Stargate to Nowhere Discovered

Did you hear the news? There’s been a “door to the afterlife” discovered in Egypt!  Really!  Here’s a picture.

This article gives some details, as well as supplying the “door to the afterlife” description (those clever archaeo-journalists). It’s a false door. Anyone who’s ever looked into Egyptian pyramid or tomb complexes knows that false doors were common (and the article notes that). No, it didn’t take anyone to the afterlife (just thought I needed to clarify that for the Stargate believers out there). We sort of know that since many tombs (those not plundered) still have the deceased in them. What a thought.

Bad Day for Vatican Conspiracists: 80,000 Manuscripts to Be Digitized

Just when you were almost convinced that the Vatican wasn’t asleep at the switch in its herculean effort to keep its ancient manuscripts secret. Bummer.  You can read about the initiative here.

Oh, wait . . .  I’ll bet that all these years they’ve been busy pulling out all the manuscripts they want to hide from public just so they can appear to be open now . . . that’s it.

Another ET Astronaut Fiction: The Dropa Stones

There’s a pun in there somewhere — Ropa Dropa; el-Dropa . . . but it’s late and I’m probably not firing on all cylinders.

At any rate, for those of you fortunate enough not to have heard about the “amazing” Dropa Stones, consider this your initiation and the antidote. Supposedly, these “artifacts” point to the Chinese Roswell — the crash of an ET craft in China in the early part of the 20th century. Maybe it’s not true “paleo” babble, but it passes the fraud test.

Some Chips in the Lolladoff Plate

Most readers have probably not heard of the Lolladoff Plate. It’s for serving paleobabble (note the image of the alien on it). Supposedly it’s 1200 years old.  Here’s a picture:

I recently came across a couple of good critique of the plate that succeeds in sending it back to the land of Lolladoofus where it belongs. Here it is from the Bad Archaeology blog. Bon appetit!

Akhenaten’s Mummy Identified via DNA Testing?

I just wanted to post an update on what has emerged as a controversy regarding the identification of Akhenaten’s mummy (or not). The Egyptology News blog has been keeping up with the discussion pretty closely. Yesterday a post appeared in favor of confirmation that the mummy of KV55 is indeed Akhenaten. It’s cranial features certainly would be in concert with that (below).

The identification was put forth as a result of new DNA testing on several mummies published a month ago in the Journal of the American Medical Society (JAMA).

However, the KV64 blog has a pretty technical summary on why the KV55 mummy is “probably not” Akhenaten, and argues that the DNA evidence is on *that* side of the debate. Here are the summary’s conclusions:

Combining the DNA data with known historical facts shows that Akhenaten is probably not the KV55 mummy.

It is tempting to consider the KV55 mummy (Tutankhamun’s father) alternatively as Smenkhare although this can be no more than conjecture on the basis of the available data.

There is a very strong probability of a second line of descent from Yuya and Thuya  to the KV62 foetuses.

This secondary line of descent is consistent with the historical Nefertiti.

There is a strong probability of second line of descent from Amenhotep III to the foetuses not via the KV55 mummy.

This second line of descent is consistent with the historical Akhenaten.

It is possible to construct a family tree along these lines which fully fits the STR analysis published in the JAMA paper and which assumes Nefertiti is a granddaughter of Yuya and Thuya.

It is possible, but not essential, to accommodate the Younger Lady and KV21B mummies in this revised family tree as further daughters of Akhenaten and Nefertiti.

Notice that the DNA evidence has received a thorough going-over by qualified interested parties of differing opinions. That’s called peer review. No one is “noticing” any alien DNA. That’s too bad for all those who wanted Akhenaten as an extraterrestrial.