me draw your attention to these moments.
Firstly, none of the creatures found in the excavations (with the possible exception of homo habilis - "a skilled man", whose age is about two and a half million years) is our direct ancestor. And Australopithecus, and Sinanthropus and Neanderthal and many others - they are all late descendants of "dead-end branches" - branches in the development of human ancestors.
There are serious doubts about our relationship with the "skillful man." That is, our real ancestors - "transitional links" from monkey to man, have not been found by anyone. Moreover, if you look closely, for example, at the Neanderthals, you can see that they did not develop at all over time, but on the contrary degraded … The later Neanderthals are further from modern humans than the early ones.
Secondly - a person differs from all known primates in the number of chromosomes - this is a very significant change. It can be assumed that the point where the number of chromosomes has changed is the point of transition from monkey to man. Further, this change in the hereditary apparatus must be accompanied by a significant change in the structure of the body. Needless to say, no trace of such creatures has been found.
And, finally, thirdly, the most ancient traces of humanoid creatures on Earth were recorded much earlier than the first primates appeared on Earth.
In 1931, the American geologist G. Burru reported on the impressions of human feet in layers that were 250 million years old. The photographs he took show that where the foot exerted more pressure on the sand, the structure of the sandstone is changed. We can imagine how this could happen THEN, 250 million years ago - the foot simply stepped on the wet sand, and the grains of sand under the heel were compressed more strongly than under the fingers, but it is difficult to imagine how an unknown hoaxer, according to many geologists, who forged the prints, contrived change the structure of the already petrified sandstone.
Somewhat later, the same G. Burru reported the discovery of ten more similar tracks a few miles from Mount Vernon. In the Peleksiriver (Texas) channel, K. Dougherty unearthed numerous traces of dinosaurs of various species - and not far from them are many human footprints dating back to the same Cretaceous period. In one place it even looks like a man was chasing a dinosaur
In 1983, similar prints were found in Turkmenistan. Corresponding member of the Academy of Sciences of Turkmenistan K. Amanniyazov tells about it as follows:
… The sun is burning more and more, the frozen giant footprints in the rocky firmament of the plateau lead us further. Most of them are three-toed and apparently belong to dinosaurs that walked on the unhardened shallow ground - signs of surf on the surface of the track-bearing area are well preserved. Mostly bipedal lizards belonging to the subclass of archosaurs walked here.
We carefully describe, measure and photograph each footprint. Their sizes in different lines are not the same. The largest are 86 cm long and 73 cm wide. The small ones are 23 and 21 cm, respectively. The average stride length is 220, the smallest is 105 cm.
“However, they walked evenly,” Plutalov says thoughtfully. - Traces in the lines are almost equidistant from each other.
“There is one more interesting detail,” I note. - Look, on almost all tracks the toes are pressed more strongly than the heels. This leads us to believe that the animal moved fairly quickly. But then my attention was attracted by not very clear small dents on a plateau slightly to the side of the chain of dinosaur tracks, stretching parallel to them. One glance at the dents was enough to understand that these tracks did not belong to lizards. But then to whom? True, one of the chains, the most distinct, seemed to resemble …
I looked at the puzzled silent employees and immediately guessed that they were thinking the same - the fossilized print was clearly similar to the trace of a bare human foot. No, it would be more correct to say - the feet of a humanoid creature.
“The length is twenty-six centimeters,” Vitaly Ivanovich said after measuring the track. - Approximately forty-third shoe size, - picks up Oleg.
- It turns out, not so hot what growth … - Do not forget to photograph, - I stop them. - It is too early to draw conclusions.
Are our ancestors contemporaries of the dinosaurs? I could not take my eyes off this trail. The forefoot 10 cm wide is well defined, there are rounded depressions that resemble toes: big, index, middle … In the middle of the foot of the right leg there is a narrowing, a heel is rounded 5 cm wide. We found other tracks, their length reached 30 cm, heels were narrower, and the foot itself was wide. And the thumb was longer, and the rest shrank towards the little finger. Yes, if the discovered traces really belong to a humanoid creature, then the history of mankind will begin to count not 5 or 10, but 150 million years …
… It was too early for us to draw any conclusions. It is dangerous to draw conclusions on the study of single traces. But we believed that traces of the strange creature would still be found.
And our hopes were justified. On May 11, 1987 the mountain together with the geologist Zagorodnev we examined the Sary-Kaya-Vostochny site. Here, for the first time, they found traces of that very "humanoid" creature, its right and left legs. The depth of their pressing into the ground turned out to be quite impressive - more than 6 cm, and the distance from the heel of the left leg to the phalangeal part of the right was almost 80 cm.
Apparently, this "humanoid" was rather big and could well, together with its congeners, enter into the fight against dinosaurs. Luck inspired us, and the next day we made a detailed mapping of the Sary-Kaya site. The results were stunning, although the site itself is located 2 km west of Central and significantly higher up the slope. But it was here that we counted about 1000 footprints in numerous "walking" chains. By lunchtime, 15 chains were examined, but when we moved on to the next, we were seized with confusion - elongated giant footprints in the shape of a pumpkin or an electric light bulb.
