This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
It is an interesting exercise to read through "The World of the Maya" by Sam Osmanagich at http://www.alternativnahistorija.com/WM.htm. In it, a person finds revealing statements such as:
... It is my theory that the Maya should be considered watchmakers of the cosmos whose mission it is to adjust the Earthly frequency and bring it into accordance with the vibrations of our Sun. Once the Earth begins to vibrate in harmony with the Sun, information will be able to travel in both directions without limitation. And then we will be able to understand why all ancient peoples worshipped the Sun and dedicated their rituals to this. The Sun is the source of all life on this planet and the source of all information and knowledge.
and
"This temple, fortunately, remained hidden and intact until 1989, so that the Masonic cliques were not able to keep it from the world. It is clear that what we see here are space ships which travel between our Solar system and other parts of the galaxy (the head of the Maya is in the vehicles and, thereby, between the Sun and the center of the galaxy).
These statements and the rather disjointed and rambling nature of this essay certainly raises questions about Mr. Osmanagic's qualifications as and his understanding of even the basics of archaeology.
There is an interesting discussion going about the Bosnian pyramid in Regarding the Bosnian "pyramid"
Given that Osmanagic has no qualifications as an archeologist, and no expertise in any of the archeological actions he's taken to date (identifying, dating, and excavating an archeological site), his writings on pseudohistory of ancient civilizations and this "pyramid" are especially telling. In "The World of the Maya" writes of the Mayan's connections with Atlantis, Lemuria, Mu, "cosmic harmony", and intragalactic travel in ancient times. It's no surprise then that he, without any evidence at all, dates his "pyramid" to the supposed time of Atlantis. -- ( Ronz 19:27, 28 April 2006 (UTC))
I removed this line from the article:
the same number is used for the number of days in one year
Because the meter, of course, was invented at the end of the 18th century, and therefore is irrelevent to the distance between the three pyramids. Aside from the fact that the precise boundaries of each are not knowable down to the meter, since they are right now just giant hills three times larger than the original structures. -- Kaz 17:39, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
The recent rewrite of the article does not meet wikipedia's standards. Statements like "seems to have located [...] the world's largest ancient man-made pyramid", "Osmanagic is an expert on pyramids", "It is suspected that the ancient Illyrian inhbitants [sic] of the Balkans, once thought to be more primitive, actually built these structures" require citations. Otherwise, the article needs to be restructured to make no such original claims. Besides that, the article includes spelling and grammatical errors, and is laid out in a very non-standard way. I will resist reverting to the earlier version (which was at least encyclopaedic in style), but ask that these issues to be addressed as a priority. — JEREMY 18:11, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Has anyone managed to dig up an image with licensing we can use of this thing?
Images like this one pretty impressively make the case for it actually being a pyramid. — ceejayoz talk 19:19, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
What is the distinction between this and a Tumulus? -Apr 23 2006
I appreciate the desire not to prejudice readers about whether there are actually pyramids present at Visoko. However, readers who come looking for this content will be searching for the pyramid information (which is all this article actually covers — there's nothing worthwhile here about the hill itself), and thus I've reversed the move. — JEREMY 01:24, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Here are a lot of photos: http://index.hu/gal?dir=0604/tech/pyramid/
If you look it is fairly obviously natural. The economy of the area is much collapsed and this is a tourism PR hype trick according to everbody you ask in the central european region. 195.70.48.242 07:41, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
The link to the petition that was anti-Bosnian Pyramid has been removed due to the fact that it was done by a Serbian nationalist who started his argument with 'Stop Taliban Bosnia!'. Taliban has nothing to due with the Bosnian Pyramid and something like this was only done to instigate more problems.
I'm not sure which groups are currently fighting over the content of this page, but as an anthropology student, I'm very disappointed in the credulous journalists who have failed to look into Mr. Osmanagic's qualifications or even attempt to get a general idea of what most actual scholars have to say on the matter. It's wiki articles like this that make me think that there should be more scholarly oversight on pages dealing with the social sciences. There has been no evidence as yet of Osmanagic ever earning an archaeology degree, though he's identified as an archaeologist in the news media (most likely because he presented himself as such and they were too lazy to verify it).
Also, the dates he presents for the "pyramid" would mean a wholesale reeavaluation of European archaeology. To those who don't see this as a problem, I suggest they find the wikipedia page for Occam's Razor. I really hope that an editor (or the original) will do some more research and fix this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.25.158.122 ( talk • contribs)
I've tidied the discussion page up by moving this text below the contents box Quarkstorm 09:46, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Back to the petition - it does seem relevant possibly not as an external link but to show how rapidly politicised this issue got with various factions jumping on it. The political angle is one that I suspect can't really be avoided but God knows how it'd be handled without adding more material for an editting war. ( Emperor 03:33, 29 April 2006 (UTC))
It has to be noted that serious researchers have disputed heavily Mr.Osmanagics claims as not only incorrect but also that his so-called excavations have been damaging older neolithic and medieval archeological sites ! Apart from this, it has been noted that Mr.Osmanagic seems to have no scientific references to display, despite his claims of "15-year-old-pyramid-research".As is apparent from his books, all of his so-called researches are simple tourist trips! For serious information regarding this so-called "research", check:
-- Comment added to main article by anon editor User:85.92.228.157, 00:16, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
This is going to be a controversial one so I think we need to keep an eye on the "facts" as some things in the entry seem to be taking Semir Osmanagić's statements as fact. A couple of things that concern me and possibly need to be more qualified:
"The 213 metre Visocica hill is symmetrically shaped, with sides reportedly sloping at 45° and aligned to the points of the compass."
The contour map [2] (extracted from here) shows this just isn't so. The north face is roughly triangular (not in itself remarkably in geomorphological terms) but it is nearly impossible to make out a rectangular plan or even well defined other sides at all (making statements on actual aignment impossible). You can make the hill look pyramidal if you stage your photographs from the N or NE but that doesn't make that statement true. Perhaps better wording might be "Semir Osmanagić has claimed that the 213 metre Visocica hill is symmetrically shaped, with sides reportedly sloping at 45° and allegedly aligned to the points of the compass."
