On Ancient Aliens, holding up an Ica Stone, his hair standing up as if electrified, Giorgio suggested that humans and dinosaurs might have coexisted, as some ancient alien theorists believe. The stones prove it, more or less.
I never heard of Ica Stones before, which shows I’m not keeping up on the plethora of discoveries out there. So I went to Wikipedia.
It seems that, Uschuya, a Peruvian farmer gave or sold most of the stones to Doctor Javier Cabrera Darquea, saying that they were artifacts. When the Peruvian government threatened Uschuya with imprisonment for selling artifacts, he recanted and said he had made the engraving on the stones himself using comic books as guidelines (ouch!). He even showed how he baked them in cow dung to give the appearance of an ancient glaze (patina).
We can’t blame him; of course he said they were fakes, selling forgeries to gringo tourists is better than incarceration for the high crime of selling real artifacts.
So what is the truth?
Let’s look at the evidence and see what we make of it.
1. Existing science says dinosaurs died out millions of years ago and that there is no evidence that they survived to cohabitate Earth with man. We know that a bunch of contemporary animals are essentially the same as they were in the Jurassic: sharks, cockroaches, crocodiles—all lived before the dinosaurs and are still here. However, we’re talking T. Rex, Brontosaurus—things that would be difficult to hide in the woods. Thousands of paleontologists from hundreds of universities have examined thousands of dinosaur remains from all over the globe, and they never found one that was contemporary with humans. Do you sincerely believe that, like a secret satanic brotherhood, they would all agree, on fear of death—apparently, to lie about their field, not one of them ever dissenting or going rogue with the truth? We either have to believe that all of those scientists are stupid or they are liars. That’s tough to swallow.
2. All of the Ica Stones come from a narrow source, mostly a few farmers channeling their finds to Darquea. As I said in my Star Skull essay—beware of strange discovery stories from limited sources. It doesn’t make them wrong, but it should increase our scrutiny.
3. All the stones appear to have been made by the same artist, or just a few artists. The feet, hands, and shapes have the same style. An art expert could probably be more definitive, but, in any case, either only a few ancients made these, or only a few modern forgers did. Which is more likely? If ancients made them, wouldn’t we expect to find more, the images spreading throughout the region and being copied by other tribes, the story of the creatures being passed down through the generations, all keeping the legend of the beasts alive in folklore and art?
4. Some of the drawings depict modern steel instruments, a dentist’s drill, being one. If they had steel wouldn’t we see other signs of it, say in dental repair or better rock carving tools?
5. Finally, the patina, if it were truly from cow dung, should be carbon dateable. Surely enough could be scrapped from stones and tested. That would prove it one way or the other.
Given the above, I’m inclined to believe that the stones were faked, which is good because I would like to buy one for its artistic value. The only problem is stones are heavy. It would be nice they would make the engravings on something lighter, like a pot or even a gourd.
Of course the stones’ could suddenly become real: an art expert declare them authentic, or a carbon date announced, all as I’m lugging a bag full of them through Peruvian customs—now that would be a bitch.