Sorry to interrupt...this will only take a moment.
This site is an independent reader-supported project.
Because you have viewed at least a few articles now...
Can you give a small donation to keep us online?
We can give you e-books and audiobooks and stuff.
This site is an independent reader-supported project.
The cost of keeping it running are considerable.
If you can spare a few dollars it would help us enormously.
We can give you e-books and audiobooks and stuff.
×
×
Experimental Feature

Select 'Atmospheric Audio' from the Audio menu to add subtle background audio to certain portions of the article.

Guidestones into the Age of Reason

Retired Article • Written by Jason Bellows

In northeast Georgia (USA), just off the Hartwell Highway there is a monument situated on a small rise. It is made of six granite slabs; there is a capstone, one slab stands in the center, and around it four vertical slabs stand just over sixteen feet high. The north/south pair of vertical granite is aligned to the poles. The central hollow of the structure is designed to be lit by light from the sun at noontime no matter the time of year. The entire monument weighs in at an appreciable 118 tons, and is fitted with a small hole that will allow one to stand at the base and observe the North Star. It’s an interesting feat of architecture, but since it was erected in 1980, it’s not fabulous for the era nor is it of surprising craftsmanship (it even bears a misspelling on the explanatory tablet which is set into the ground a few feet away).

The interesting part is the message which is etched into every one of the structure’s faces: a self-professed guide into the age of reason. In our day of political strife, and various religions trying to rule the world, such a guidepost should be welcome. Astonishingly, in our era of polarized views there are factions calling for the demolition and dismantling of the guide stones— though no one wants to personally foot the bill.

Starting from the top, the sentiments of guide stones seem benevolent enough. The capstone reads the following message in Babylonian, Classical Greek, Sanskrit, and Egyptian Hieroglyphics:

A good opening in an era that could use a hefty dose of reason. The four corner pieces each bear two languages—one on each face. The English translation reads:

Despite some glints of good advice, most anyone can quickly spot items that are unpalatable. Starting with the first point, “Maintain humanity under five-hundred-million” would mean eradicating nine-tenths of the current world’s population. The next item sounds a little like eugenics, which still bears a vile stigma after the way the Nazis wanted to breed undesired traits from the world.

Obviously these are not portents that will end political partisanship and unite the world, but perhaps some could be considered wise. Rule passion, fair laws, prize beauty are all good ideas. The thought on evading useless officials would mean eradicating ninety percent of the world’s politicians.

Perhaps the person/group who funded the monument realized the faux pas he/she/they committed in printing some of their advice, because no one has ever stepped forward to claim credit for the work. It was built by the Elberton Granite Finishing Company on public land at the behest of a man known only as “R. C. Christian”. It is that name that is engraved on the explanatory tablet as the author, but it also marked as a PSEUDONYN—which I can only assume means “pseudonym”.

Obviously the age of reason hasn’t been adopted, and as a result, there is controversy. Some contend that this structure is named for Thomas Payne’s The Age of Reason, which argued against judeo-christian dogma.

Others compare it to a monument depicting the Ten Commandments, but more new-age and thus offensive. Yet more just loathe the guide stones' popularity, and lick their chops at the thought of its demise. These organizations haven’t yet found a way to fund the demolition of the guide stones, however, though there are groups seeking donations.

My take, however, is that we shouldn’t bother destroying the monument regardless of whether we agree with its sentiments or not; if there is to be an age of reason, a major factor (that this monument has overlooked) will be an open dialog between people. These stones portray someone’s ideal world, and though the designer has used anonymity to avoid a dialog, at least we can look at his message—and the eloquent way of communicating it—and use our own reasoning to decide to embrace or reject these notions. If we all resorted to reason, any advice offered here would be obsolete.

Further reading:
Wikipedia on guidestones
Arguement to dismantle the guide stones

Article suggested by Ms T Hanback.

Article written by Jason Bellows, published on 18 June 2006. Jason is a contributing editor for DamnInteresting.com.

Article design by Alan Bellows. Edited by Alan Bellows.
SHARE

More Information
Related Articles


88 Comments
peridot window
Posted 18 June 2006 at 05:08 pm

The last point is my favorite: leave room for nature, indeed.


Morgan
Posted 18 June 2006 at 08:58 pm

Amazing how little reason the guides actually espouse. Number 1 is arbitrary, 5 and 6 are often contradictory, and almost all have to do with spirituality over reason. It's much more Age of Aquarius than Age of Reason, but they're cool stones anyway. No reason to tear them down, I don't see them inciting any kind of revolution.