"The dig, involving a team of international archaeologists from Australia, Austria, Bosnia, Scotland and Slovenia [1], began in April 2006."
You can see named "international archaeologists" in this statement from Semir Osmanagić "Foreigners on our team include experienced archaeologist such as: Richard Royce from Australia, Allyson McDavid from U.S., Chris Mundligler from Canada, Martin Aner from Austria." [3] - few of them show up online (apart from in connection with this) suggesting they aren't well established in the field. Mundligler is probably Chris Mundigler [4] but a handful of (unconfirmed) archaeology graduates from different countries hardly counts as "an international team" - I could find archaeologists from America and France to come and look at things in my back garden if I tried hard enough (or made big enough claims) - would that allow me to claim they were an "international team"? My concern is that this seems to be providing false authority to the claims. Perhaps better wording might be: "Archaeologists from around the world, including Australia, Austria, Bosnia, Scotland, Slovenia and the USA, " and then throw in the link I gave [5] as a source too.
The current last link is Bosnian language only - for English language concerns you can see the Science and Politics blog [6] which has a number of entries and links to other places raising concerns. This critical article should also probably be linked in [7]
Caveats: I have expressed a range of concerns about this hill actually being a pyramid (despite my really wanting it to be - ironically as I was eidtting this in someone added other comments with links to what I've said - I'd still recommend using the Science and Politics blog entry as the central one for English language blogging concern about goingson as they link out to various other aspects) so I don't feel I should make those updates and will leave it to more neutral editors to decide on the best way forward ( Emperor 17:15, 26 April 2006 (UTC))
instead of "...involving a team of international archaeologists... " try "...involving an international team of largely unrecognised archaeologists ..." or "...involving an international team of budding, but as yet, unrecognised archaeologists..." Quarkstorm 08:16, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Presenting Osmanagić's statements is probably the best way to demonstrate the questionable nature of the claims, but leaves it for the reader to decide. The trick is to write it up without sounding sarcastic. For instance - The fact the Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun would be the biggest pyramid shows that the pyramids were all built by the same people and the Bosnian Pyramid was the last according to Osmanagić. This has been disputed by Osmanagić who has noted that it may well have been built first. -- Alunsalt 12:11, 29 April 2006 (UTC)Visocica overlooking Visoko. Semir Osmanagić states the symmetrical nature of the hill and its forty-five degree slopes are indicative of a pyramid. Other archaeologists find the claim controversial.
If you visit this site you can see the comment
I am the Royce Richards made famous (and notorious) by Mr Osmanagich. I made an initial enquiry into the project and then decided to distance myself from it as it looked to me like someone selling snake oil. I have since had my name published in articles in national newspapers in Australia and in international media as an “Australian Archaeologist out to unearth ancient Bosnian pyramids and rewrite the established version of history........”
Its all a big load of bollocks. The “Bosnian Pyramid” is just a shonky attempt by a shonky person to make a name for themselves, its not something I want to be involved with. Its quite annoying as I now get random emails from all kinds of kooks expecting me to be an authority on Bosnian pyramids!! The damage this will do to my professional reputation is yet to be seen..........!
I never gave Mr Osmanagich permission to give my name to any media organisation and I never gave any media organisation permission to put my name in print. For the record I am an archaeologist. For the record I am not involved in the Bosnian pyramid project. For the record I’m pretty annoyed with finding my name given to the media in relation to Bosnian pyramids.
I thought it could be an imposter, but I've emailed the address in the South Australian government and it's genuine. Royce Richards is, according to the official site, on the archaeological committee. Is this verification enough to be able to write up a section on the misrepresentation of archaeologists? At the moment you only have my word for it that I've emailed him, but realistically the whole world cannot email him to check. It is also provocative enough to inspire a few flames. I thought I'd put it up for debate before writing it up to see what other people think. Alunsalt 08:08, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Ditto Grace Fegan, the (real) Irish archaeologist. At this site Grace Fegan says:
Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 20:17:46 +0100 (BST) Subject: Re: Questions regarding Bosnian pyramid Dear (*izbrisano*) Thank you for giving me the opportunity to clarify, once more, my position with regard to this project. I have been a professional archaeologist since 1998 and am currently working for a private consultancy in Ireland. In the course of considering summer volunteer positions on various European excavations I contacted, among others, Mr Osmanagich. I found his contact details on the Archaeological Institute of America website. Mr Osmanagich later replied that he may be in a position to offer me a paid staff position, requiring my presence on site for up to six months. I informed him that I would need to consider this very carefully as I am in full-time employment and would find it difficult to take such extended leave. Mr Osmanagich said he would contact me with a definitive offer and also forwarded some information regarding the site.
The information came in the form of two reports, one was a 'geophysical survey report' (it was unlike any geophysical report I had ever seen) and the other was a 'geological report' (ditto). Having looked through this information it became clear that this project was dubious at best. I did some searching on the web and realised that Mr Osmanagich had no affiliations to any academic body, and was not a qualified archaeologist.
My mistake at this point was not emailing him immediately to inform him that I would not be taking part.