It would be too daring to call them the tracks of a "human-like" creature, but I also could not attribute these strange prints to the tracks of dinosaurs: they were sharply different in form from those previously known. And at the same time, it is impossible to classify them as random. There are a lot of such "pumpkins", most of them are pronounced and stretch for tens of meters. Only in the sixteenth chain of traces of "humanlike" we found 38 prints of unknown origin, in three others - more than 30 such traces.
But if the tracks were not left by dinosaurs and not by our "humanoid" ones, then by whom? There was something to puzzle over. The finds of the next two days completely baffled us. Climbing higher and higher along the slope of the ridge, we unexpectedly discovered a new platform with chains of footprints of the "humanoid", and with them strange "pumpkins", which, no doubt, could already be called gigantic. For the description, we divided each footprint into the upper part - the phalanx and the lower part - the heel.
Basically, the length of the print was 66 cm. Half of this distance, or even more, fell on the heel, which was 13 cm wide. But the most impressive was the stride length of the mysterious creature - from 18O to 210 cm. Such giants could really enter into single combat. with dinosaurs! But the absence of fingerprints in the tracks suggested that the unknown creatures could not be humanoid. An unknown dinosaur species?
When I told Academician V. E. Khain about the preliminary results, he jokingly suggested calling the creatures anthroposaurs. It seems that finding out who these strange footprints belong to, a dinosaur or some other unknown giant, is a task for the near future. Therefore, we named the track site we found Nadezhda.
Short reports on the findings of traces of the "humanoid" flashed on the pages of central newspapers, and after a while I received a letter from the United States with the following content:
Dear Sirs! A Sydney newspaper dated November 27, 1983 published a TASS report that about 1,500 dinosaur prints were found in Turkmenistan. Along with prints of footprints of dinosaurs, prints resembling human footprints have been found. Members of our geological team in 1983 near Glen Rose (Texas, USA) excavated human and dinosaur footprints. The tracks were found under a 40 cm layer of chalk and clay (marl) at a distance of two meters from each other.
Dimensions of footprints, cm. Human dinosaur Length 28 41 Width of the front part of the track 10.5 31 Heel width 7 tapering Depth 1.9 3.8 Length of the thumb 5.75 20
Note: The other 4 dinosaur footprints were flat. This summer, our group is going to continue excavations, and if you are interested in the results, we will inform you about them additionally. Considering the above, it would be very interesting for us to learn more about your find and research in this area in exchange for the information you are interested in about our discoveries. We hope that the exchange of such information will be mutually beneficial and extremely fruitful. Respectfully…"
Some scientists try to explain these footprints by the footprints of bipedal lizards, whose foot is similar to a human foot. Unfortunately (for these theories) this explanation loses all meaning if we consider the CHAIN of footprints - after all, the reptile's steps have a completely different dynamics, the ratio of stride to foot length, and the distribution of the foot load on the ground is different …
So, paleontologists, experienced in such matters, did not give such an explanation even as possible. Interrupting for the time being the consideration of the facts, I would like to present you with a HYPOTHESIS designed to explain these facts. Perhaps it will seem strange to you, but I have already said that to sort out the facts and "generally accepted" theories trying to explain these facts, pouring all this with enthusiasm about how much we still do not know and calls to "fight and seek" from me there is not the slightest desire. So listen.
I personally cannot imagine that a person arose somewhere in the Mesozoic and had lizards as his ancestors. Reptiles have a completely different organization, despite the fact that some of the dinosaurs were probably viviparous and even warm-blooded, despite the fact that some birds - the closest descendants of reptiles - can produce a substance that resembles mammalian milk - nevertheless the difference between them is enormous.
But there are simply no other possible candidates for the role of the ancestors of the human race in past centuries - neither in the Mesozoic nor in the Paleozoic. We simply have no other option but the assumption that man's homeland is not Earth.
In this case, many of the oddities that we have already considered and which we will still consider become explainable. In fact, assuming the external, unearthly origin of man, we can easily explain the fact that traces of his stay are found in many eras, and these findings have no visible connection with each other.
Earth, as a habitable planet, has probably been colonized by humans many times. I do not exclude (there are facts confirming this opinion, and in due time I will cite them) that the Cosmos can be quite densely populated by people biologically indistinguishable from us.
It may be objected to me that man is a mammal by nature, and he is very similar to other mammals - so similar that this made the natural hypothesis of his origin from earth primates. This will be the strongest argument not in favor of the proposed hypothesis, but the argument is practically the only one.
Let's try to reject this argument. First of all, despite the fact that man is very similar to other mammals, he still differs from them, and differs so significantly that serious doubts arise about what is more in him - features of similarity or difference. It has long been known that in terms of the microelement composition of their tissues, humans are somewhat different from other animals - the difference is small, but it exists.
In addition, man is the only bipedal erectus among mammals (except for the legendary "Bigfoot", which also has a place in the hypothesis under consideration). And, finally, the most important thing - a person has what no mammal, no animal on Earth has - he has a MIND, a property that raises him by many orders of magnitude on the scale of organization of a living mother. Agree, these are more than significant differences.
As for the chemical composition of our tissues, which very closely correspond to terrestrial conditions, it was most likely artificially adjusted to the environment - hardly a race capable of interstellar travel will leave a long-term colony of people ill adapted to the environment on another planet …