Well I did state that it was, in my opinion, most, but not all cases. An impartial study of the more questionable areas of archeology reveals some very revealing documented cases. One such is that of Thomas Lee, Assistant Curator of Indian Antiquities at the National Museum Of Canada. Between 1951 -55, at a dig in Ontario, he excavated stone tools that had been made with an obvious level of skill. The problem was that they appeared to be far older than 10,000 years. He consulted fifty highly reputable geologists, who thoroughly and accurately examined the strata they were found in and determined that they were between 65,000 - 125,000 years old. These findings were supressed as they were unacceptable to the presiding theory of human antiquity. In 1970, a report from the University Of Detroit reviewed the evidence: ' the stratagraphic sequence of the sediments and the artefacts contained in each layer is definite and unequivocal. Careful digging and observation of the sediments and artefacts in place leave no room for doubt regarding the stratigraphy'.
Lee was, however, hounded and discredited,and the evidence he collated was 'lost' in the archives of the museum, never to be recovered. Lee was fired, as was the Director Of The National Museum, Dr Jacques Rousseau, who had suppported him and wished to publish a paper on the findings. In Lee's own words ' it had to be killed. It was killed'.
There are other examples of this type of suppression, as these discoveries cast serious doubts on accepted theory, and human nature being what it is, arses are on the line.