Asshe
Posted 18 June 2006 at 08:59 pm

Wouldn't it be interesting for a future civilization to find this structure, and to see that it was created by people that destryed eachother through Nuclear War (if that's the way the future plays out).

How puzzled they would be.


Cori
Posted 18 June 2006 at 09:08 pm

It's utterly ridiculous that someone would be upset enough to actually want to spend money to tear them down. "Look at those ROCKS! They have WORDS on them! GET 'EM!"


surfjay
Posted 18 June 2006 at 09:43 pm

Tearing these down brings to mind the idea of burning books. Even if they do advocate unpopular ideas (although the idea of eliminating 90% of the world's population is not unpopular with me, as long as we start with the politicians), one of the guiding principles of our country is the right to express them. Or at least it used to be...


Arcangel
Posted 18 June 2006 at 10:19 pm

Maybe a poor man's Stonehenge.


kwiksand
Posted 18 June 2006 at 10:41 pm

Arcangel said: "Maybe a poor man's Stonehenge."

I was thinking this when I saw the picture for the article.


Dreamsinabadger
Posted 18 June 2006 at 10:53 pm

I want to be a judo-christian! I know, I know, just a missing e, but it brought such a terribly amusing picture into my head. Like Mighty Morphin Jesus Rangers.


Sassanix
Posted 18 June 2006 at 11:35 pm

Amazing but not intresting in my opinion.


kwiksand
Posted 19 June 2006 at 12:52 am

Sassanix said: "Amazing but not intresting in my opinion."

So in your opinion it shouldn't be on the site? Wouldn't the fact that it amazes you, mean thats its interesting?


OmniNegro
Posted 19 June 2006 at 02:10 am

I like the part about thinning the numbers a bit. (a lot)

1 and 2 can be achieved together with mandatory vasectomies at an appropriate age. (15?)

I think the petty laws and useless poloticians thing would be better if avoid was replaced by destroy.


Justin Parks
Posted 19 June 2006 at 02:39 am

I don't get it. Get some chain and a big truck. That can't be THAT hard to tear down. Or give some kids a some hammers and let em have at it. =P

Obviously these people aren't THAT offended, or it'd get taken care of.

Pretty sad how people choose to spend their time, really. "I think today I'll take up the cause to try to destroy a monument cause it only mildly bothers me."

It's too bad there wasn't specifically a guideline mentioning tolerance of other's beliefs / ideas. That'd make for a good long chuckle after they smash it to the ground.


LL
Posted 19 June 2006 at 04:24 am

The people who want to destroy it seem to have taken lessons from the Taliban.


1c3d0g
Posted 19 June 2006 at 05:14 am

"The thought on evading useless officials would mean eradicating ninety percent of the world’s politicians."

I don't see a problem with that. Do you? :-/ Also, only people with a childish mind would tear down those stones. I mean, WTF?!? If I say something you don't like, are you going to tear me down too? I'd really like to see that... :-P


Josh Harding
Posted 19 June 2006 at 05:51 am

1c3d0g said: ""The thought on evading useless officials would mean eradicating ninety percent of the world’s politicians."

I don't see a problem with that. Do you? :-/ Also, only people with a childish mind would tear down those stones. I mean, WTF?!? If I say something you don't like, are you going to tear me down too? I'd really like to see that… :-P"

You said something I didn't like...be prepared for a tear down....(hem, hem, hem) You lousy waste of human tissue. You jerk, you real knee-biter. You stuck-up, scruffy-lookin nerf-herder. Your type really makes me puke....There, do you feel torn down?


Kafka
Posted 19 June 2006 at 06:42 am

The Ideals that are written on the stone seem pretty common sense to us, because they describe a modern day secular society (for the most part). Freedom of religion, plus the choice of freedom from religion, a just government and a balance between personal rights and responsibilities.

Some haven't been seen yet, such as a World Language, but that will eventually come around (I'm thinking english because it's the world scientific language, but maybe some other language). A World Court could be a good thing (even though no country in the world likes being told what to do) and a population of 500000000, which will probably never happen, but probably should.

