The PTB History Fabrication Tools

First of all, our history is not a science, for there is no science involved in telling the truth, no matter how old that truth is. Unfortunately, we do have a whole bunch of diploma-wielding individuals with some professional parroting skills. Their full time job is to be blind to reality, and to spread fake facts by repeating them over and over again.


Most of our professionals are good people and have no idea that they were tricked into spreading the disinformation of this magnitude. Unfortunately, this doesn't change the outcome.


Victors write our history. Losers write nothing. Victors will never present themselves in a globally bad light. They can throw us a distorted bone now and then (e.g. Indian Massacres, the Boxer Rebellion, etc.), but that's about it. That lives us with the neverending puzzle of trying to figure out the rest. In the process of trying to solve this historical puzzle, certain distortion tools used by the PTB reveal themselves. Below are some of the most obvious ones.

Throughout time, the establishment had to deal with tons of inconvenient historical information. We have to give credit where credit is due. They did a great job making ends meet. Luckily for us, there were a few loose ones left. These loose ends are out there for everyone to see, and were not really concealable.

• The PTB did the only thing they could with those.
• They forced an altered understanding of such loose historical ends.

Below are some of the examples.

Official position: In painting, a capriccio is a work where part or all of the subject matter is invented and typically focuses on architecture. The word itself is derived from the Italian term used for the impulsive jumping of a baby goat. The capriccio was not meant to represent reality, but rather to provide the viewer with an interesting image based on reality.

• Capriccio Art
• Capriccio Art

A View Of The Arch Of Constantine: The below example is a painting allegedly done by Apollonio Domenichini, alternatively referred to as the Maestro della Fondazione Langmatt, or Menichini or il Menichino.

Veduta della Piazza del Popolo: Below is a painting allegedly done by Giovanni Battista Piranesi, famous for his etchings of Rome and of fictitious and atmospheric "prisons".

The mechanism of deception: The PTB falsely accused multiple artists of painting imaginary landscapes. As far as I'm aware, none of these artists positioned themselves as fantasy painters. There are multiple real world confirmations of the so-called imaginary scenes.


Conveniently, paintings of the surviving ruins are not being questioned, while paintings of the ruins we do not see today are mere "fantasies". Here is an example of an imaginary landscape by Giovanni Battista Piranesi.

• e.g. Imaginary Prisons

KD: The PTB has no factual documented proof (other then their unsubstantiated claims) that ruin artists were making stuff up. In falsely accusing tens, and possibly hundreds of artists of the past, professional historians deliberately altered our understanding of certain historical events.
For me, this is one of the most egregious ones, simply because of how blatantly obvious the establishment lies are. Unfortunately, in our society, journalists like this Greg Miller are allowed to influence masses with statements like this:

• Inventing cities, mountains, and monsters to fill the empty spaces on maps is a centuries-old tradition in cartography.
  • Says who?
• Caspar Vopel, a German cartographer, left behind no explanation of why he added these things to his map, but he may have been motivated by what art historians call horror vacui (ngram), the artist’s fear of leaving unadorned spaces on their work. Chet Van Duzer, a historian of cartography, has found dozens of maps on which cartographers appear to have filled the empty spaces on their maps with non-existent mountains, monsters, cities, and other gratuitous illustrations.
• Why Ancient Mapmakers Were Terrified of Blank Spaces - please red this pseudo-research.

In his article, Greg Miller refers to another lying tool of a researcher named Chet Van Duzer. And both of them bombard your brains with crap like this:

• One reason mapmakers may have done this (KD: drew imaginary things) is to hide their ignorance, says Van Duzer.
• Mapmakers may have also been motivated by the market for their work. Aristocrats and other wealthy patrons who commissioned the most expensive maps would have expected lavish decoration.
  • What a load of BS. If anything, they would have expected accurate maps, and not some made up crap.
• The interior of Africa was not well mapped either at the time, but there were texts available that described it in detail - albeit speculative and unreliable detail - and van den Keere likely relied on these to fill in the interior of that continent, Van Duzer says. According to the map, for example, the Niger River flows underground for 60 miles and then re-emerges in a lake. In reality it does no such thing.
  • Van Duzer is so full of baloney with his disinfo. I called him a tool of a researcher for a reason, for that's what he appears to be. Idiotic assumptions similar to the Niger River one, show how little different Van Duzers and Millers care about the cartographers they right about, and about our true history in general.
  • 400 year old Sahara Desert, or why people forgot everything they knew about Africa
  • Annihilated African cities, killed population, establishment lies, Timgad and the Richat Structure

The mechanism of deception: The PTB (through the educational system in place) breed pseudo-researches like Van Duzer. Such pseudo-researchers ridicule professionals of the past through publications similar to the above example. In the process, the scientific community is rigged to dismiss the inconvenient evidence of the existence of the previous spin of our civilization (including other types of beings; e.g. centaurs, giants, etc.) as mere fantasies. In turn, this allows for teaching lies in our educational organizations, so that more pseudo-researchers could be produced.

