History- what do we really know?

Cyracuz, I have looked at the website you highlighted. I have seen and read others of a similar nature. Of the ten items in the article I knew of seven of them, the others I had not heard of before. On the subject of the development/history of the human race I'm no expert but like most people I have my own beliefs/convictions.

My main belief is that more credit should be given to our ancestors in that they were capable of doing far more (and in fact did) then currently accepted.

Two of the items suggest that a form of electricity, or the effect of current flow was known at least in ancient Babylon and Egypt. I have no problem with that. In any stable civilisation with a class or group of people with time on their hands, the inquisitive nature of man would discover a great deal about natural forces.

The same applies to the glider/flight object and gear mechanism. The Askor pillar is what the article states it is, a testament to ancient metrological skills. I am certain the other objects apart from the metal spheres also have a man made explanations. As the spheres are stated to be millions of years old I would assume a natural explanation.

I believe that there have been a number of civilizations/societies before known history and hopefully some evidence of some of them still exists, and with a bit of luck and some diligent and intelligent searching knowledge of them will emerge someday. I do not subscribe to alien intervention etc. The Pyramids were built by us, as was Stonehenge.

I see no reason why stable societies did not form several thousand years ago in various parts of the world. Man as a rational being existed long before known history and was capable of constructing static living cities providing the natural recourses were available and the society was not threatened firstly by natural disasters such as floods, earthquakes, volcanoes and rapid climate changes and secondly by over population or civil disorder.

Like you I would welcome the opinion of others.

Well, the first things that historians do when considering evidence is to ask a few questions. One of those question is cui bono--who benefits?--and the point is to ask if a witness or a purveyor of evidence stands to benefit from the evidence which is being presented. So, the first thing i noticed when i went to your linked page is that Mr. Jochmans (or whoever maintains the site) is attempting to sell a magazine, "Atlantis Rising"--so Mr. Jochmans has a stake in being believed to be expert on that basis which might outweigh any putative loyalty to historical truth. In fact, whoever maintains that page, and is responsible for the "Atlantis Rising" site, wishes to sell you something, and with a link to a "store," probably quite a few things. This does not mean that Mr. Jochmans or those who maintain the site are automatically to be considered untruthful, but it does make the purpose of the page suspect.

The next step i took was to look for a biography of Mr. Jochmans--and i can find none. That is extraordinary. It suggests, at the least, that Mr. Jochmans is not an academic historian, since university web sites have at least brief biographies of their staff members, and a search for Mr. Jochman does not turn one up. It also suggests that he is not an historian of any note or repute outside an academic environment (and historians who are not at least affiliated with a university are rare birds, indeed).

Finally, i did find evidence that Mr. Jochmans has been published (at least in booklet form) since the late 1970s--yet he is largely unknown as an historian--and his book and booklet titles and blurbs that i have foundare all suggestive of his possessing special knowledge or insight which is otherwise withheld from the public.

I have found him suspect, therefore, before even beginning to read the article. Ordinarily that would be enough for me to pass him by--but, since you have asked, i will look at this article to see how it strikes me. But i went to the Atlantis Rising home page, and immediately was struck by the banner ad at the top from the American Institute of Holistic Theology, who want to help you earn your degree at home. Hmmm . . . might these folks be only in it for the money? Might not a policy of "the sensationaler, the better" describe their editorial policy?

Set...

...you are kick ass on these kinds of things.

I stand in awe of you once again.

Well, Frank, i've made myself obnoxious to my friends for nearly all of my life with what i've read of history, so, i ought to have learned by now to make myself thoroughly unpopular in this area.

*************************************************

We'll start with Mr. Jochmans "title"--just what the hell is "Lit. D." supposed to mean? Is that a putative academic degee? If so, what degree would that be?



This constitutes a statement from authority, for which the author provides no evidence. In fact, archaeologists and paeleoanthropologists recognize that long periods of time passed without significant technological advances in particular hominid and human eras, and that groups separated in space very often had radically different technologies, cultural heritages, and cosmogenies and cosmologies. Mr. Jochmans gets off to a good start by positing a false premise. Whereas it would be reasonable to assert that many museums and some textbooks (and he provides no examples) present an over simplistic view of human "progress," Mr. Jochman proceeds to this statement:



--which makes a big leap from how museum displays and textbooks may be arranged to suggest that such a view obtains among archaeologists and geologists (how the hell did geologists get roped into this?). It is, however, obvious why Mr. Jochmans would want the reader to believe that if he intends to proceed to debunking such a point of view. There is a name for that rhetorical technique--it is called a straw man.