Before I knew it an article had appeared in an Irish newspaper, stating that I was going to be taking part in this Bosnian pyramid project. The article stated that I had excavated Newgrange and described me as an 'eminent Irish archaeologist'. Just to clear things up – Newgrange had been excavated to a satisfactory degree before I had even graduated from my B.A., and although I'm doing well in my career at the moment, I would certainly not describe myself as eminent (at best, I would like to think that my eminence is imminent, he he). I also received phone calls from two British journalists enquiring as to the nature of my involvement in the project. These gentlemen were kind enough to inform me that I was listed on the project website as being one of the 'foreign experts' taking part. When I logged on to the website I found that I was listed as Senior Archaeologist, Kilkenny (I am the senior archaeologist for the firm in which I work, but not for the entire county of Kilkenny!). Most worrying of all was a link through which people could supposedly contact me. When I clicked on it an email address came up of which I had no previous knowledge and to which I had no access. Needless to say, I found this pretty unsettling. Mr Osmanagich used my name in connection with his project when he had no right to do so. He also seems to have made every attempt to make me into something that I am not. In addition he potentially misled those who visited the website that they could contact me, and that whatever responses they would receive would be from me. With regard to the excavations taking place on the 'Bosnian Pyramid' site, I would be very surprised if at the end of the season Mr Osmanagich throws up his hands having failed to find definitive evidence supporting his argument. No matter what is there he will find what he is looking for. That is what happens when a site is not excavated by archaeologists, but glory hunters. Kindest Regards Grace Fegan
Doug Weller
I've restored the (apparently representative) letter to the Times Online. Is there some doubt that this (notably redlinked) source is fraudulent or WP:NPOV#Undue weight? If so, it should probably be removed again. Also, why was the Dutch link to Visocica removed? Is the article about the hill, rather than the "pyramids" perhaps? — JEREMY 04:01, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
They released a piece on their site [8] - the quotes from Curtis Runnels could do with adding into the criticism section. ( Emperor 16:19, 28 April 2006 (UTC))
It's notable that the criticism section is now the dominant feature of the article. While some of us may feel that's appropriate, I suspect a lot of our readers will have come here looking for the juicy details of Osmangic's claims. I'd like to see the Interpretation section beefed up and referenced, lest it appear we're simply straw-manning the whole thing. Also, the redlinking from the Criticism section is actually a little embarrassing; are these really such obscure sources, or is archaeology just one of wikipedia's weak suits? — JEREMY 19:09, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
If someone as able to get a copy of Osmangic's book that can read Bosnian, they would be able to provide much more information on what Osmangic has actually claimed and why. It would be interesting to find out why the book refers to Atlantis, Mu, and Lemuria, plus dates of 40,000 and 27,000 years ago. -- ( Ronz 02:10, 30 April 2006 (UTC))
What is it we're trying to balance? I've seen concern for the expectations of people reading the article who may know little or nothing about the topic, concern that Osmangic is not treated too "skeptically", and concern that the article isn't too critical. -- ( Ronz 01:27, 1 May 2006 (UTC))
Are they actually archeologists? Are they qualified in the field? if not should we refer to them as such? -- Artw 17:31, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Sean Pilav is a recent graduate - his job is mapping the tunnels. The 'experienced geologist' did an undergraduate degree in engineering geology in 1971 and has worked in mining since. Royce Richards (the right name) isn't involved. The official list is at this site. I'm on the trail of Anne Handberry, I hope. I know she's not a senior archaeologist, she is mainly an artist. Doug
Royce Richards tells me he finished his undergraduate degree in archaeology in 2004. He's had very little archaeological experience. But he is still on the Foundation's web page as a member of the Archaeology Subcommittee and labelled a 'Senior Archaeologist'. You can imagine how embarrassing that is. DougWeller
It looks like the "team" has dwindled to almost nothing. Currently, the official site lists only:
Silvana Čobanov, Degree in Archaeology, University of Zadar Saša Janković, archaeologist, University of Belgrade; Anne Handberry, Senior archaeologist, USA; (no name) Department for Aboriginal Affairs, South Australia
So, is the Foundation still lying about their heavily revised "team of archeologists"? -- Ronz 20:54, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
I've added the link to "the other side" of the story. 217.227.222.19 21:10, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
Osmangic is now on record claiming the pyramid has supernatural powers:
Osmanagic believes the site was chosen in the belief that it was a focal point of energies, like Giza in Egypt. That, he says, could explain the local claim that no one was killed in the three-pyramid area during the 1992-95 war.
"The pyramid saved them," he said.
( Ronz 01:51, 9 May 2006 (UTC))
Via Ma'at comes the interview with Slovenian magazine Misteriji. I've checked the original and with the very very very limited knowledge I have of Serbo-Croat "negativni energijski oblak" does seem to be "negative energy cloud". A pyramid would be quite pointy and possibly capable of bursting a cloud if sharpened. I leave it to the reader to decide if this is plausible. -- Alunsalt 20:15, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
The more Osmangic says, the less sense he makes, the more evident he's just making things up. The "Osmanagić's interpretation" section shows this. Should we try to make the section make sense, or continue with it as is, the ramblings of a charlatan?
The Economist has an Aug 10th 2006 article that documents some of his more absurd ideas:
Mr Osmanagic's theories sound fantastical. He believes that the biggest pyramid is one-third taller than Egypt's Great Pyramid, and that they were built by an ancient civilisation 12,500 years ago. “Yes,” says Mr Osmanagic, who has been denounced by Bosnian archaeologists as a hallucinating lunatic, “we are rewriting the history of the world.” Indeed. Mr Osmanagic, who has also written about survivors from the mythical island of Atlantis who built pyramids in Central America—and about Hitler escaping in the direction of the Antarctic in 1945—says his enemies are just jealous.
("Bosnia's pyramids: A towering success" [10]) -- Ronz 14:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
http://www.superbosna.com/vijesti/nauka/i_u_maglaju_piramida?/
I'd like a size comparison with Silbury Hill and some famous pyramids in Egypt and Mexico.
In the interest of averting an edit war with User:Jeremygbyrne, can various editors interested in this topic offer suggestions on a proper characterization of S. Osmanagić? I think it is at least neccesary to point out that he is not a real archaeologist, or even a scientist. Obviously this brings us into NPOV/POV territory, but I think their are NPOV ways to say that someone is pretending to be something he is not. Taking an extreme NPOV view of him does no service to an uninformed reader who might use this article to form an honest opinion of the man. Hiberniantears 17:20, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
My emphasis. The section is entitled "Verifiability, not truth"."Verifiability" in this context does not mean that editors are expected to verify whether, for example, the contents of a New York Times article are true. In fact, editors are strongly discouraged from conducting this kind of research, because original research may not be published in Wikipedia. Articles should contain only material that has been published by reliable sources, regardless of whether individual editors view that material as true or false. The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is thus verifiability, not truth.
after "...covered the structure." and before "Osmanagić has claimed that the dig..."Osmanagić began investigating the pyramid after 15 years of study in Latin America (ref: http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2006/04/19/experts_find_evidence_of_bosnia_pyramid/?rss_id=Boston.com+%2F+News) which, he claims, has enabled him to identify which extra-terrestrials built which the pyramids (ref http://www.alternativnahistorija.com/WM.htm#12). His theories have been rejected by professional archaeologists as "wacky" and "absurd" (ref http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,59-2150036,00.html).