This section requires a certain understanding of the entire chronology related issues we are facing. For an out of the loop person, the below will sound like an utter nonsense. Those who care will devote their time and research, those who don't will walk by. Such things are expected, but wouldn't it be interesting to find out true reasons for some crazy rumors like this one?

• One of the earliest traditions associated with the Tower of London was that it was built by Julius Caesar; the story was a popular amongst writers and antiquaries.
• Some writers, such as Shakespeare, in his play Richard III, have ascribed an earlier origin to the Tower of London and have stated that it was built by Julius Caesar.
• The Salt Tower was originally known as the Tower of Julius Caesar. It is one of the 21 towers that make up the Tower of London complex.

Our historical chronology has been tempered with since at least Joseph Justus Scaliger who allegedly lived between 1540 and 1604. That is without factoring in our possible 185 year shift.

Influencing opinions is the name of the game here. Dumbing masses down is much easier when logical justifications are augmented by some convincing terminology. We have this wonderful TPTB invention called anachronism, with its subdivision called prochronism. This, ladies and gentlemen, presents us with an example of perfectly legitimate tools being used for fraudulent reasons:

• Anachronism: An anachronism is a chronological inconsistency in some arrangement, especially a juxtaposition of persons, events, objects, language terms and customs from different time periods. The most common type of anachronism is an object misplaced in time, but it may be a verbal expression, a technology, a philosophical idea, a musical style, a material, a plant or animal, a custom, or anything else associated with a particular period that is placed outside its proper temporal domain.​
• Prochronism: A prochronism is an impossible anachronism which occurs when an object or idea has not yet been invented when the situation takes place, and therefore could not have possibly existed at the time. A prochronism may be an object not yet developed, a verbal expression that had not yet been coined, a philosophy not yet formulated, a breed of animal not yet evolved (or perhaps engineered), or use of a technology that had not yet been created.​

In other words, the above is an attempt to present certain artists of the past as stupid and uneducated, or deliberately misleading due to some non-existent tendencies existing at the time.

• If today's artist depicted Hernan Cortes attacking Azteca Indians with M-4/AR-15 Carbines and M1 Abrams tanks, that would be an example of some seriously grotesque prochronistic anachronism.
• At the same time, the use of cannons and arquebus rifles was expected.

Based on our traditional education, we do not expect Nebuchadnezzar II and Julius Caesar to be using cannons, and in some instances rifles during their battles. We also do not expect to see Jesus Christ next to a rifle.

• In case we do, we are trained to think that we are observing an instance of anachronism, and there is nothing.

The Battle of Alesia or Siege of Alesia was a military engagement in the Gallic Wars that took place in September, 52 BC, around the Gallic oppidum (fortified settlement) of Alesia, a major centre of the Mandubii tribe. It was fought by the army of Julius Caesar against a confederation of Gallic tribes united under the leadership of Vercingetorix of the Arverni. It was the last major engagement between Gauls and Romans, and is considered one of Caesar's greatest military achievements and a classic example of siege warfare and investment. The battle of Alesia marked the end of Gallic independence in France and Belgium.

• 1533 painting by Melchior Feselen - Siege for Battle of Alesia

Was the author of the below painting stupid to the point of not knowing that there were no cannons or long guns in 52 BC?

In 589 BC, Nebuchadnezzar II laid siege to Jerusalem, culminating in the destruction of the city and its temple in the summer of 587 or 586 BC. After the fall of Jerusalem, the Babylonian general Nebuzaraddan was sent to complete its destruction. Jerusalem was plundered, and Solomon's Temple was destroyed. Most of the elite were taken into captivity in Babylon. The city was razed to the ground.

• Siege of Jerusalem 587 BC
• Luther Bible - Wiki
• The Luther Bible: 1534 Edition

Was the author of the below image stupid to the point of not knowing that there were no cannons in 587 BC?

Recent astronomical research uses the contrast between the synoptic date of Jesus' last Passover on the one hand with John's date of the subsequent "Jewish Passover" on the other hand, to propose Jesus' Last Supper to have been on Wednesday, 1 April AD 33 and the crucifixion on Friday 3 April AD 33 and the Resurrection on the third day.

• Chronology of Jesus​
• Resurrection of Jesus by Jan Joest​

Those inconvenient little things.... help us Jesus... oops, help us Prochronism...


There are hundreds of similar inconvenient instances of the so-called anachronisms. None of the artists in question made it publicly known that they were a little too creative and irresponsibly passionate. Well, their lack of transparency was fully compensated by our pseudo-historians.

What we have here, is one of the most blatant "in your face" lies. It's one of those, where I have nothing but questions. I will start with a few simple ones, but they form interesting patterns. The PTB would prefer to answer such questions on a case by case (individual busts, or statues) basis. It's much easier to lie about each statue or bust individually, for it allows our narrative compilers to avoid the pattern exposure related issues.

• What the heck happened for statues and busts to end in various rivers or creeks, or being buried under ground?
• How many statues or busts were not "discovered" after 1400? Meaning they were always located in some room, or garden, etc.
• What is the "first mentioned ever" date for each individual statue, or bus?

