DOCUMENT TRAIL

A SMALL SAMPLE OF THE LETTER EXCHANGES, C14 RESULTS, ETC., BETWEEN RUSSELL PRICE, ATHOL RAFTER & OTHERS IN, MAINLY, 1969 – 70.

Specimens dated to 31^st Oct. 1965.

 Specimens dated to 29^th Dec 1966.

Sample dated 23^rd March 1968,

Sample dated 11^th May 1968 and the heavily edited document below is directly derived from the document above but stripped of all the pertinent information the public is not allowed to know or see (censored/sterilised).

Whereas the C14 results found on the New Zealand Radiocarbon Database have been severely Mcfudged and tampered with to hide the much more comprehensive information that was found on the original source document, this one slipped under the radar and shows that humans have been in New Zealand since at least 2285-years before 1950. The abbreviation C. R. A. means “Conventional Radiocarbon Age”.

And guess who’s in charge of the University of Waikato Radiocarbon Dating Unit and the New Zealand Radiocarbon Database? … Yup! ... Bruce McFudgen.

 Specimens dated 26^th Oct. 1968.

Sample dated 2^nd November 1968.

Sample dated 18^th January 1969.

Sample dated 25^th Jan. 1969.

Sample dated 23^rd March 1970. One broken femur, sawn into by man, was dated to 7170-years plus or minus 60-years before 1950 in age.

Sample collected 23^rd October 1965, given its final C14 test on 13^th February 1970 and producing a finalised reading of 7170  60-years before 1950. This Moa bone was positively identified to have been sawn into by humans.

One of the letters in the DSIR file that speaks about the specimen from which the 7170  60-years date was derived (written here as  70-years) before 1950.

‘The text shown reads: Poukawa H.B. 2^nd Sept. R2476

Dear Phil, I do apologise for taking so long to answer your letter – it’s been the reference to the c. 5000-year carbon date from Poukawa which has caused the problem. And the problem is still not solved; I can’t track down the reference.

I think it was in a report put out [by] the Nuclear Lab of the DSIR. Anyway, details of the date I can tell you. The date of 5180  70-years (before 1950) was obtained from giant Moa bone (D. giganteas or hercules) from Poukawa Site III.

The bone was dated because one of the pelvic pubes was found to have a deep cut across it. We have also obtained an older date for Moa bone from Site I, that being 7170   70-years (b. 1950). A deep diagonal cut across the femur of this bird suggested …’

Price’s letter to Athol Rafter dated 7^th May 1969.

Athol Rafter’s letter to Russell Price, dated 13^th June 1969.

Athol Rafter’s letter to Russell Price dated 16^th June 1969.

Athol Rafter’s letter to Russell Price dated 17^th June 1969.

Price’s letter to Athol Rafter, 19^th June 1969

Price’s letter to Athol Rafter, 3^rd September 1969.

Price’s letter to Athol Rafter dated 10^th October 1969.

Price’s Letter to Athol Rafter dated 21^st September 1969.

Price’s letter to Athol Rafter, dated 28^th October 1969.

Price’s letter to Athol Rafter dated 3^rd November 1969.

Letter from Athol Rafter to Russell Price, dated 29^th October 1969.

Price’s letter to Athol Rafter dated 26^th March 1970.

Price’s letter to Athol Rafter dated 2^nd April 1970.

Athol Rafter’s letter to Russell Price dated 7^th May 1970.

IN QUEST OF POUKAWA MAN

One detail that has bordered on “Top Secret” is the fact that human skeletons or sundry human bones were encountered deep down under the ancient ash layers at Poukawa, along with the cooked and broken up Moa bones, cast aside after the Moa hunter feasts. In letters exchanged between Price and Rafter, especially, the term “Poukawa Man” is raised several times and other insiders were privy to the information. This included local Maori, who authorised skeletal remains to be sent to the DSIR radiocarbon lab for age-testing. Maori of the 1960s genre were obviously as inquisitive as everyone else as to who these old skeletons belonged. One advantage they had over non-Maori New Zealanders was that their old elders, recounting oral history, spoke openly about the “strangers” who had previously occupied lands that came into Maori possession. Historian/anthropologist Edward Tregear wrote:

“The Maoris used to pay great respect to the bones of their dead, yet here and there may be found among sandhills, etc., human remains uncovered by the wind, and of these no tradition remains, as there would certainly be if the relics were those of ancestors. The natives say, “These are the bones of strangers.” So also, mortuary-caves are found concerning the contents of which the Maoris make the same remark, and regard them with indifference” (See: The Maori Race, pp. 562-563).  

On May 7^th, 1969 Price wrote the following to Athol Rafter:

Many thanks for your helpful and encouraging letter of 24^th April. I have just finished packing the skeleton from Roy Natusch property. He has obtained the full approval of the 3 tribal committees concerned, and a permit from the Police, so all is well. We have retained the lower jaw (quite good order considering) and what remains of the skull. When this lower jaw is compared with ours from Poukawa it is at once observable that you are looking at two distinct types of man. Roy is obtaining medical evidence on this point. Unfortunately, right in the middle of this his wife fell and broke her arm, so [I] volunteered to pack the skeleton which he will pick up in a day or two and forward by road transport direct to you. I am going to recommend to him that he let you examine the jaw width which I consider very important.

At the end of his May 7^th, 1969 letter Price wrote cryptically about human skeletal finds:

‘We were very pleased to hear your remarks re northern interests but thought it advisable to let you know just what these people had in mind. They are a crowd I have little interest in. I had a nice letter from Prof. Charles Highman [&] he will visit us if possible but, like ourselves time is the vital factor. I was delighted to hear of this success re early dates. They are on the right track, feel sure they will recover more.