This page needs to be brought into line with the truth about the "pyramids".
At present articles like this make a mockery of wikipedia.
Hi I don't know how to sign my comments really but yes I am not responsible for what's written here above, I do however see that persons point, the article at the moment does give one the impression that there could possibly be a pyramid there. There is however obviously no pyramid to be found there, when I first heard the news of a pyramid in Bosnia I thought that it was sorta exciting but it's just BS, a mistake, a hoax a fuckup who knows. Either way this article should tell it like it is, there are no pyramids there. (Signed by me or something)
... scheduled to finish by 2012 in order to break a cloud of negative energy, allowing the Earth to receive cosmic energy from the centre of the galaxy ...
I see there's a reference to back this up, but it's in Slovenian. Is there an English article that states the same? Or can someone familiar with Slovenian confirm the accuracy of this? - Kfor 12:39, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
The Economist: "Bosnia's pyramids: A towering success" [11]
Robert M. Schoch, "The Bosnian Pyramid Phenomenon" [12]
John Bohannon, "Mad About Pyramids", Science Magazine [13]
(above added 00:48, 26 September 2006 by Ronz)
Ian Traynor, "Tourists flock to Bosnian hills but experts mock amateur archaeologist's pyramid claims" [14] -- Ronz 17:42, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
Old Visoki fort, Bosnian National Monument [15] -- Ronz 18:02, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
"Pyramid No More: Sphinx geologist Robert Schoch and anomalies researcher Colette Dowell report from Bosnia", Sub Rosa, Issue 6, Oct 2006. [16] -- Ronz 04:29, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
"Researchers Helpless as Bosnian Pyramid Bandwagon Gathers Pace", Science Magazine, 22 December 2006, p. 1862 [17] -- Ronz 19:47, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Declaration from the European Association of Archaeologists, 11 Dec 2006 [18] -- Ronz 19:50, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
"The great Bosnian pyramid scheme" by Anthony Harding, British Archaeology November/December 2006 [19] -- Ronz 23:11, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
"An open letter from the Bosnian scientific community to M. Christian Schwarz-Schilling, High Representative of the international community in Bosnia and Herzegovina" [20] (Haven't found other copies of this letter as yet) -- Ronz 19:30, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
"Come see the pyramids ... in Bosnia?", The Christian Science Monitor, March 29, 2007 [21] -- Ronz 20:58, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
"The Great Pyramids of ... Bosnia?" by Colin Woodard. The Chronicle of Higher Education, March 30, 2007. [22].
"It is not possible that those are pyramids," says Mark Rose, of the Archaeological Institute of America, who organized a petition asking Unesco, the United Nations' education-and-science agency, not to send a proposed expedition to the site. "Every major media outlet that initially covered this story got it wrong. It's clearly crackpot stuff, but apparently nobody bothered to check the story."
But as pyramid mania has grown, spread by credulous accounts, those who have expressed skepticism have been savaged in the Bosnian news media, deluged with hate mail, even labeled traitors to their nation. Many observers now see the debate in stark terms: Will a pseudoscientific project, even one that serves to restore Bosnia's wounded pride and dignity, win out over peer-reviewed archaeological research?
Unesco does not intend to send a mission to Visoko, says Mechtild Rossler, of the organization's World Heritage Center, in Paris.
-- Ronz 00:27, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't see value in:
-- Ronz 17:54, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
Using the heading debunking is asserting (correctly) that the claims are false. It's one of those areas that shows Wikipedia isn't perfect, but if we ignore it then there's no defence when a New Age Wikipedian comes along and re-writes the entry to their point of view. The easiest way to show that Osmanagić is a crank is to baldly state the facts and assume the reader isn't a fool. It's more persuasive if the reader is allow to come to their own opinion rather than being told what it is. The sort of reader who is a fool isn't going to be swayed by any facts. -- Alunsalt 14:07, 10 October 2006 (UTC)If we're going to represent the sum total of human knowledge, then we must concede that we will be describing views repugnant to us without asserting that they are false. Things are not, however, as bad as that sounds. The task before us is not to describe disputes as though, for example, pseudoscience were on a par with science; rather, the task is to represent the majority (scientific) view as the majority view and the minority (sometimes pseudoscientific) view as the minority view; and, moreover, to explain how scientists have received pseudoscientific theories. This is all in the purview of the task of describing a dispute fairly.
(Anyone know why I can't see the references? Do others have this problem?) - It's the gallery tag that's causing it.
It's now almost a year since the pyramid pr started. Early on, the sources available were few and poor. I think we have enough available sources now that we should at least discuss this article's reliance on poor sources, and what changes should be made now that many better ones are available. Minimally, I think the article could contain a section critical of most media about the pyramid, citing the multiple sources that have published such media criticisms. Additionally, I think it's worth considering adding something about this being a hoax designed to increase tourist revenue and influence politics across Bosnia, again citing the multiple sources available. -- Ronz 19:11, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
Osmanagić and APBPSF have been playing with weasel words, making an issue of whether or not the hill is man-made or natural. Everyone knows that there are man-made structures on the hill. Man-made structures do not make the hill into a pyramid. Please don't fall for this simple ruse. -- Ronz 16:12, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm proposing that we stop treating Osmanagić and APBPSF (Archaeological Park: Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun Foundation) are reliable sources. If needed, we can summarize all the evidence. If the source for material is Osmanagić or APBPSF, we should look for other reliable sources before incorporating it, otherwise it should not be added to the article. For example, there are claims that Aly Abd Barakat thinks portions of the hill are man-made, but we have no reliable sources confirming this and more importantly we have no sources that confirm if Barakat thinks there is a pyramid or just other man-made structures. -- Ronz 16:13, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Those working on the article might like to know that it was mentioned as further reading in an article on the "pyramids" in British Archaeology magazine (issue no. 92, Jan-Feb 2007), in an article written by Anthony Hall, President of the European Association of Archaeologists, who it seems found himself involved in the furore. Shimgray | talk | 14:37, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
It is an interesting exercise to read through "The World of the Maya" by Sam Osmanagich at http://www.alternativnahistorija.com/WM.htm. In it, a person finds revealing statements such as:
... It is my theory that the Maya should be considered watchmakers of the cosmos whose mission it is to adjust the Earthly frequency and bring it into accordance with the vibrations of our Sun. Once the Earth begins to vibrate in harmony with the Sun, information will be able to travel in both directions without limitation. And then we will be able to understand why all ancient peoples worshipped the Sun and dedicated their rituals to this. The Sun is the source of all life on this planet and the source of all information and knowledge.
and
"This temple, fortunately, remained hidden and intact until 1989, so that the Masonic cliques were not able to keep it from the world. It is clear that what we see here are space ships which travel between our Solar system and other parts of the galaxy (the head of the Maya is in the vehicles and, thereby, between the Sun and the center of the galaxy).
