Cover up that report, which I can't endure to look on... - [Le site d'Irna]

Cover up that report, which I can’t endure to look on...

Article published on 14 March 2011

logo imprimer

Tartuffe (taking a handkerchief from his pocket)
Ah!
Before you speak, pray take this handkerchief.

Dorine
What?

Tartuffe
Cover up that bosom, which I can’t
Endure to look on.

Molière: Tartuffe, or the Impostor [1]

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:

"Visocica in the balance"
Source

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“ [2], 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:

"Semir Osmanagich reports the Results of the following analyses"
Source

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 [3]), 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 [4] - new site registrations? Apparently, people have to show credentials before being allowed to read certain documents, something considered too dangerous for "unbelievers" ...

Notes :

[1"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.

[2Branch 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...

[3Unfortunately, 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...

[4At any event, on 14th February, the – rather sceptical – poster "Schweinsteiger," from the Nibiru2012 forum, was still awaiting (it) a response to his registration request of 11th February …


Forum
Comment on this article
Cover up that report, which I can’t endure to look on...
Anubis - on 30 August 2011

Hi Irna,
this is Eldar. Now I found the comment feature, and it’s really great because I have much to say.
This article makes me believe that you either didn’t read Dr. Swelims paper or that you are misinterpreting his words intentionally. Unfortunately, I think the latter is the case.

First of all... you say: "In short, we can summarize the new opinion of Dr. Swelim as follows: yes, both Visocica and Pljesevica are indeed pyramids - but natural ones!", yet there isn’t any sentence that would explain your conclusion.

"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"

If one believes your interpretation, Dr. Swelim declared Visocica as a natural formation and addresses Osmanagic & Co with his three points in this quote. You colored one phrase red as if it was a clear statement and the ultimate proof. But his message becomes clear when you read the rest of the text. As I said, your article suggests that you haven’t read the rest because there are just a few quotes you are sharing with your audience. Maybe you should implement these too:

"If pyramid properties are fulfilled at Visočica, it will justify a pyramid nomination. Properties
discuss: geometry, orientation and stability. The facts that Visočica offers a pyramid appearance;
oriented to the cardinal points and adheres to the angle of repose; warrant the nomination"
"Looking along the NS and the EW axis, I see the largest pyramid in the world"
"I understand how the first glance at the pyramid hill Visočica creates some astonishment; and
that it does not look like the pyramids at Giza. This does not dismiss the pyramid state"

He actually criticizes Osmanagic’s opponents, especially Dr. Schoch:

"Some statements give us the wrong impression:
- Thus claiming “I have also spent many years studying pyramids in Egypt and elsewhere,
and I feel I have a good handle on the features that distinguish a genuine pyramid”, ( I,
N.S. do not agree).
- The same geologist, talking Geology (not pyramids) said: “I maintain my conviction that
there are NO pyramids at Visoko, Bosnia”; (wrong; N.S.).
- Another believes he is authorized to announce, that “(a second person) knows nothing
about pyramids”. And thinks he has the right to say that (a third person) “is
hallucinating”; (I, N.S. ask you to: control your emotions).""

And here’s one for the geologists in general:
"Field geology is where disagreement has developed at Visočica, and reveals diagnostic
disharmony among specialist"
"These are only a few selected opinions on geology where one can see little
agreement on certain items"

So, in brief: Dr. Swelim isn’t so sure about the existence of pyramids but does acknowledge the evidence. However, he doesn’t claim that this is just a hill.

You can have an opinion of your own, but that doesn’t mean it gives you the right to take these words out of context and bend and twist them how you like. As you know, I’m not taking sides in this pyramid story, but I do request objectivity.

Cover up that report, which I can’t endure to look on...
irna - on 30 August 2011

Hi Eldar,

I fail to see your point here. Evidently Dr. Swelim did not ’declare’ Visocica a natural hill, but he makes two strong points, even if it is in a strange language:

1° he makes it perfectly clear that he calls "pyramid" any object that has a pyramidal form, whatever its origin

2° he sees "disagreement" between geologists on the explanations of the "pyramid" (in the geometrical sense) (forgetting, it seems, that only one Egyptian geologist gave different interpretations - glacial and periglacial features, all the others, including Vrabac, Schoch, Ramovic, Coric... perfectly agree on the composition and structural history of the hill!), so that he considers that "the true status" (man-made or natural) will be decided by archaeological finds; and he has to recognize that there were no such finds, so that "until then we may dismiss human intervention".

I fail to see where I would have twisted, or overinterpreted his words.

So, in brief: Dr. Swelim isn’t so sure about the existence of pyramids but does acknowledge the evidence.

Re-reading again his text, the only evidence he acknowledges is the fact that Visocica is a ’geometrical pyramid’, nothing more.

However, he doesn’t claim that this is just a hill.

No, but he "dismisses human intervention" for the time being. Let me remind you that in 2008 he seemed perfectly sure of human interventions on both Visocica and Pljesevica.

