ARCHEOLOGY

This is a Shush castle in Iran, next to the archeological site of ancient city of Susa. The castle was built in 1890 by ... French archeologists. This shows actual importance of archeology for the French government. Other governments are no different, because Archeology defines History.

COINS

This is a map of verified(!) 16,000 stashes of Roman coins with 6,000,000+ coins found in them as of today:

It's not that people in Rome wouldn't hide some coins in the ground. Yet how can you imagine forgetting it? No family? Friends? Anybody to pass it too? Consider the fact that it's hundreds of coins per stash. Those were some rich people, not your average drunk legionnaires. Accidentally killed by barbarians before could reveal the location to anybody? 16,000 times? And nobody found them for 1000+ years since until recently some guy just got lucky? Vikings too: Scandinavian museums possess almost 500,000 dirhams, more than any other place in the world. Wow! Business of selling archeological fakes has never been so good:

METAL

Weapons and armor of the people killed in a battle were the prize of the winner. If city was sacked, all the property missed by the conquerors was later looted by the survivors or people from nearby. Tombs and graves were robbed, it was a business long before archeology was invented. Arrowhead is money. Nail is money. Any metal junk is money too. Lots of kids and dirt poor people around, picking up anything. Chances of finding anything made of any metal from 300+ years ago are about same as chances of a magician to pull a rabbit out of a hat.

DATING

Pottery and stone can't be dated. Clay and stone are older than any History.

EPIGRAPHY dating is as good as there is a date on it, given you trust the authenticity of that date. The claim of linguistic based dating is laughable given that there was no grammar in Europe in medieval and earlier. There wasn't even a defined uniform set of letter shapes. People used different style handwriting, based on who they studied writing from. Some invented new letters, some invented new ways of writing words to better convey the pronounciation. Ever wondered why English grammar is so ridiculous? That's why. That's the original state of things all over the world, it got fixed much later, after Renaissance, almost everywhere, but not in Britain.

Writing is not the biggest problem. Even today there are half a dozen Spanish dialects, there were two French languages 100 years ago, there are still two Italian ones. This is in times of 100% literacy, radio, TV, newspapers, Internet. Europe 1600: there are over 520 native languages spoken in Nigeria. No literacy, every city had its own dialect of ... something. Mix of Latin, German, Slavic, Phoenician Jewish, Arabic, Greek, Turkish, Persin words + some local "grammar" and pronounciation. There was no single Greek language. Despite of 100% literacy Jewish split into dozens of dialects, plus they acquaired their own German dialect (Yiddish). Compare:

Geoffrey Chaucer (1343-1400)	Modern English
This frere bosteth that he knoweth helle, And God it woot, that it is litel wonder; Freres and feendes been but lyte asonder.	This friar boasts that he knows hell, And God knows that it is little wonder; Friars and fiends are seldom far apart.
William Shakespeare (1564-1616)	Modern English
Good frend for Iesvs sake forbeare, To digg the dvst encloased heare. Bleste be yͤ man yͭ spares thes stones, And cvrst be he yͭ moves my bones.	Good friend, for Jesus' sake forbear, To dig the dust enclosed here. Blessed be the man that spares these stones, And cursed be he that moves my bones.

In 200+ years from incomprehensible to comprehensible with some weird words? Yet it would be naive to assume that in times of Shakespear in England everybody spoke "Shakespearean" or that in times of Chaucer everybody spoke "Chaucerean". Both of these lived in the same region. I come from a tiny 3rd world country with few million people in it. We have 3 mutually incomprehensible dialects. Not accents. Incomprehensible as in I can't understand what he said even if he says it very slow, even if he writes it. One of them is "main", two others are "minorities", yet they are written languages and they still exist today. This is what natural regional language diversity looks like. "Minority" languages have smaller vocabulary, less borrowed words (isolated provinces). If archeologists find them in 1000 years, they will conclude that those are early forms of the "main" language. More than likely some people spoke "Chaucerean" in times of Shakespear and most were illiterate and spoke dialects nobody remembers, and hell knows what else people spoke in times of Chaucer.

Old England is a simple case, BTW, it was very isolated, compared to Latins/Greeks/Jews/Arabs, who conquered and colonized and "imported" lots of people. These languages were misspoken by non-native speakers and mutated under their influence. Compare Jamaican English to British one, that's how Latin became Italian(s), French(s) and Spanish(s). It didn't "evolve" for 1000 years, it was corrupted within a century. Latin child raised by improperly speaking "migrant worker" nanny inevitably picks up her language too. Some families hired local nanny, some none. Some kids played with "alien" kids, some didn't. There is no school where teacher will fix the "accent" or "alien words". There is no dictionary or spellchecker. Everybody writes words however they hear them. Same happened to Greek, Jewish, German, ... Knowing this, any claims of identifying different time-periods by version of Latin or Hebrew used are laughable. How large and how representative their text sample set is from that period? From all cities? All of Mediterranean? All of them have dates on them or were they dated by linguists too?