These statements and the rather disjointed and rambling nature of this essay certainly raises questions about Mr. Osmanagic's qualifications as and his understanding of even the basics of archaeology.
There is an interesting discussion going about the Bosnian pyramid in Regarding the Bosnian "pyramid"
Given that Osmanagic has no qualifications as an archeologist, and no expertise in any of the archeological actions he's taken to date (identifying, dating, and excavating an archeological site), his writings on pseudohistory of ancient civilizations and this "pyramid" are especially telling. In "The World of the Maya" writes of the Mayan's connections with Atlantis, Lemuria, Mu, "cosmic harmony", and intragalactic travel in ancient times. It's no surprise then that he, without any evidence at all, dates his "pyramid" to the supposed time of Atlantis. -- ( Ronz 19:27, 28 April 2006 (UTC))
I removed this line from the article:
the same number is used for the number of days in one year
Because the meter, of course, was invented at the end of the 18th century, and therefore is irrelevent to the distance between the three pyramids. Aside from the fact that the precise boundaries of each are not knowable down to the meter, since they are right now just giant hills three times larger than the original structures. -- Kaz 17:39, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
The recent rewrite of the article does not meet wikipedia's standards. Statements like "seems to have located [...] the world's largest ancient man-made pyramid", "Osmanagic is an expert on pyramids", "It is suspected that the ancient Illyrian inhbitants [sic] of the Balkans, once thought to be more primitive, actually built these structures" require citations. Otherwise, the article needs to be restructured to make no such original claims. Besides that, the article includes spelling and grammatical errors, and is laid out in a very non-standard way. I will resist reverting to the earlier version (which was at least encyclopaedic in style), but ask that these issues to be addressed as a priority. — JEREMY 18:11, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Has anyone managed to dig up an image with licensing we can use of this thing?
Images like this one pretty impressively make the case for it actually being a pyramid. — ceejayoz talk 19:19, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
What is the distinction between this and a Tumulus? -Apr 23 2006
I appreciate the desire not to prejudice readers about whether there are actually pyramids present at Visoko. However, readers who come looking for this content will be searching for the pyramid information (which is all this article actually covers — there's nothing worthwhile here about the hill itself), and thus I've reversed the move. — JEREMY 01:24, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Here are a lot of photos: http://index.hu/gal?dir=0604/tech/pyramid/
If you look it is fairly obviously natural. The economy of the area is much collapsed and this is a tourism PR hype trick according to everbody you ask in the central european region. 195.70.48.242 07:41, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
The link to the petition that was anti-Bosnian Pyramid has been removed due to the fact that it was done by a Serbian nationalist who started his argument with 'Stop Taliban Bosnia!'. Taliban has nothing to due with the Bosnian Pyramid and something like this was only done to instigate more problems.
I'm not sure which groups are currently fighting over the content of this page, but as an anthropology student, I'm very disappointed in the credulous journalists who have failed to look into Mr. Osmanagic's qualifications or even attempt to get a general idea of what most actual scholars have to say on the matter. It's wiki articles like this that make me think that there should be more scholarly oversight on pages dealing with the social sciences. There has been no evidence as yet of Osmanagic ever earning an archaeology degree, though he's identified as an archaeologist in the news media (most likely because he presented himself as such and they were too lazy to verify it).
Also, the dates he presents for the "pyramid" would mean a wholesale reeavaluation of European archaeology. To those who don't see this as a problem, I suggest they find the wikipedia page for Occam's Razor. I really hope that an editor (or the original) will do some more research and fix this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.25.158.122 ( talk • contribs)
I've tidied the discussion page up by moving this text below the contents box Quarkstorm 09:46, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Back to the petition - it does seem relevant possibly not as an external link but to show how rapidly politicised this issue got with various factions jumping on it. The political angle is one that I suspect can't really be avoided but God knows how it'd be handled without adding more material for an editting war. ( Emperor 03:33, 29 April 2006 (UTC))
It has to be noted that serious researchers have disputed heavily Mr.Osmanagics claims as not only incorrect but also that his so-called excavations have been damaging older neolithic and medieval archeological sites ! Apart from this, it has been noted that Mr.Osmanagic seems to have no scientific references to display, despite his claims of "15-year-old-pyramid-research".As is apparent from his books, all of his so-called researches are simple tourist trips! For serious information regarding this so-called "research", check:
-- Comment added to main article by anon editor User:85.92.228.157, 00:16, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
This is going to be a controversial one so I think we need to keep an eye on the "facts" as some things in the entry seem to be taking Semir Osmanagić's statements as fact. A couple of things that concern me and possibly need to be more qualified:
"The 213 metre Visocica hill is symmetrically shaped, with sides reportedly sloping at 45° and aligned to the points of the compass."
The contour map [2] (extracted from here) shows this just isn't so. The north face is roughly triangular (not in itself remarkably in geomorphological terms) but it is nearly impossible to make out a rectangular plan or even well defined other sides at all (making statements on actual aignment impossible). You can make the hill look pyramidal if you stage your photographs from the N or NE but that doesn't make that statement true. Perhaps better wording might be "Semir Osmanagić has claimed that the 213 metre Visocica hill is symmetrically shaped, with sides reportedly sloping at 45° and allegedly aligned to the points of the compass."