Cordially, Irna

Cover up that report, which I can’t endure to look on...
Anubis - on 30 August 2011

Well, my point is that someone who judges by reading your article, gets the impression that Swelim refuses a man-made origin completely. But he doesn’t. In his first report he didn’t really concluded that these are pyramids, so this new paper isn’t a correction of his last report at all. He simply gives a summary of pro and contra, nothing more. But it seems like you understood it as a complete change of opinions.

so that he considers that "the true status" (man-made or natural) will be decided by archaeological finds; and he has to recognize that there were no such finds, so that "until then we may dismiss human intervention".

well, this is what he always said, only a little more "polite", when he was pointing to the fact that no one knows anything about the possible civilization and the purpose of the pyramid.

Dr. Swelim does not seem at all convinced that the “pyramids” at Visoko bear the least evidence of any human intervention.

Re-reading again his text, the only evidence he acknowledges is the fact that Visocica is a ’geometrical pyramid’, nothing more.

He listed the findings and opinions, and commented the ones that were doubtful for him. It’s another story if they are doubtful for you.

Cover up that report, which I can’t endure to look on...
irna - on 30 August 2011

Hi,

I re-read the two papers, and cannot help thinking that he really changed, at least partly, his opinion. In the 2008 report, he is relatively cautious, and you are right to point that he never really affirms anything, and calls for further research and analysis. But you’ll find in that report numerous sentences like the ones below:
- "The pyramid shape of Plješevica Hrašće especially the west side cannot be a result of nature alone" p.33
- "when regular features appear on two or three sides of one hill, with corners and sides oriented to the cardinal points, the case cannot be ignored" p.39
- "Human intervention removed thin layers of shale exposing a white and smooth hard face of the upper part of the nucleus" p.40
- "The regularity of the sides could easily be achieved by trimming the outer edge of the soft clay terraces" p.40
- "Human intervention brought them as much as possible to perfection." p.44

not to mention his use of a construction vocabulary ("masonry", "the tiles are set", "the tiles were carefully set", "the tiling is arranged in strips"... but it may be a problem of lack of mastering of English?)

But his 2010 text, if it doesn’t totally exclude the possibility of a man-made pyramid (or a terraformed hill), warns that it would be "out of proportion". So yes, I feel I am entitled to consider he changed opinion.

However, his 2010 text is so strangely written, so tortuous, that sometimes he seems to say one thing and its opposite in the same sentence, so that I admit that I could be wrong.

Irna

Cover up that report, which I can’t endure to look on...
Anubis - on 31 August 2011

Ok, you have a point. I just wanted to share my opinion, because I still don’t agree with the general message of your article. However, I agree about his text being quite confusing and contradictory. He should have explained what he really thinks instead of giving us just hints. That’s probably the reason why this text can be interpreted in both ways.

With good intentions,

- Eldar

Cover up that report, which I can’t endure to look on...
irna - on 31 August 2011

Yes, we can agree on the fact that everything would be easier if Dr. Swelim had seen fit to produce a real scientific report!

I noticed that he will not be in Sarajevo this year for the second "international conference" about the ’pyramids’. Nor will the other Egyptians who attended in 2008. It may be a consequence of Egyptian revolution, of course. But they have been quite discreet as far as Bosnian pyramids are concerned these last years, I do not think that any Egyptian scientist came again to Visoko for two years. No news either of the Chinese archaeologists, nor of the Malaysian team with Prof. Chia who came last year and was supposed to produce a scientific paper: http://www.piramidasunca.ba/en/index.php/TEAM-OF-MALAYSIAN-ARCHAEOLOGISTS-WORK-AT-THE-BOSNIAN-PYRAMIDS.html

Cordially, Irna

Cover up that report, which I can’t endure to look on...
Anubis - on 31 August 2011

Yeah, but they are going to have some real scientists there! Though, no geologists I think :D it seems like geology is their arch-enemy. But you know, geology isn’t the only sector related to this topic. Anyway, lets wait for their conclusions. I’m really excited!

Cover up that report, which I can’t endure to look on...
irna - on 1 September 2011

Hi Eldar,

Yeah, but they are going to have some real scientists there!

"real scientists"?

I’m not so sure... Just make a Google search with some of the names on ICBP 2011 page, it’s often... interesting! As far as I know, the nearest one to a "real scientist" is Prof. Debertolis, and it seems that he’s now much disappointed with a lot of things that the Foundation team told him or took for granted. If you can read Italian, there is a very interesting thread on the archaeological forum Ostraka where Prof. Debertolis participates, see particularly the last pages.

Irna

bullet pointSite map bullet pointContact bullet pointEditors area bullet point RSS

2006-2018 © Le site d’Irna - All rights reserved
Top of the page
Site created with SPIP
with the template ESCAL 4.1.6
amélioré par Pigédius
Host: L'Autre Net