fossil_digger Report This Comment
Date: December 16, 2009 05:36AM
We don't know what they are, where they came from, or what caused them
Scientists love a mystery. Biologists used to have the human genome, but now
they have the structure of protein. Physics used to have cosmic rays, but now
they have the God particle. Astronomers used to have black holes, but now they
have dark matter.
And then there’s the puzzle, the enigma, the joyous mystery that dots the
world over: the riddle of what’s commonly called Mima Mounds.
What’s an extra added bonus about these cryptic ‘whatevertheyares’ is that
they aren’t as miniscule as a protein sequence, aren’t as subatomic as the
elusive God particle, and certainly not as shadowy as dark matter. Found in such
exotic locales as Kenya, Mexico, Canada, Australia, China and in similarly
off-the-beaten path locations as California, Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana, and
especially Washington state, the mounds first appear to be just that: mounds of
The first thing that’s odd about the mounds is the similarity, regardless of
location. With few differences, the mounds in Kenya are like the mounds in
Mexico which are like the mounds in Canada which are like the … well, you get
the point. All the mounds are heaps of soil from three to six feet tall, often
laid out in what appear to be evenly spaced rows. Not quite geometric but
almost. What’s especially disturbing is that geologists, anthropologists,
professors, and doctors of all kinds – plus a few well-intentioned
self-appointed "experts" – can’t figure out what they are, where
they came from, or what caused them.
Not man-made, hardly nature-made and possibly not subconscious-made
One of the leading theories is that they are man-made, probably by indigenous
people. Sounds reasonable, no? Folks in loincloths hauling dirt in woven
baskets, meticulously making mound after mound after … but wait a minute. For
one thing it would have been a huge amount of work, especially for a culture
that was living hand-to-mouth. Then there’s the fact that, as far as can be
determined, there’s nothing in the mounds themselves. Sure they aren’t
exactly the same as the nearby ground, but they certainly don’t contain grain,
pot shards, relics, mummies, arrowheads, or anything that really speaks of
civilization. They are just dirt. And if they are man-made, how did the people
in Kenya, Mexico, Canada, Australia, China, California, Arkansas, Texas,
Louisiana, and especially Washington state all coordinate their efforts so
closely as to produce virtually identical mounds? That’s either one huge tribe
or a lot of little ones who somehow could send smoke signals thousands of miles.
Not very likely.
Next on the list of explanations is that somehow the mounds were created either
by wind and rain or by geologic ups and downs – that there’s some kind of
bizarre earthy effect that has caused them to pop up. Again, it sounds
reasonable, right? After all, there are all kinds of weird natural things out
there: rogue waves, singing sand, exploding lakes, rains of fish and frogs –
so why shouldn’t mother nature create field after field of neat little
The "natural" theory of nature being responsible for the Majorly
Mysterious Mima Mounds starts to crumble upon further investigation. Sure
there’s plenty of things we don’t yet understand about how our native world
behaves scientists do know enough to be able to say what it can’t do – and
it’s looking pretty certain it can’t be as precise, orderly, or meticulous
as the mounds.
But still more theories persist. For many who believe in ley lines, that crop
circles are some form of manifestation of our collective unconscious, in ghosts
being energy impressions left in stone and brick, the mounds are the same, or at
least similar: the result of an interaction between forces we as yet do not
understand, or never will, and our spaceship earth.
Then who's responsible?... wait for it...
Others, those who prefer their granola slightly less crunchy or wear their
tinfoil hats a little less tightly, have suggested what I – in my own
ill-educated opinion – consider to be perhaps the best theory to date. Some,
naturally, have dismissed this concept out-of-hand, suggesting that the whole
idea is too ludicrous even to be the subject of a dinner party, let alone
deserving the attention and respect of serious research.
But I think this attitude shows not only lack of respect but a lack of
imagination. I simply ask that this theory be considered in all fairness and not
dismissed without the same serious consideration these now well-respected
theories have received.
After all, giant gophers could very well be responsible for the Mysterious Mima