"The dig, involving a team of international archaeologists from Australia, Austria, Bosnia, Scotland and Slovenia [1], began in April 2006."
You can see named "international archaeologists" in this statement from Semir Osmanagić "Foreigners on our team include experienced archaeologist such as: Richard Royce from Australia, Allyson McDavid from U.S., Chris Mundligler from Canada, Martin Aner from Austria." [3] - few of them show up online (apart from in connection with this) suggesting they aren't well established in the field. Mundligler is probably Chris Mundigler [4] but a handful of (unconfirmed) archaeology graduates from different countries hardly counts as "an international team" - I could find archaeologists from America and France to come and look at things in my back garden if I tried hard enough (or made big enough claims) - would that allow me to claim they were an "international team"? My concern is that this seems to be providing false authority to the claims. Perhaps better wording might be: "Archaeologists from around the world, including Australia, Austria, Bosnia, Scotland, Slovenia and the USA, " and then throw in the link I gave [5] as a source too.
The current last link is Bosnian language only - for English language concerns you can see the Science and Politics blog [6] which has a number of entries and links to other places raising concerns. This critical article should also probably be linked in [7]
Caveats: I have expressed a range of concerns about this hill actually being a pyramid (despite my really wanting it to be - ironically as I was eidtting this in someone added other comments with links to what I've said - I'd still recommend using the Science and Politics blog entry as the central one for English language blogging concern about goingson as they link out to various other aspects) so I don't feel I should make those updates and will leave it to more neutral editors to decide on the best way forward ( Emperor 17:15, 26 April 2006 (UTC))
instead of "...involving a team of international archaeologists... " try "...involving an international team of largely unrecognised archaeologists ..." or "...involving an international team of budding, but as yet, unrecognised archaeologists..." Quarkstorm 08:16, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Presenting Osmanagić's statements is probably the best way to demonstrate the questionable nature of the claims, but leaves it for the reader to decide. The trick is to write it up without sounding sarcastic. For instance - The fact the Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun would be the biggest pyramid shows that the pyramids were all built by the same people and the Bosnian Pyramid was the last according to Osmanagić. This has been disputed by Osmanagić who has noted that it may well have been built first. -- Alunsalt 12:11, 29 April 2006 (UTC)Visocica overlooking Visoko. Semir Osmanagić states the symmetrical nature of the hill and its forty-five degree slopes are indicative of a pyramid. Other archaeologists find the claim controversial.
If you visit this site you can see the comment
I am the Royce Richards made famous (and notorious) by Mr Osmanagich. I made an initial enquiry into the project and then decided to distance myself from it as it looked to me like someone selling snake oil. I have since had my name published in articles in national newspapers in Australia and in international media as an “Australian Archaeologist out to unearth ancient Bosnian pyramids and rewrite the established version of history........”
Its all a big load of bollocks. The “Bosnian Pyramid” is just a shonky attempt by a shonky person to make a name for themselves, its not something I want to be involved with. Its quite annoying as I now get random emails from all kinds of kooks expecting me to be an authority on Bosnian pyramids!! The damage this will do to my professional reputation is yet to be seen..........!
I never gave Mr Osmanagich permission to give my name to any media organisation and I never gave any media organisation permission to put my name in print. For the record I am an archaeologist. For the record I am not involved in the Bosnian pyramid project. For the record I’m pretty annoyed with finding my name given to the media in relation to Bosnian pyramids.
I thought it could be an imposter, but I've emailed the address in the South Australian government and it's genuine. Royce Richards is, according to the official site, on the archaeological committee. Is this verification enough to be able to write up a section on the misrepresentation of archaeologists? At the moment you only have my word for it that I've emailed him, but realistically the whole world cannot email him to check. It is also provocative enough to inspire a few flames. I thought I'd put it up for debate before writing it up to see what other people think. Alunsalt 08:08, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Ditto Grace Fegan, the (real) Irish archaeologist. At this site Grace Fegan says:
Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 20:17:46 +0100 (BST) Subject: Re: Questions regarding Bosnian pyramid Dear (*izbrisano*) Thank you for giving me the opportunity to clarify, once more, my position with regard to this project. I have been a professional archaeologist since 1998 and am currently working for a private consultancy in Ireland. In the course of considering summer volunteer positions on various European excavations I contacted, among others, Mr Osmanagich. I found his contact details on the Archaeological Institute of America website. Mr Osmanagich later replied that he may be in a position to offer me a paid staff position, requiring my presence on site for up to six months. I informed him that I would need to consider this very carefully as I am in full-time employment and would find it difficult to take such extended leave. Mr Osmanagich said he would contact me with a definitive offer and also forwarded some information regarding the site.
The information came in the form of two reports, one was a 'geophysical survey report' (it was unlike any geophysical report I had ever seen) and the other was a 'geological report' (ditto). Having looked through this information it became clear that this project was dubious at best. I did some searching on the web and realised that Mr Osmanagich had no affiliations to any academic body, and was not a qualified archaeologist.
My mistake at this point was not emailing him immediately to inform him that I would not be taking part.