Who refers to archaeological discoveries as "out of place artifacts"--Mr. Jochmans. Please note that Mr. Jochmans states that such artifacts exist, and that such artifacts point "to the existence of advanced civilizations before any known ancient cultures came into being."--but that he does not subsequently provide any evidence of this. This is a crucial point, because it gives evidence at the outset that Mr. Jochmans is attempting to convince you before any evidence is advanced, and relies on the sloppy habits of peoples' memories to assure that at the end you do not look around in anticipation, asking: "where's the evidence of advanced civilizations which existed before any of the known ancient cultures came into being?"

Also, it that were true, if there were abundant evidence of "advanced civilizations" as he suggests, then said evidence could not predate itself, and would constitute evidence of one or more "known ancient cultures." Mr. Jochmans relies upon an uncritical reader. He says that "most historians would like to sweep these disturbing anomalies under the proverbial rug"--and once again, provides no evidence for such a contention, which constitutes an accusation. Academic historians can dine out at the public or private troth for a lifetime based upon a successfully demonstrated set of new discoveries, and all the better if they force the revision of previously held views. Were there actually huge amounts of artifacts which were unaccounted for in the civilizations from which they were thought to derive, you can bet your boots that you be trampled in the stampede of graduate students eager to begin a career by speculating upon a handful of that pile. Mr. Jochman, once again, relies upon an uncritical reader. He finishes his introductory remarks by asserting that that there are ancient legends and myths which purport that civilizations are cyclical, rising and falling again over the ages--but he does not refer to a single such legend which would support his claim.

BAFFLING BATTERIES OF BABYLON--i suggest that Mr. Jochmans would like you to believe that these batteries are baffling. It has been well accepted in the archaeological and historical academic communities for more than 50 years that batteries have indeed been found which date, very possibly, to the Sumerian civilization which predates the Akkadian civilization conquered by the Persians and Medes when the came down out of the Iranian highlands. So, how does that constitute evidence of now vanished civilizations for which there now exists no evidence? The species homo sapiens sapiens was as intelligent 50,000 years ago as it is today. Mr. Jochmans' thesis assumes that our ancestors were stupid, and don't deserve credit for the intelligence to make important scientific discoveries by their own means.

THE STRANGE ELECTRON TUBES FROM DENDERA--this one is really hilarious, and is constructed from whole cloth. Please note that both symbolic images and hieroglyphic writing was commonly enclosed in oblong engravings which the first European investigators (French scholars who were originally brought to Egypt by Napoleon in 1798) referred to as "cartouches," which is the French word for cartridge--the oblong shapes reminded them of the oblong white paper cartridges with which French soldiers loaded their muskets. Basically, you have one peddler of sensationalist contentions leaning upon the unsupported contentions of another such peddler of sensationalist contentions. Mr. Jochmans' cites just two individuals, and no published works which the reader can check.

THE ENIGMA OF THE ASHOKA PILLAR--this is another snow job. There are Ashoka pillars all over India, and most of them are made of sandstone, or other local stone. There is one pillar, however, made of iron in the Qutb temple complex, which is, as advertised, 1600 years old. However, Mr. Jochmans' once again relies upon the readers' credulity. Rather than simply copy and paste the information, i suggest that you simply go to Wikipedia, and type "Iron pillar" into the search window. Then click on the "Scientific analysis" rubric in the Contents section--it explains both how the iron is preserved, and refers to the metallurgists who have published studies of the pillar by name, as well as referring to an article on the Dehli Iron Pillar in the journal corrosion science. Once again, Mr. Jochman does not explain how this is evidence of a more highly advanced civilization which has disappeared without leaving any other trace, and once again, it is implicit in his sensationalist text that humans even as recently as 1600 years ago were too stupid to be highly skilled metallurgists.