Here are several (out of hundreds, and possibly thousands) examples of the discovered busts, or statues. I wan to emphasize the dates of their discovery.

• Ancient Bust of Greek God Hermes Found During Work on Athens’ Sewage System
• Ancient marble head of god Dionysus discovered under Rome
• Oldest known bust of Caesar found at the bottom of the River Rhone
• Ancient Roman statue of Minerva discovered in margarine tub
• Ancient Roman Statues were accidentally discovered by a sharp-eyed local
• 1,700-year-old Roman bust unearthed in ancient city in Turkey’s south

Essentially, we have the following patterns:

• close to 99% of all discovered ancient Roman busts were located in the 19th century or later
• close to 100% of all discovered ancient statues were located after 1500 AD

Important patterns:

• Museums are reluctant to list the date of the actual statue, or bust discovery
• Museums (predominantly) only list the "dated" age of statues
• It's increasingly hard to find the discovery date of the ancient roman busts
• ...a Roman copy of a Greek original

We normally do not think about simple things like this, but may be we should. I think that our civilization has no idea who most of the ancient busts displayed in various museums, and private collections belong to. Have you ever though of what magic sources are being used by the historians to put "a name to a face"? I suggest you do. Don't just blindly accept "this is the bust of Plato". Verify why it is Plato, and not some mannequin head.

• The bust of Julius Caesar. Why?

While putting this article together, I ran into the below alleged bust of Herodotus. Herodotus's busts are known to have his name inscribed on them.

• A Roman copy (2nd century AD) of a Greek bust of Herodotus from the first half of the 4th century BC

Several questions pertaining to the above bust:

• Who vandalized this work of art with the ugly inscription? ​
• I do not believe for a second that the creator of this alleged "carving", suddenly lost all his skills and disrespected his own creation with this crooked child's scribble.​
• When was this bust discovered?​
• How do we know that it's a Roman copy of a Greek original?​

Official: Antiquities were high stakes and high profit in 16th-century Rome, and no one was above breaking the law for loot. During the 16th century, the Roman market for antiquities became highly competitive.

• Are we to believe, that for over 1000 years, people just walked by various statues or busts without ever creating an instance of those being mentioned?
• If this is the PTB narrative... how come ancient Roman busts started getting discovered in 1800s, with virtually none prior?

The mechanism of deception: The PTB "dated" various statues and busts to desired dates. They named statues and busts with desired names. They prevented having dates of discovery, or "first time mentioned" dates from being widely advertised - to suppress the pattern.

I have hard time believing that individuals representing our history related scientific community have never tried to ask two simple questions:

• How do we know all this? What and how old are the sources of the information?​
• Am I simply repeating after my teachers, without bothering to verify for myself?​

This is the easiest point to discuss with any PhD in Ancient History. Just ask them what the sources of their knowledge are. You will get names of texts, works and authors like this, this, or this. Essentially it will come down to this:

• All sources are dated with whatever, but discovered after 1400 AD.

Individual texts: Question the original sources of any specific author or text. You will get one of two answers:

1. The original did not survive, but some caring individuals were kind enough to produces a copy or two.​
2. We discovered an original after 1400 AD, dated it with whatever and this is how we know.​

Continue with your line of questioning, and ask your PhD in parroting, why nothing was discovered prior to 1400 AD? This is where answers may vary, for this is not something the PTB likes to attract anyone's attention to. They do not like these patterns being exposed. The most likely version of the answer you get, will sound something like this:

• Prior to 1400 AD people did not care about antiquities due to the hardships of the Dark Ages.

Ask your PhD this:

• What is the source of your knowledge, that people did not care for antiquities during the Dark Ages?

The answer will, most likely, come down to your PhD naming a few fairly recent experts.

The mechanism of deception: By fraudulently dating various texts, the PTB was able to successfully misrepresent events barely predating 1400s.

• An example of fraudulent dating.

By pure volume, this is the most powerful narrative delivery mechanism employed by the PTB. Possessing such a powerful tool, greatly assisted the establishment in placing specific images and associations into the minds of mankind.

• Of course, without the above bullets, nothing achieved by our movie making and television industries would have been possible.

For my example, I used Julius Caesar. I could have used Alexander the Great, Pontius Pilate, Hector, Cleopatra, etc.

The mechanism of deception: By misrepresenting the appearance of Julius Caesar and alike, the PTB was able to successfully create specific visual associations to fake thousands of years of separation between events.

KD: These are just several major history fabrication tools I see. We have other major ones, like geniuses and weird wonders, and many more minor ones. The above bullets should be enough for starters.

For myself, I see several distinct periods. 1400s and 1600s: those could be one and the same. The 19th century is a stand alone puzzle.

When presented with hard physicals evidence, pre-1400s appears to be a very significant date. Whatever event triggered the Age of Re-discovery, had to be significant enough to be compared to the Great Flood.

Who knows, may be our Renaissance, was not some cultural, artistic, or political "rebirth". May be it was an actual recovery/rebirth period after a major JESUS EVENT.