Before I knew it an article had appeared in an Irish newspaper, stating that I was going to be taking part in this Bosnian pyramid project. The article stated that I had excavated Newgrange and described me as an 'eminent Irish archaeologist'. Just to clear things up – Newgrange had been excavated to a satisfactory degree before I had even graduated from my B.A., and although I'm doing well in my career at the moment, I would certainly not describe myself as eminent (at best, I would like to think that my eminence is imminent, he he). I also received phone calls from two British journalists enquiring as to the nature of my involvement in the project. These gentlemen were kind enough to inform me that I was listed on the project website as being one of the 'foreign experts' taking part. When I logged on to the website I found that I was listed as Senior Archaeologist, Kilkenny (I am the senior archaeologist for the firm in which I work, but not for the entire county of Kilkenny!). Most worrying of all was a link through which people could supposedly contact me. When I clicked on it an email address came up of which I had no previous knowledge and to which I had no access. Needless to say, I found this pretty unsettling. Mr Osmanagich used my name in connection with his project when he had no right to do so. He also seems to have made every attempt to make me into something that I am not. In addition he potentially misled those who visited the website that they could contact me, and that whatever responses they would receive would be from me. With regard to the excavations taking place on the 'Bosnian Pyramid' site, I would be very surprised if at the end of the season Mr Osmanagich throws up his hands having failed to find definitive evidence supporting his argument. No matter what is there he will find what he is looking for. That is what happens when a site is not excavated by archaeologists, but glory hunters. Kindest Regards Grace Fegan
Doug Weller
I've restored the (apparently representative) letter to the Times Online. Is there some doubt that this (notably redlinked) source is fraudulent or WP:NPOV#Undue weight? If so, it should probably be removed again. Also, why was the Dutch link to Visocica removed? Is the article about the hill, rather than the "pyramids" perhaps? — JEREMY 04:01, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
They released a piece on their site [8] - the quotes from Curtis Runnels could do with adding into the criticism section. ( Emperor 16:19, 28 April 2006 (UTC))
It's notable that the criticism section is now the dominant feature of the article. While some of us may feel that's appropriate, I suspect a lot of our readers will have come here looking for the juicy details of Osmangic's claims. I'd like to see the Interpretation section beefed up and referenced, lest it appear we're simply straw-manning the whole thing. Also, the redlinking from the Criticism section is actually a little embarrassing; are these really such obscure sources, or is archaeology just one of wikipedia's weak suits? — JEREMY 19:09, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
If someone as able to get a copy of Osmangic's book that can read Bosnian, they would be able to provide much more information on what Osmangic has actually claimed and why. It would be interesting to find out why the book refers to Atlantis, Mu, and Lemuria, plus dates of 40,000 and 27,000 years ago. -- ( Ronz 02:10, 30 April 2006 (UTC))
What is it we're trying to balance? I've seen concern for the expectations of people reading the article who may know little or nothing about the topic, concern that Osmangic is not treated too "skeptically", and concern that the article isn't too critical. -- ( Ronz 01:27, 1 May 2006 (UTC))
Are they actually archeologists? Are they qualified in the field? if not should we refer to them as such? -- Artw 17:31, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Sean Pilav is a recent graduate - his job is mapping the tunnels. The 'experienced geologist' did an undergraduate degree in engineering geology in 1971 and has worked in mining since. Royce Richards (the right name) isn't involved. The official list is at this site. I'm on the trail of Anne Handberry, I hope. I know she's not a senior archaeologist, she is mainly an artist. Doug
Royce Richards tells me he finished his undergraduate degree in archaeology in 2004. He's had very little archaeological experience. But he is still on the Foundation's web page as a member of the Archaeology Subcommittee and labelled a 'Senior Archaeologist'. You can imagine how embarrassing that is. DougWeller
It looks like the "team" has dwindled to almost nothing. Currently, the official site lists only:
Silvana Čobanov, Degree in Archaeology, University of Zadar Saša Janković, archaeologist, University of Belgrade; Anne Handberry, Senior archaeologist, USA; (no name) Department for Aboriginal Affairs, South Australia
So, is the Foundation still lying about their heavily revised "team of archeologists"? -- Ronz 20:54, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
I've added the link to "the other side" of the story. 217.227.222.19 21:10, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
Osmangic is now on record claiming the pyramid has supernatural powers:
Osmanagic believes the site was chosen in the belief that it was a focal point of energies, like Giza in Egypt. That, he says, could explain the local claim that no one was killed in the three-pyramid area during the 1992-95 war.
"The pyramid saved them," he said.
( Ronz 01:51, 9 May 2006 (UTC))
Via Ma'at comes the interview with Slovenian magazine Misteriji. I've checked the original and with the very very very limited knowledge I have of Serbo-Croat "negativni energijski oblak" does seem to be "negative energy cloud". A pyramid would be quite pointy and possibly capable of bursting a cloud if sharpened. I leave it to the reader to decide if this is plausible. -- Alunsalt 20:15, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
The more Osmangic says, the less sense he makes, the more evident he's just making things up. The "Osmanagić's interpretation" section shows this. Should we try to make the section make sense, or continue with it as is, the ramblings of a charlatan?
The Economist has an Aug 10th 2006 article that documents some of his more absurd ideas:
Mr Osmanagic's theories sound fantastical. He believes that the biggest pyramid is one-third taller than Egypt's Great Pyramid, and that they were built by an ancient civilisation 12,500 years ago. “Yes,” says Mr Osmanagic, who has been denounced by Bosnian archaeologists as a hallucinating lunatic, “we are rewriting the history of the world.” Indeed. Mr Osmanagic, who has also written about survivors from the mythical island of Atlantis who built pyramids in Central America—and about Hitler escaping in the direction of the Antarctic in 1945—says his enemies are just jealous.
("Bosnia's pyramids: A towering success" [10]) -- Ronz 14:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
http://www.superbosna.com/vijesti/nauka/i_u_maglaju_piramida?/
I'd like a size comparison with Silbury Hill and some famous pyramids in Egypt and Mexico.
In the interest of averting an edit war with User:Jeremygbyrne, can various editors interested in this topic offer suggestions on a proper characterization of S. Osmanagić? I think it is at least neccesary to point out that he is not a real archaeologist, or even a scientist. Obviously this brings us into NPOV/POV territory, but I think their are NPOV ways to say that someone is pretending to be something he is not. Taking an extreme NPOV view of him does no service to an uninformed reader who might use this article to form an honest opinion of the man. Hiberniantears 17:20, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
My emphasis. The section is entitled "Verifiability, not truth"."Verifiability" in this context does not mean that editors are expected to verify whether, for example, the contents of a New York Times article are true. In fact, editors are strongly discouraged from conducting this kind of research, because original research may not be published in Wikipedia. Articles should contain only material that has been published by reliable sources, regardless of whether individual editors view that material as true or false. The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is thus verifiability, not truth.
after "...covered the structure." and before "Osmanagić has claimed that the dig..."Osmanagić began investigating the pyramid after 15 years of study in Latin America (ref: http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2006/04/19/experts_find_evidence_of_bosnia_pyramid/?rss_id=Boston.com+%2F+News) which, he claims, has enabled him to identify which extra-terrestrials built which the pyramids (ref http://www.alternativnahistorija.com/WM.htm#12). His theories have been rejected by professional archaeologists as "wacky" and "absurd" (ref http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,59-2150036,00.html).