AN OUT-OF-PLACE COMPUTER FROM ANTIKYTHERA--what makes it out of place? Upon what basis does Mr. Jochmans state: "It is highly possible that the device may have origins ages long before the Greeks, and in a land far removed, now unknown." Oh? Why should we believe that? In fact, this is a highly interesting story, and Jochmans' brief notice here does not do justice to this wonderful device--which, by the way, has inscriptions in Greek. I highly recommend a web search for "Antikythera device," which has been much in the news lately. I think you'll enjoy reading about something which in many respects simply provides more evidence that our distant ancestors were just as intelligent as we are.

FLIGHT IN ANCIENT EGYPT--this story is yet another example of a story created from whole cloth.



Winged gods and goddesses are very common in Egyptian engravings, paintings, sculpture--and there is absolutely nothing extraordinary about this. It is a figment of Mr. Jochmans' imagination to suggest that this is a "model plane," and note that he once again, although naming a source, lists no publication (a book or a scholarly paper) which can be checked. Please also note that there is no bio to be found for Kahlil Messiha--which is almost certainly a misspelling. However, if one searches for Khalil Messiha, one does find that this gentleman suggests that what was found was a glider--but there is no evidence that Mr. Messiha ever suggested that actual gliders would be found under the sands, or that there was any reason to believe that ancient Egyptians built gliders which could carry heavy loads. If they had, how would they have launched them? As with just about everything else in this article, Mr. Jochmans' askes tendentious questions which often assume what is not demonstrated. Mr. Jochmans' is a master at begging questions.

A JET FROM SOUTH AMERICA--I'd never heard of this one. Once again, though, we have only Mr. Jochmans' assertion that this two inch long artifact can reasonably be assumed to be a model of a jet aircraft. Once again, Mr. Jochman's language is tendentious, and he does not provide sufficient evidence in the way of reference to published works to support the claims he makes.

CRYSTAL SKULL FROM ATLANTIS--this is an hilarious one. There is indeed a crystal skull. Mr. Dorland does indeed claim to have studied the skull at length, and he is the origin of the claim that it is from "Atlantis," although no evidence is advanced to substantiate that claim, or any other claim made as to the properties of the skull. The skull is also known as the Mitchell-Hedges skull, because Anna Mitchell-Hedges, the daughter of F. A. Mitchell-Hedges, supposedly found it in a Maya Temple in 1927. Frederick A. Mitchell-Hedges mentions it in the first edition of his autobiography, and claims that it is 3600 years old--but the entire passage was left out of other editions of his autobiography. There are many other such crystal skulls, and everyone which has been examined has been determined to likely to have been manufactured in the 19th century for the artifact market, to be sold to gullible tourists. Miss Anna Mitchell-Hedges refuses to allow anyone to examine the skull in her possession, and Mr. Dorland's claims have never been verified by an external source.

WHO SHOT NEANDERTHAL MAN?--Please note that in this case, Jochman's provides absolutely no basis upon which to examine the evidence. He simply refers to a skull found in 1921 in what is now Zambia. For what it is worth, slings have been in use for at least tens of thousands of years. The first bullets ever known in western culture were made of lead or ceramic, and were designed to be used with a sling. If this story is true (and there is no way to know from the passage Jochmans' has written), it would only constitute evidence that someone was likely using a sling 38,000 years ago, and had used it in that case from close range. Slings, when properly used, are so reliably lethal that the residents of the Island of Rhodes made a good living for many centuries hiring out as mercenaries--the weapon which they used was the sling.

That's about all i can stand, you can believe what Mr. Jochmans has to say, or not, it is immaterial to me. All that i see is that Mr. Jochmans offers a lot of assumptions and unsupported claims, and that site at which that article is posted hopes to sell things to you. I do hope, though, that you haven't spent your hard-earned money on anything they are selling at the Atlantis Rising site--although, of course, if that's your thing, it's none of my business.

Set

First, let me say that my view of these things is pretty much identical to that of Eiadeio. I find it very strange that a creature that has been biologically unaltered almost hundred thousand years should not begin to realize it's potential until the last five thousand years.

But the approach you take towards the site in question strikes me as very appropriate, and I am thoroughly persuaded that this fellow is suspect.

It seems to me that you went to some lengths to find this out, and I am very grateful. Thank you.

Well, Frank, i've made myself obnoxious to my friends for nearly all of my life with what i've read of history, so, i ought to have learned by now to make myself thoroughly unpopular in this area.

*************************************************

We'll start with Mr. Jochmans "title"--just what the hell is "Lit. D." supposed to mean? Is that a putative academic degee? If so, what degree would that be?