TREE RING dating is matching tree-ring patterns from found logs to the historical verified sequence of tree ring samples in a region. See the logs on the picture? They were cut in the same forest at the same time. Science claims they must have similar recognizable pattern. If you look at this picture for an hour, you might even start seeing it. Imagine matching one old fuzzy barcode like pattern to hundreds of others from verified sequence. If it matches not the way you like it you can take sample from another side of the log. My aunt practiced fortune telling by matching patterns in the sediment at the bottom of a coffee mug. Somehow scientists forget that trees grow in individual conditions, some faster, some slower, regional climate is not the only factor. This kind of methods can work only in theory, in ideal conditions. In practice this is just another pseudo-scientific trick to justify desired dating.

RADIO-CARBON dating smells fishy, since anything nuclear-particle-related smells fishy. If particle/nuclear physics was taught in schools "as is", every country out there would have nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants by now. Somehow it doesn't happen. Yet let's accept that radio-carbon dating is real and it works. Has it ever debunked any History written before this technology was invented in 1940? Nope. Somehow historians got it right long before radio-carbon dating and all other fancy modern archeological techniques. Conclusion: it is either a pseudo-scientific scam or the dated samples are manipulated to produce desired results. E.g. adding fossil charcoal to the sample would make it look older since that charcoal is pure carbon that is way older than anything you date.

STRATIGRAPHY is when they date stuff by the fact that it was found (partially) underground. The theory is that in inhabited areas the "cultural layer" is formed by all the junk people drop/leave on the ground + some dust/dirt and that burries the old stuff, the deeper - the older. Yet we have hundreds of acknowledged old enough buildings in different countries standing above ground. Large heavy buildings, like pyramids, amphitheatres, churches and ziggurats. Somehow no cultural layer covered them even partially. At the same time some single story mud-huts sink into deep and newer buildings are built on top. Why is that? The hint:

Earth surface is not flat, any old enough settlement was built on uneven surface, some foundations lower than the others. At some point, especially after wheeled transport and canalization appeared, cities were leveled, and the lower buildings (partially) went underground. This is not some catastrophical geological event nor it's 10,000 years of cultural layers but a city planning committee. This tells you nothing about how old this old building is. It can be 1900+. The only certain thing is that it's older than the building on top of it. The fact that this dirt where we found iPhone matches that dirt where we found arrowhead doesn't mean iPhone was produced around the time arrowhead was produced. It means the dirt with arrowheads was explicitly transferred to a different place by people who had iPhones and one of them was lost in the process.

CULTURE based dating: we found smartphones with Chinese parts in them - this is Chinese village! It gets better: we found smartphones next to clay pots and little elephant figurine made of stone - Chinese manufactured smartphones in the late Stone Age! You think I'm exaggerating or being mean to archeologists and historians? Antikythera mechanism ... Analogue computer ... 2nd century BC ... discovered ... in early 1900 ... wreck of a Roman cargo ship ... depth of 45 metres (148 ft) off ... Greek island of Antikythera.:

Anything but the obvious conclusion that this is late medieval or renaissance shipwreck.

CAVES

No known large animal lives in a cave. Wolves, bears, lions, tigers do not. No living cavemen tribe ever discovered, though lots of Stone Age tribes still exist and there were even more in 1800. Reasons are quite simple:

• caves are rare, hunter gatherers have to move
• cave is a trap if you are atacked by overwhelming enemy
• cave is not regularly washed by rain and will soon stink like a toilet
• caves are dark
• fire in a cave will fill it with smoke if wind blows in
• caves are too cold, anywhere North of Equatorial Africa, fire is nowhere near enough to warm up cold stones, you can't sit or lie down there, you will get cold/inflammation, furs/hay are not going to help, unless you make some elevated beds

Archeologists keep finding human remains and paintings in caves. Paintings are never what they are supposed to be, e.g. faces: eyes, nose, mouth, teeth. That's what primitive art looks like, e.g. african masks. Human brain is biologically wired to recognize faces. Your ability to see someone looking at you before it's too late is your chance to survive the ambush. We see anything but faces in the caves. We see drawings of animals and hunters. There are no known tribes who go into caves to draw hunting scenes. Later, I guess, they are supposed to put up a bonfire to review the drawings with their friends over a cup of coffee? Who is the ... who came up with this ...? Cave of Altamira ... Spain ... discovered in 1868 ... first European cave paintings for which a prehistoric origin was suggested and promoted. First it was only Western Europe. I guess they were trying to sell unique European white people intelligence. Later everybody picked up this trick: there are hundreds of these fakes worldwide now. How come nobody ever noticed them until the end of 1868?

PALAEOLITHIC VENERAS

Stone age venus figurines are somehow always overweight. Given amount of naked young girls around, who in his sane mind would make statues like that? ... Archeologists?