I suppose the "people" who want to tear down this monument believe that we should reproduce endlessly like a virus, that the environment, despite sustaining LIFE itself, isn't important, that Justice isn't important (might makes right), Religion or some strange Dogma should rule forever and we should all be feverant fanatics without reason. Ah yes, the cry of the fanatics, making a big fuss about anything to gain popularity within a group. Only a fanatic would care enough to try to destroy this monument.


mrkdent
Posted 19 June 2006 at 07:15 am

It is interesting when you look at the text on the stones. You see the prime directive of the author is a harmonic balance between humans and nature. The author's "ideal" society cuts out red-tape, and lowers our burden on nature. The reference to eugenics is nonsense, the word diversity dispells that. Ultimetly while each persons view is only that, we would be wise as a society to take these suggestions into our thoughts. Then again, this is just one persons point of view


dday
Posted 19 June 2006 at 07:38 am

love Cori's statement -

seems like a waste of perfectly good rock


tiffjamaica
Posted 19 June 2006 at 07:43 am

I've been to the guidestones! I can't understand why people would want to tear them down. They are in the middle of nowhere... you're driving along this back Georgia road and all of a sudden, there they are in the middle of a field. It's bizarre!! It's got to be good for the town of Elburton. While we were visiting, two other groups came to see them, too, and let me tell ya - the only other thing in Elburton is their Granite Museum, which isn't likely to bring in any tourists (even though they do give out free granite samples that look lovely in our bonsai trees). :)

They are worth seeing if you're ever in the area. I heard that people often camp out there on the solstices and do rituals or hope for weird things to happen.


coheed
Posted 19 June 2006 at 08:17 am

Very interesting. Did anyone read the wiki article that talked about Rosicrucians that's linked to from the guidestone wiki article? Very intersting as well.

I wonder what's in the 'time capsule', if one was even buried. Seeing as there's no date I doubt one was put down there.


Marius
Posted 19 June 2006 at 08:49 am

Imagine, in twenty centuries or so if the stones are still there, the future version of Believe it or Not will do a special on them: It's amazing that this primitive culture, using only rudimentary combustion engines and hydraulics, erected a monument that withstood such blindered intolerance that it still stands today. Note the tell-tale scratches that give mute testimony to the chains of 4 X 4's that tried to pull them down.


Robert Waugh
Posted 19 June 2006 at 08:56 am

The time capsule contains a genetically engineered virus that would wipe out nine-tenths of the population, and a copy of "Teach Yourself Esperanto and 39 Other Ways to Save the World."


Jasonb
Posted 19 June 2006 at 10:08 am

Kafka said: "I suppose the "people" who want to tear down this monument believe that we should reproduce endlessly like a virus, "

I have four "viruses", I mean children. Which would you like to kill first? I suggest the infant, as he would probably scream the least.

As for the monument, It doesn’t bother me. Kafka on the other hand, scares me.


SparkyTWP
Posted 19 June 2006 at 10:40 am

Yeah, the 500M figure is just made up. Why specifically that number? Why not 2 billion? Or 5 million? I don't think he realizes the economic and scientific implications of doing that.

I don't agree with the language part either really. I'd prefer to keep diversity by letting everyone keep their own language. You lose something culturally by changing to someone else's language. I guess you could advocate it being complementary instead of it being the only language, but you end up with the same result either way unless you have a huge language base.


Drakvil
Posted 19 June 2006 at 01:18 pm

I think that, at least as far as this [web] site goes, it has fulfilled it's purpose... it has got people discussing those particular issues.

I don't myself think that the half-billion figure is practicable, as for certain technologies to be operable, there needs to be a certain population level to support them. This isn't so much a desire to keep every technology we have now, but there are others on the way (unknown to most of us) that will need that support to arrive. I do, though, believe that we have far too many people on the planet right now. I think a proper population level can be attained within a hundred years just by people deciding not to have more than 2 or 3 kids per family, if they must have kids. I don't think anyone benefits from having 7, 12 or 22 kids in their family (what parent can give their children enough individual attention to properly raise them with that many? And many countries where they do have that many children per family have frequent famines that kill half of them. And how many brothers and sisters does Osama bin laden have again?) A more realistic number to me would be closer to 2 billion. That's a per-planet number, not absolute.

As for the new living language, it doesn't say anything about giving up any of the old ones. If every nation spoke their current language plus language X, it would be very easy for people across the globe to communicate clearly with each other, and by the use of their traditional language to retain their culture. Many people in the world currently speak more than two languages, yet there are barriers to communication between them. If everyone had at least one language in common...