This constitutes a statement from authority, for which the author provides no evidence. In fact, archaeologists and paeleoanthropologists recognize that long periods of time passed without significant technological advances in particular hominid and human eras, and that groups separated in space very often had radically different technologies, cultural heritages, and cosmogenies and cosmologies. Mr. Jochmans gets off to a good start by positing a false premise. Whereas it would be reasonable to assert that many museums and some textbooks (and he provides no examples) present an over simplistic view of human "progress," Mr. Jochman proceeds to this statement:



--which makes a big leap from how museum displays and textbooks may be arranged to suggest that such a view obtains among archaeologists and geologists (how the hell did geologists get roped into this?). It is, however, obvious why Mr. Jochmans would want the reader to believe that if he intends to proceed to debunking such a point of view. There is a name for that rhetorical technique--it is called a straw man.



Who refers to archaeological discoveries as "out of place artifacts"--Mr. Jochmans. Please note that Mr. Jochmans states that such artifacts exist, and that such artifacts point "to the existence of advanced civilizations before any known ancient cultures came into being."--but that he does not subsequently provide any evidence of this. This is a crucial point, because it gives evidence at the outset that Mr. Jochmans is attempting to convince you before any evidence is advanced, and relies on the sloppy habits of peoples' memories to assure that at the end you do not look around in anticipation, asking: "where's the evidence of advanced civilizations which existed before any of the known ancient cultures came into being?"

Also, it that were true, if there were abundant evidence of "advanced civilizations" as he suggests, then said evidence could not predate itself, and would constitute evidence of one or more "known ancient cultures." Mr. Jochmans relies upon an uncritical reader. He says that "most historians would like to sweep these disturbing anomalies under the proverbial rug"--and once again, provides no evidence for such a contention, which constitutes an accusation. Academic historians can dine out at the public or private troth for a lifetime based upon a successfully demonstrated set of new discoveries, and all the better if they force the revision of previously held views. Were there actually huge amounts of artifacts which were unaccounted for in the civilizations from which they were thought to derive, you can bet your boots that you be trampled in the stampede of graduate students eager to begin a career by speculating upon a handful of that pile. Mr. Jochman, once again, relies upon an uncritical reader. He finishes his introductory remarks by asserting that that there are ancient legends and myths which purport that civilizations are cyclical, rising and falling again over the ages--but he does not refer to a single such legend which would support his claim.

BAFFLING BATTERIES OF BABYLON--i suggest that Mr. Jochmans would like you to believe that these batteries are baffling. It has been well accepted in the archaeological and historical academic communities for more than 50 years that batteries have indeed been found which date, very possibly, to the Sumerian civilization which predates the Akkadian civilization conquered by the Persians and Medes when the came down out of the Iranian highlands. So, how does that constitute evidence of now vanished civilizations for which there now exists no evidence? The species homo sapiens sapiens was as intelligent 50,000 years ago as it is today. Mr. Jochmans' thesis assumes that our ancestors were stupid, and don't deserve credit for the intelligence to make important scientific discoveries by their own means.

THE STRANGE ELECTRON TUBES FROM DENDERA--this one is really hilarious, and is constructed from whole cloth. Please note that both symbolic images and hieroglyphic writing was commonly enclosed in oblong engravings which the first European investigators (French scholars who were originally brought to Egypt by Napoleon in 1798) referred to as "cartouches," which is the French word for cartridge--the oblong shapes reminded them of the oblong white paper cartridges with which French soldiers loaded their muskets. Basically, you have one peddler of sensationalist contentions leaning upon the unsupported contentions of another such peddler of sensationalist contentions. Mr. Jochmans' cites just two individuals, and no published works which the reader can check.

THE ENIGMA OF THE ASHOKA PILLAR--this is another snow job. There are Ashoka pillars all over India, and most of them are made of sandstone, or other local stone. There is one pillar, however, made of iron in the Qutb temple complex, which is, as advertised, 1600 years old. However, Mr. Jochmans' once again relies upon the readers' credulity. Rather than simply copy and paste the information, i suggest that you simply go to Wikipedia, and type "Iron pillar" into the search window. Then click on the "Scientific analysis" rubric in the Contents section--it explains both how the iron is preserved, and refers to the metallurgists who have published studies of the pillar by name, as well as referring to an article on the Dehli Iron Pillar in the journal corrosion science. Once again, Mr. Jochman does not explain how this is evidence of a more highly advanced civilization which has disappeared without leaving any other trace, and once again, it is implicit in his sensationalist text that humans even as recently as 1600 years ago were too stupid to be highly skilled metallurgists.