P.S. With regards to Roy Natusch second skeleton he has decided not to push his luck too far with the Maoris at present, and the same applies to our own. They are easily upset and in both cases the skeletons can be used for comparative purposes. What I want is more human material in the way of a skeleton or scattered bone clearly below the ash showers.

On June 19^th, 1969 Price wrote the following to Athol Rafter:

‘I have talked with Roy Natusch and Ken Ramsey and we are unanimous in the decision for you to take whatever steps you consider necessary in this vital matter of Roy’s remarkable discovery. So, you can move quickly and correctly to get recognition for all the work that has been done by us all.

I have gone over very carefully all the material Roy has sent you, and there can be no doubt in my mind that he has found an entirely different type of man hitherto not found in New Zealand. When he first brought me the evidence which you are now dating apart from its evident age, once I examined that primitive and massive jaw (lower) I at once told him he really had something. As you say, the counter will tell the story’

Roy Natusch had found a giant skeleton, or parts thereof, which displayed a very large jaw. During the colonial era of New Zealand, many of these tall stature skeletons have been seen, especially on the West Coast, ranging from Port Waikato to Mitimiti (a distance of 160-miles or 255 kilometres up the coastline). Anomalous skeletons like this, when found today, are given to local Maori tribes who destroy them. No scientific analysis is allowed.

Athol Rafter wrote back on the 17^th of June 1969:

‘We will start on the skeleton tomorrow and as soon as we have this date an assessment can be made of the whole area. If the collagen human date is what you expect then a considerable amount of work will be warranted on your Poukawa site. We opened up the two skulls you kindly sent down. Poukawa Man as you say is of relatively modern vintage, but the other skull could easily be of a man living thousands of years ago in New Zealand. However, we cannot speculate, but leave off now until the C14 age put away all doubts. David Natusch has taken the skulls down to our photographer for record purposes. We will send you copies.’

Athol Rafter wrote again to Russell Price on the 17^th of June 1969:

Your letter of May 7 got lost for a time beneath my correspondence and I have enclosed the papers you need. I am pleased you are going to write up a scientific paper with Mr Pullar. If the collagen age for this skeleton is in the order of 1000 years, then I think you and Mr Natusch should write a short account for Nature straight away. This should be no trouble. Another way of getting good publicity for your work is for reference to be made at the Anthropology Section Meeting at A. N, A. A. A. S. in Adelaide next August. I think I told you I am Chairman of a Symposium at that meeting and would be happy to refer to your excellent work. If the collagen age is right I will, with your permission, let Dr Macintosh, the Professor of Anatomy, Sydney University, know and send him photos of the two skulls. I’m sure he will be on the next plane to Poukawa. These are just ideas in anticipation of the right result, but we need to move quickly and correctly to get you the scientific credit you deserve.’

On November 3^rd, 1969 Russell Price wrote a lengthy, 3-page update on recent activities and concluded with:

David Buddo (farmer) has given me authority to expel any undesirable persons from our sites and was delighted to hear that the Institute of Nuclear Sciences will do all it can to assist in the research for Poukawa man. We all feel that Dr Duff is a decidedly prejudiced person and as a self-appointed judge is a bit of a flop. We shall continue with our work at Poukawa for a long time to come.

There were a number of archaeologists who seemed to, quite openly, resent Price’s extraordinary finds and Price had to try and sidestep their academic-snobbery and rank-pulling condescension. One of these self-appointed primo-uomos was Dr. Roger Duff and when the plug was finally pulled by jealous or politically aligned adversaries, and Price’s work and reputation went down the gurgler, he felt that a major architect in his demise was Dr Roger Duff.

About these down-in-the-mouth dissenters, Bernadette Noble or the Hawkes Bay newspaper wrote on May 1^st, 1969:

‘I went to Hastings to meet Mr. Price and to see for myself the small 120 by 120 feet square that is causing such gnashing of teeth in high scientific places.’

With authority given to Price by farmer David Buddo to expel undesirables, it’s a pity he didn’t give Bruce McFadgen the “bum’s-rush” in 1973.

Human bones found under the Taupo ash layer.

This is an example of highly significant information “HIDDEN IN PLAIN SIGHT”, as the dearth of relevant facts that should have been included, make the unsuspecting public simply gloss over the data without realising what was found. Here is an actual letter from Rafter with results related to one of the several human skeleton finds, where the remains were lying on the Waimihia ash band.

On the 16^th of June 1969, Dr. Athol Rafter, in doing C14 analysis on samples submitted by Price, paraphrases what Price wrote in reference to the samples. Note that dates of 3120-years and 3210-years before 1950 were returned in the sample ages.   

 So close and yet so far … just when it looked like we were going to get full disclosure of our long-term history, the clobbering machine went into full swing and dashed our hopes. It was a resounding NO! from the control-freak faction … and we were not permitted to have this forbidden knowledge. Thereafter New Zealand archaeological research in this category was locked-down, and such has been the case now for nigh on 50-years.

Many New Zealanders would question why a government would wish to censor history in this way. By all appearances, it’s a scourge that afflicts many western countries, pushed by the internationalists, who use “indigenous-rights” legislation as a main weapon of leverage in breaking the solidarity and sovereignty of, especially, western nations. The United Nations foisted UNDRIP (United Nations Declaration of Rights of Indigenous Peoples) onto New Zealand, thus dividing the country into at least two major inter-bickering factions …  and a central theme that must be religiously advocated is that Maori are the only people to have ever occupied pre-colonial New Zealand. Thus, one group in society is empowered, while another is disenfranchised, allowing big corporations to gain access to rich resources that would not usually be so readily available in a country where sovereignty is fully intact and impregnable.

Continue