>>>> CONTD

Rivera filed this report, "The truth is that there is not the most remote idea suspicion of there having lived in Acambaro, or near or far from here, anyone who made in quantity or little by little such pieces. This fact has been investigated by all possible means, covering the time from more than a century ago up to now. There are old people living here who can still give details otherwise unrecorded from the date of the independence of this country."

Another consideration that is often ignored in the debate over the authenticity of the artifacts is that many of them are made of hard stones and not of ceramic. These stone objects show all the effects of erosion and the stone objects are of the same style as the ceramics and the erosion factor is almost impossible to fake.

In 1954, the storm of controversy surrounding the Julsrud collection reached such a crescendo of interest that official archaeologists of the Mexican Government decided to investigate. Dr. Eduardo Noquera, director of Pre-Hispanic Monuments of the Instituto Nacional de Antropologiae Historia, was the lead investigator. Dr. Noquera was accompanied by Rafael Orellana, Ponciano Salazar, and Antonio Pompa y Pompa of the Instituto Nacional de Antropologiciae Historia, upon arrival they inspected the collection and proceeded to El Toro Hill to select undisturbed sites for excavation.

Dr. Noguera supervised the dig at a site that he and the other prominent Mexican archaeologists selected. After several hours of digging many figures were discovered. The archeologists declared that the pieces gave every sign of antiquity and of having been buried a long time ago. The figurines were dug up in the presence of a number of witnesses which included people from the local schools and members of the Chamber of Commerce. Immediately the archeologists congratulated Julsrud on his remarkable discoveries. Two of the archeologists promised to write about the discovery in a scientific journal.

Noquera realized that the dinosaur figurines posed a problem that could ruin his professional career. The archeologists simply faced a dilemma to either tell the truth, that regardless of what anybody may think they had chosen a site and dug up dinosaur figures or to hide the truth in some alternative explanation.

Noquera went back to Mexico City and three weeks later submitted a report with his subordinates that the collection must be a hoax because of the life forms involved - dinosaurs. Dr. Noquera wrote, "Actually in spite of the apparent scientific legality with which these objects were found, it is a case of reproduction and to say falsification, made in a relatively recent epochs. In my opinion it is composed of three types of objects one of them figurines which pretend to be time reproductions of animals extinct for millions of years; possibly the maker of these objects was inspired by some books on paleontology which were in vogue at the end of the past century or the beginning of the present one."

Julsrud was gravely disappointed that in a span of a few weeks, the archaeologists first vindicated the collection and then cleverly maneuvered to deny their own discoveries. Julsrud, undaunted by all the academic goofy dust sprinkled over the collection by rigid orthodox scientist's to make it go away, pressed on in his efforts to convince the skeptics.

Eventually, an eminent scholar arrived on the scene in Acambaro who would expose the contentions of Julsrud's opponents with a series of arguments and facts that would prove to be indisputable. In the summer of 1955 Charles Hapgood, the Professor of History and Anthropology at Keene State College of the University of New Hampshire, spent several months in Acambaro and conducted a very detailed investigation of the collection. Charles Hapgood had already distinguished himself as the author of a number of books including "Earth's Shifting Crust" (1958), "Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings" (1966), and "The Path of the Pole" (1970).

Hapgood excavated a number of sites that were on previously undisturbed ground and found many pieces of ceramic figurines of the "Julsrud" type. To eliminate any possibility of fraud that Tinajero or anyone else had manufactured the ceramics, Hapgood decided to excavate beneath a house that had been built in 1930, long before any artifacts were found on El Toro Hill. They found a house directly over the site owned by the chief of police, asked permission to dig beneath the floor of his house. Permission was granted, and they dug a six-foot deep pit beneath the hard concrete floor of the living room, unearthing dozens of the controversial objects. Since the house had been built twenty five years before Julsrud arrived in Mexico, it exonerated Julsrud, eliminated the hoax theory and negated Dipeso's as well as Noquera's reports at all the important points.