AN OUT-OF-PLACE COMPUTER FROM ANTIKYTHERA--what makes it out of place? Upon what basis does Mr. Jochmans state: "It is highly possible that the device may have origins ages long before the Greeks, and in a land far removed, now unknown." Oh? Why should we believe that? In fact, this is a highly interesting story, and Jochmans' brief notice here does not do justice to this wonderful device--which, by the way, has inscriptions in Greek. I highly recommend a web search for "Antikythera device," which has been much in the news lately. I think you'll enjoy reading about something which in many respects simply provides more evidence that our distant ancestors were just as intelligent as we are.

FLIGHT IN ANCIENT EGYPT--this story is yet another example of a story created from whole cloth.



Winged gods and goddesses are very common in Egyptian engravings, paintings, sculpture--and there is absolutely nothing extraordinary about this. It is a figment of Mr. Jochmans' imagination to suggest that this is a "model plane," and note that he once again, although naming a source, lists no publication (a book or a scholarly paper) which can be checked. Please also note that there is no bio to be found for Kahlil Messiha--which is almost certainly a misspelling. However, if one searches for Khalil Messiha, one does find that this gentleman suggests that what was found was a glider--but there is no evidence that Mr. Messiha ever suggested that actual gliders would be found under the sands, or that there was any reason to believe that ancient Egyptians built gliders which could carry heavy loads. If they had, how would they have launched them? As with just about everything else in this article, Mr. Jochmans' askes tendentious questions which often assume what is not demonstrated. Mr. Jochmans' is a master at begging questions.

A JET FROM SOUTH AMERICA--I'd never heard of this one. Once again, though, we have only Mr. Jochmans' assertion that this two inch long artifact can reasonably be assumed to be a model of a jet aircraft. Once again, Mr. Jochman's language is tendentious, and he does not provide sufficient evidence in the way of reference to published works to support the claims he makes.

CRYSTAL SKULL FROM ATLANTIS--this is an hilarious one. There is indeed a crystal skull. Mr. Dorland does indeed claim to have studied the skull at length, and he is the origin of the claim that it is from "Atlantis," although no evidence is advanced to substantiate that claim, or any other claim made as to the properties of the skull. The skull is also known as the Mitchell-Hedges skull, because Anna Mitchell-Hedges, the daughter of F. A. Mitchell-Hedges, supposedly found it in a Maya Temple in 1927. Frederick A. Mitchell-Hedges mentions it in the first edition of his autobiography, and claims that it is 3600 years old--but the entire passage was left out of other editions of his autobiography. There are many other such crystal skulls, and everyone which has been examined has been determined to likely to have been manufactured in the 19th century for the artifact market, to be sold to gullible tourists. Miss Anna Mitchell-Hedges refuses to allow anyone to examine the skull in her possession, and Mr. Dorland's claims have never been verified by an external source.

WHO SHOT NEANDERTHAL MAN?--Please note that in this case, Jochman's provides absolutely no basis upon which to examine the evidence. He simply refers to a skull found in 1921 in what is now Zambia. For what it is worth, slings have been in use for at least tens of thousands of years. The first bullets ever known in western culture were made of lead or ceramic, and were designed to be used with a sling. If this story is true (and there is no way to know from the passage Jochmans' has written), it would only constitute evidence that someone was likely using a sling 38,000 years ago, and had used it in that case from close range. Slings, when properly used, are so reliably lethal that the residents of the Island of Rhodes made a good living for many centuries hiring out as mercenaries--the weapon which they used was the sling.