This page needs to be brought into line with the truth about the "pyramids".
At present articles like this make a mockery of wikipedia.
Hi I don't know how to sign my comments really but yes I am not responsible for what's written here above, I do however see that persons point, the article at the moment does give one the impression that there could possibly be a pyramid there. There is however obviously no pyramid to be found there, when I first heard the news of a pyramid in Bosnia I thought that it was sorta exciting but it's just BS, a mistake, a hoax a fuckup who knows. Either way this article should tell it like it is, there are no pyramids there. (Signed by me or something)
... scheduled to finish by 2012 in order to break a cloud of negative energy, allowing the Earth to receive cosmic energy from the centre of the galaxy ...
I see there's a reference to back this up, but it's in Slovenian. Is there an English article that states the same? Or can someone familiar with Slovenian confirm the accuracy of this? - Kfor 12:39, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
The Economist: "Bosnia's pyramids: A towering success" [11]
Robert M. Schoch, "The Bosnian Pyramid Phenomenon" [12]
John Bohannon, "Mad About Pyramids", Science Magazine [13]
(above added 00:48, 26 September 2006 by Ronz)
Ian Traynor, "Tourists flock to Bosnian hills but experts mock amateur archaeologist's pyramid claims" [14] -- Ronz 17:42, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
Old Visoki fort, Bosnian National Monument [15] -- Ronz 18:02, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
"Pyramid No More: Sphinx geologist Robert Schoch and anomalies researcher Colette Dowell report from Bosnia", Sub Rosa, Issue 6, Oct 2006. [16] -- Ronz 04:29, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
"Researchers Helpless as Bosnian Pyramid Bandwagon Gathers Pace", Science Magazine, 22 December 2006, p. 1862 [17] -- Ronz 19:47, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Declaration from the European Association of Archaeologists, 11 Dec 2006 [18] -- Ronz 19:50, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
"The great Bosnian pyramid scheme" by Anthony Harding, British Archaeology November/December 2006 [19] -- Ronz 23:11, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
"An open letter from the Bosnian scientific community to M. Christian Schwarz-Schilling, High Representative of the international community in Bosnia and Herzegovina" [20] (Haven't found other copies of this letter as yet) -- Ronz 19:30, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
"Come see the pyramids ... in Bosnia?", The Christian Science Monitor, March 29, 2007 [21] -- Ronz 20:58, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
"The Great Pyramids of ... Bosnia?" by Colin Woodard. The Chronicle of Higher Education, March 30, 2007. [22].
"It is not possible that those are pyramids," says Mark Rose, of the Archaeological Institute of America, who organized a petition asking Unesco, the United Nations' education-and-science agency, not to send a proposed expedition to the site. "Every major media outlet that initially covered this story got it wrong. It's clearly crackpot stuff, but apparently nobody bothered to check the story."
But as pyramid mania has grown, spread by credulous accounts, those who have expressed skepticism have been savaged in the Bosnian news media, deluged with hate mail, even labeled traitors to their nation. Many observers now see the debate in stark terms: Will a pseudoscientific project, even one that serves to restore Bosnia's wounded pride and dignity, win out over peer-reviewed archaeological research?
Unesco does not intend to send a mission to Visoko, says Mechtild Rossler, of the organization's World Heritage Center, in Paris.
-- Ronz 00:27, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't see value in:
-- Ronz 17:54, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
Using the heading debunking is asserting (correctly) that the claims are false. It's one of those areas that shows Wikipedia isn't perfect, but if we ignore it then there's no defence when a New Age Wikipedian comes along and re-writes the entry to their point of view. The easiest way to show that Osmanagić is a crank is to baldly state the facts and assume the reader isn't a fool. It's more persuasive if the reader is allow to come to their own opinion rather than being told what it is. The sort of reader who is a fool isn't going to be swayed by any facts. -- Alunsalt 14:07, 10 October 2006 (UTC)If we're going to represent the sum total of human knowledge, then we must concede that we will be describing views repugnant to us without asserting that they are false. Things are not, however, as bad as that sounds. The task before us is not to describe disputes as though, for example, pseudoscience were on a par with science; rather, the task is to represent the majority (scientific) view as the majority view and the minority (sometimes pseudoscientific) view as the minority view; and, moreover, to explain how scientists have received pseudoscientific theories. This is all in the purview of the task of describing a dispute fairly.
(Anyone know why I can't see the references? Do others have this problem?) - It's the gallery tag that's causing it.
It's now almost a year since the pyramid pr started. Early on, the sources available were few and poor. I think we have enough available sources now that we should at least discuss this article's reliance on poor sources, and what changes should be made now that many better ones are available. Minimally, I think the article could contain a section critical of most media about the pyramid, citing the multiple sources that have published such media criticisms. Additionally, I think it's worth considering adding something about this being a hoax designed to increase tourist revenue and influence politics across Bosnia, again citing the multiple sources available. -- Ronz 19:11, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
Osmanagić and APBPSF have been playing with weasel words, making an issue of whether or not the hill is man-made or natural. Everyone knows that there are man-made structures on the hill. Man-made structures do not make the hill into a pyramid. Please don't fall for this simple ruse. -- Ronz 16:12, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm proposing that we stop treating Osmanagić and APBPSF (Archaeological Park: Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun Foundation) are reliable sources. If needed, we can summarize all the evidence. If the source for material is Osmanagić or APBPSF, we should look for other reliable sources before incorporating it, otherwise it should not be added to the article. For example, there are claims that Aly Abd Barakat thinks portions of the hill are man-made, but we have no reliable sources confirming this and more importantly we have no sources that confirm if Barakat thinks there is a pyramid or just other man-made structures. -- Ronz 16:13, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Those working on the article might like to know that it was mentioned as further reading in an article on the "pyramids" in British Archaeology magazine (issue no. 92, Jan-Feb 2007), in an article written by Anthony Hall, President of the European Association of Archaeologists, who it seems found himself involved in the furore. Shimgray | talk | 14:37, 10 December 2006 (UTC)