In 1968 Charles Hapgood returned to Acambaro accompanied by Earle Stanley Gardner of Perry Mason fame. Mr. Gardner was not only trained in criminology but was also an investigator of archaeological problems. He was supremely impressed with the vastness and the variety of the collection. It was quite clear that Mr. Gardner considered the fake theory completely asinine.

The radiocarbon 14 method of dating was still in its infancy, but Hapgood acquired specimens for C14 testing. (7) Gardner and Andrew Young (inventor of the Bell Helicopter) financed the testing.

Hapgood submitted the samples to the Laboratory of Isotopes Inc. in New Jersey. The results were as follows:

Sample No.l:(I-3842) 3590 + - 100 (C. 1640 B.C)

Sample No.2:(I-4015) 6480 + - 170 (C. 4530 B.C)

Sample No.3:(I-4031) 3060 + - 120 (C. 1110 B.C)

The radiocarbon dates of up to 4,500 B.C. for Carbon on the ceramics would make the collection the oldest in the Western Hemisphere.

In 1972, Arthur Young submitted two of the figurines to Dr. Froelich Rainey, the director of the Pennsylvania Museum for Thermoluminescent Dating. The Masca lab had obtained thermoluminescent dates of up to 2,700 B.C. In a letter dated September 13, 1972, addressed to Mr. Young, Dr Rainey said:

"...Now after we have had years of experimentation both here and at the lab at Oxford, we have no doubt about the dependability of the thermoluminescent method. We may have errors of up to 5-10% in absolute dating, but we are no longer concerned about unexpected bugs that might put the whole system in doubt. I should also point out, that we were so concerned about the extraordinarily ancient dates of these figures, that Mark Han in our lab made an average of 18 runs on each one of the four samples. Hence, there is a very substantial bit of research in these particular pieces... All in all the lab stands on these dates for the Julsrud material, whatever that means in terms of archeological dating in Mexico, or in terms of 'fakes verse's authentic' pieces."

But when the lab at the University of Pennsylvania found out that dinosaurs were part of the collection, they retracted their thermoluminescent. They asserted that the ceramics gave off regenerated light signals and could be no more than 30 years old.

A thermoluminescent technician admitted that no other ceramics existed, in his experience, that produced regenerated light signals, and no other thermoluminescent dating of ceramics had ever been done by utilization of a regenerated light signal. In short, the testing was a hocus pocus, laboratory trick to avoid the obvious conclusion that dinosaurs and man lived together.

John Tierney determined to expose the University of Pennsylvania's shenanigans by testing with standard procedures. Tierney had two fragments of Julsrud type ceramics excavated at El Toro Mountain in Acambaro and in 1956, in Julsrud's presence, Tierney submitted these pieces to Dr. Victor J. Bortolet, Director of Research of Daybreak Nucleari Archaeometrics Laboratory Services for dating. Dr. Bortulot determined the pieces' upper limit of age to 2,000 years old, thus, invalidating the Masca report which claimed the objects were made thirty to one hundred years ago. (8)

John Tierney took a half dozen samples of Julsrud ceramics of different clay composition to a team at Ohio State University. The team of experts consisted of Dr. J.0. Everhart (Chairman of the Department of Ceramic Engineering) Dr Earle R Caley, (among the world's most respected archaeological chemist) and Dr Ernest G Ehlers (mineralogist in the geology department at Ohio State University). They reported that they could not believe the artifacts were made in modern times nor could they believe they were made by some amateur who tried to perpetuate a fraud. Upon my notifying them that they had authenticated Julsrud artifacts they lapsed into a profound and apparent permanent silence.

In 1997 B.C. Video released the program Jurassic Art with the Acambaro segment which was originally supposed to have been a part of NBC's television special, "The Mysterious Origins of Man." The program features Neil Steede, President of the Early Sites Research Society West and Mexican Epigraphic Society, attempting to debunk the collection, claiming it is of recent manufacture. Toward the end of the program, it is revealed that he sent two samples from the Julsrud type ceramics (one of a human figure and the other a dinosaur figure) to an independent C14 laboratory. Startling results came back. The human figure was dated at 4,000 years BP (Before Present) and the dinosaur figure at 1,500 years BP. Steede tap danced around implications, embarrassingly embracing the human figurine as credible, while waltzing past the dinosaur figurine, claiming the laboratory test must not have given a true reading. In reality, the dinosaur figurine created too much tension for orthodox science and Steede had to find an out. The solution was simple. He discarded the dinosaur date.