That's about all i can stand, you can believe what Mr. Jochmans has to say, or not, it is immaterial to me. Note that he nowhere demonstrates conclusively that any of these things can only be explained by reference to a highly advanced civilization, for which no other traces now exist. Note also that his entire thesis rests upon an assumption that our ancestors were stupid and inept, and incapable of devising and building beautiful, or practical or complex things. All that i see is that Mr. Jochmans offers a lot of assumptions and unsupported claims, and that site at which that article is posted hopes to sell things to you. I do hope, though, that you haven't spent your hard-earned money on anything they are selling at the Atlantis Rising site--although, of course, if that's your thing, it's none of my business.

uh uh, no way

i listen to, coast to coast am, and i'm telling the alien's did it :wink:




i really do listen to coast to coast am ( here )

it's more entertaining than rush, and doesn't raise my blood pressure

You're welcome. What makes you think, though, that the human "creature" is unaltered over a hundred thousand years? The evidence is that homo sapiens sapiens became a sophisticated tool-maker and -user, and has progressed since then to metallurgy and to science--sometimes slowly and sometimes rapidly, and at different rates in different places. If one keeps in mind that individual humans did not commonly live beyond 40 years, and often did not even live that long, it is not only little wonder that we took tens of thousands of years to become literate, it is a wonder that we have accomplished as much as we have in a hundred thousand years, or fewer.

Since the advent of written language, humans, already noteworthy for a long and capacious memory, have removed their evolution from their bodies and deposited it in libraries, universities and research institutes--we have changed a great deal in a hundred thousand years.

I was under the impression that there have been no evolutional changes (physical) to the human species for approximately one hundred thousand years.

If that's the case, then the potential for all our modern discoveries has been with us for far longer than recorded history.

At least, that was my thought....

Sorry for the double post--i didn't realize that i had done that.

Whenever one sees something like this which makes extraordinary claims, remember that the person making the claims has the burden to prove them. Then ask yourself if he or she has done that.

We only "know" what we've been told. As it's impossible to go back and find out what actually happend this will have to do.

You have convinced me that this dude hasn't proved his claims. But the part about the batteries of sumeria is interesing, since I got the impression that this is more thoroughly documented. But I have never heard of it, save from atlantisrising.

I don't deny that the battery story is true, i'm just pointing out that there is nothing to be baffled about, and that Mr. Jochmans first simply engages in sensationalism about something well known for many decades, and that he fails in that matter, as in all the others, to demonstrate that this is evidence that highly advanced civilizations once existed, for which no other evidence remains. Keep in mind that his thesis relies upon an assumption that our ancestors were too stupid to have thought these things up on their own.

Just a short quote from Henry Ford, Cyracuz.

History is bunk!

Setanta, do you think he was right? I know that you think Thoreau was an old fraud, but how can you be certain of that?

You need to review that remark, Miss Lettybettyhettygetty . . . if i said that i think Thoreau was a fraud, then it would be what i think, not what i am certain of . . .

When I went to the webpage, the banner was empty and said "advertise here." Banners alone don't mean anything because so many website managers likes the idea of making some extra money by hosting some banners on their site that they are already paying for.

What I DID notice was the "Shop Atlantis Rising Online" link where they try to sell a bunch of additional information crap for very high prices!

I cannot help but be reminded of the supposed hieroglyphics of a helicopter and tank at the temple of abydos:



(it is, of course, no such thing)

But something that is real, is this marvelous ancient greek clockwork "computer" for calculating "precise" planetary orbits:

http://www.mlahanas.de/Greeks/SCAMKythera.htm

Cyracuse, yes people were intelligent before us but in prehistoric times humans were not able to build upon the knowledge of their priors like we do now. You'll notice that all the great works have science have been incremental improvements upon each other. If Einstein had been born in Faraday's time, he would not have been thinking about relativity!

You're right, Setanta. I just saw it in passing. I think that is why we all need to qualify things a bit when talking about the past.

Without being patronizing, you do have a lot in that head of yours.

stuh

You cannot know for sure that people weren't able to "stand on eachother's shoulders".

I am not saying that they could. Just that we can never know for sure.

Cyracuz,

There is no good philosopher, historian, or scientist that would disagree with you that we cannot know for sure, if phrased correctly. The fact is we don't really know much of anything for sure. It is certainly not impossible that our memories are distorted, our history books are contrived, our understanding of science is fatally flawed, and God's name is Douglas Adams, who humorously wrote the entire universe as a computer program and implanted the idea to write a book about his holy self by smacking the idea into the mind of some unsuspecting mortal with his own holy name.

When it comes down to it, there are really only two kinds of people: those who believe in Occam's Razer -- what is most likely true -- and those that believe in Faith, and believe in whatever they want to believe most strongly in. You are clearly the latter, and I am the former. It's ok.