Enquête sur les pyramides de Bosnie et quelques autres cas de pseudo-archéologie
Article published on 14 March 2011
Tartuffe (taking a handkerchief from his pocket)
Before you speak, pray take this handkerchief.
Cover up that bosom, which I can’t
Endure to look on.
Molière: Tartuffe, or the Impostor 
Following the publication of his 2008 "report", Dr. Nabil Swelim doesn’t seem to have been too much in evidence on the Foundation website. Judging from these comments, Dr. Swelim’s report - on which the “pyramidomaniacs" rely for confirmation of the validity of Mr. Osmanagic’s theories - is hardly destined for a place in the annals of archaeology … although it might be a different kettle of fish as far as the world of pseudo-science is concerned. At any rate, following my thoughts on his report, Dr. Swelim sent me several emails announcing a scathing response: since when, nothing further.
In August 2010, however, by way of a supplement to his first report on the Bosnian “pyramids”, he apparently published a paper called "Visocica in the balance", which can be found both on his own site and below:
So what is in this supplementary report? If Dr. Swelim seems as prickly as ever towards those who disagree with him, and still somewhat full of himself, the report nevertheless contains some interesting observations which show that, between March 2008 and August 2010, his position has apparently undergone a considerable change.
Doubtless anxious not to disassociate himself entirely from what he wrote and published back in 2007-2008, Dr. Swelim battles gamely on with his concept of a new branch of science, "pyramid science“ , the purpose of this new science being the study of all pyramid objects of whatever origin. Under this heading, he proceeds to argue that, for the sole reason that they are indisputably pyramid-shaped, Visocica and Pljesevica must evidently be "pyramids": "Conclusion 1. At Visočica we have tolerable scenarios, similar to, the local ones at Mexico, China and elsewhere. Thus the pyramid hill Visočica is a new introduction to the local scenarios of pyramid science. Conclusion 2. Because Visočica has small deviations from the classical format as some of the Egyptian pyramids do ; I believe that Visočica is justified for a pyramid nomination". As I have already noted, there is a play here on both meanings of the word pyramid: the strict geometric sense, which Dr. Swelim claims to be the only one that he has ever used; and the archaeological sense of a man-made monument - which, of course, when the scientist discussing the question is not a mathematician, but an Egyptologist, will be the definition that is universally assumed to be under discussion ...
Dr. Swelim also mentions a number of sources that did not appear in his first report. Of particular interest is the fact that we learn that Mr. Osmanagic apparently sent him a list of reports, whose contents he summarizes. This liste is available on Dr. Swelim’s website and below:
Whilst I was looking at this list, I also discovered some other "reports" that the Foundation has never published, in addition to those mentioned here; for example: " Rudjer Boskovic Physics Institute, Zagreb, Croatia, February 2010, Roentgen diffraction analysis and phased analysis : “Sample from the megalith K-2 is an artificial ceramic material (quartz, calcite, muscovite” "; on this point, I am very curious to know how the existence of the “artificial ceramic material” was demonstrated. Question: has Dr. Swelim actually read any of these "reports"? Whilst this is debatable, it can be said that he did not use any of them either in his 2008 report, or in the 2010 supplement. On the other hand, it seems that, since 2008, he has found the time to read some geological papers (Robert Schoch, Sejfudin Vrabac, an Egyptian geologist present at the "International Conference" of 2008, Mohamed El-Anbaawy ), all adherents of the theory of a natural origin for the pyramids. This is a definite improvement over his position of 2008, when he haughtily ignored all geological opinion...
More interestingly still, Dr. Swelim does not seem at all convinced that the “pyramids” at Visoko bear the least evidence of any human intervention. Let the reader judge: "If nature creates a geological pyramid shape, why don’t we give it the proper descriptive term: pyramid hill ? The arguments on this nomination at Visočica persist because of: 1) little knowledge on PYRAMID SCIENCE, 2) wrong belief that pyramids are MANMADE; and 3) opinions driven by
DISAGREEABLE ATTITUDES." ; "At Visočica the calculated base is found to be rectangular but in fact there is no physical base for this natural structure." ; "Field archaeology is a tool which can reveal information about the object and if the pyramid is manmade or if there are any human interventions. [...] If no traces are found then our pyramid hill becomes a geological case." ; "archaeological finds, when unearthed, will show the true status, this has not been attempted and until then we may dismiss human intervention."
In short, we can summarize the new opinion of Dr. Swelim as follows: yes, both Visocica and Pljesevica are indeed pyramids - but natural ones!
It’s certainly very odd that no trace of the "supplement" to the 2008 report is to be found either on the Foundation website, or on the 2008 International Conference site, which had nevertheless published his original report. Yet it would be very surprising if the author had not submitted the report to Mr. Osmanagic. In any case, there is at least one person with close links to the Foundation, also a member of the "SB Research Group", who very probably does have a copy of this paper. This would be Mr. Nenad Djurdjevic, who, a short while ago, announced (it) that a "2010 update" to Dr. Swelim’s report was available on his website ... except that it is available only in the "members only” part of the site. And guess who approves - or refuses  - new site registrations? Apparently, people have to show credentials before being allowed to read certain documents, something considered too dangerous for "unbelievers" ...
 "Tartuffe" here, of course, stands for those who, being aware of the content of Dr. Swelim’s report mentioned here, are careful not to make it largely known to the public.
 Branch of science of which he must be just about the only proponent. An Internet search using the terms “science of the pyramids” or “pyramid science” throws up – apart from his own site – only games and recreational activities connected with pyramids, or links to sites of a more or less New Age nature concerning the “science” of pyramid energy...
 Unfortunately, this Egyptian geologist’s paper is rather disappointing. How can a geologist confuse the network of fractures at Pljesevica with tundra polygons, or spherical concretions – whose composition he did not even bother to check, given that he considers that they’re all granite ! – with glacial erratics? Yet another scientist who, before writing his report, might have been well advised to consult Bosnian colleagues, or read the available scientific literature...