The Japanese company, Nissi, sponsored a television crew to go to Acambaro and produce a program for Japanese TV regarding the Acambaro figurines. The program entitled "Did the Ancients See Dinosaurs" was aired on February 2, 1997 in Japan. There is a stunning moment in the program as the Japanese narrator is looking over an animal figurine, and he holds it up next to his Japanese book on dinosaur species. Dr. Herrejon said that even most of the Brontosaurs looking dinosaurs did not look like a "typical" saurian dinosaur. We pressed him as to what he meant by "typical?" He replied, "they had spines all down their backs, little spines." We drew dinosaurs with conical dermal spines and Antonio pointed vigorously stating in Spanish, "That's it, That's it".

Dr. Herrejon unwittingly had helped to verify the authenticity of the Julsrud dinosaur figurines. No one knew in the 1940s, 50's, that some species of Saurian dinosaurs had dermal spines. They were perceived as represented on the Sinclair gasoline filling station signs. It was the work of Stephen Czerkas in a 1992 article that brought to light this aspect of dinosaur anatomy (Geology, V.20, No. 12, 1992, p.1068-1070).

Dr. Herrejon was intimately aware of the details and of the immensity of the Julsrud collection (33,700 ceramic pieces). He said it was simply astonishing that not one piece was a duplicate of another. They were all individually distinct. Others who closely examined the collection have also observed this fact. Antonio commented, "If there was a fabrication who was its artist?" No single artist could make 33,700 figurines, all different in style. If there was a hoax then there must have been many artists. How could such a conspiracy be kept silent all these years? Surely someone would have known about such activities.

I inquired of Dr. Herrejon as to the condition of the artifacts when they were excavated. Antonio said that they were encrusted with dirt and other materials (patina). During Easter week of 1951 Antonio spent two days with Julsrud cleaning the dirt and patina off recently excavated ceramic pieces.

Herrejon and Julsrud did not realize that the absence of patina on the objects would later erupt into accusations that they could not be old or authentic. Julsrud ignorantly commenced the cleaning of all the artifacts back in the 1940's. The job was completed by Tinejero and his helpers.

However, there are many eyewitnesses who saw Julsrud's excavating of the ceramic pieces and confirm that the artifacts had patina and dirt on them.

In my handling of several hundred pieces of the Julsrud collection, I have observed pieces that still have dirt embedded in the crevices as well as some patina on the surface.

Footnotes

1. Charles Hapgood, MYSTERY IN ACAMBARO, An Account of the Ceramic Collection of the Late Waldemar Julsrud in Acambaro, QTU, Mexico. (Self Published, 1972).

2. THE DINOSAUR ENCYCLOPEDIA, (Kingfisher Books: New York, N.Y.) p.80.

3. Lowell Harmer. MEXICO FINDS GIVE HINT OF LOST WORLD, Los Angeles Times, (March 25,1951).

4. William N. Russell "Did Man Tame the Dinosaurs?" Fate, (March, 1952), pp 2027; "Report on Acambaro, "Fate. (June, 1953), pp.31-35.

5. Charles C. Dipeso, "The Clay Figurines of Acambaro," Guanajuato, Mexico, American Antiquity, April 1953, pp 388-389.

6. Charles Dipeso, "The Clay Monsters of Acambaro, "Archaeology (Summer, 1953), Pages 111-114.

7. Taylor and Berger, American Antiquity (Vol.33, No.3), 1968.

8. John H Tierney, "Pseudoscientific Attacks On Acambaro Artifacts: The Ceramic Technology of Intellectual Suppression," World Explorer Magazine (Vol.1 #4), pp 52-61.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Copyrights © acknowledged where applicable.
Material reproduced here is for educational and research purposes only.