Regarding "guide reproduction wisely", rather than bringing up images of Nazis in my head, this brings up the Howard Foundation from Robert Heinlein's "Time Enough for Love" and it's sequels. (Lazarus Long, anyone?) [summary: the foundation identified thousands of people who had one trait in common: at the time they reached the age of majority, they had four living grandparents - people that lived a long time. Those people were added to a database and were told they would receive something on the order of $10k for each child they had with someone else in the database... the children were then added to the database. After several generations, the people who were in the database were living at least twice as long as everyone else.] I see nothing wrong with identifying good traits and giving people an incentive for people to marry and have children with people with similar good traits - as long as they have the freedom to decide not to participate. Parents have been doing this for thousands of years with their children, only they use nagging and guilt as their incentives instead of cash.

I think the petty laws and useless officials clause will rule out objections to most of the rest. It's pretty hard to argue against truth, beauty, love (Moulin Rouge?), fairness and balance.


Zubir
Posted 19 June 2006 at 01:41 pm

I live about 3 miles from the Guidestones. They're located in Elbert County, which is "the granite capital of the world." I have a pretty good idea who funded the project. He's the same man who keeps OSHA out of the granite sheds (factories) here.


Harold
Posted 19 June 2006 at 02:08 pm

Pick a problem, any problem. All can be traced to the fact that there are too many humans on this earth and we are very out of sync with the natural laws. Now, how do we resolve that problem? Maybe Mom nature will take care of it for us i.e bird flu.


Morgan
Posted 19 June 2006 at 02:18 pm

Sorry, this anti-population stuff is so stale. Ehrlich couldn't have been more wrong, and alarmists will continue to be dead wrong for ages to come. We've never lived so long or so well, and that goes for the entire world. That is, except for those few places that haven't had population explosions, like the Amazon tribes or folks in the middle of New Guinea. Their natural lives still blow like a caveman's.

I can understand the urge to have the place to yourself, to have less people crowding you, but there is just nothing rational about it.


sined
Posted 19 June 2006 at 05:16 pm

A while i go i read something about a guy claiming to be from the future on a couple diffrent popular forums online. He said something would happen in the year 2012 that would kill of 9/10 of the worlds population. I'm betting on the super volcano in yellowstone national park :]


Zubir
Posted 19 June 2006 at 05:24 pm

sined said: "A while i go i read something about a guy claiming to be from the future on a couple diffrent popular forums online. He said something would happen in the year 2012 that would kill of 9/10 of the worlds population. I'm betting on the super volcano in yellowstone national park :]"

According to Mayan (or is it Aztec?) myth, this world will end in the year 2012, supposedly by fire. Hence, what you read.


USNSPARKS
Posted 19 June 2006 at 05:39 pm

I admit I only skimmed over this but I never saw any mention of just who built it and why. If it's on
private property which I would say it is I don't understand how people can want to tear it down. It's not inciting riots or such things. Then again since it mentions "faith" the ACLU will demand it's destruction since they abhor anything having to do with God or religion. It obviously took a certain amount of planning and money. I won't lose any sleep over it even though it can't be all that far from my home in SE TN.


Dido
Posted 19 June 2006 at 06:37 pm

What idiot would sign a petition to knock down a set of rocks that have advice that if followed, would create a paradise? Like that will ever happen. I've noticed how on all websites like this, ones that post interesting stuff, the writers and readers seem to be against religion. I say we unite and create our own religion where we live by common sense!


Orestes
Posted 19 June 2006 at 07:05 pm

Morgan said: "Sorry, this anti-population stuff is so stale. Ehrlich couldn't have been more wrong, and alarmists will continue to be dead wrong for ages to come. We've never lived so long or so well, and that goes for the entire world. That is, except for those few places that haven't had population explosions, like the Amazon tribes or folks in the middle of New Guinea. Their natural lives still blow like a caveman's.

I can understand the urge to have the place to yourself, to have less people crowding you, but there is just nothing rational about it."

o yah cause people in Darfur are just living for ages. i dont agree with the anti-population crap, but to say that the entire world has never lived 'so long or so well' is really an insult


Spike
Posted 19 June 2006 at 08:12 pm

If I were to make a guide to the age of reason it would read something like:

Live well, laugh often, love much, be kind and wear comfortable shoes. Also, pie is nice.


Jason Bellows
Posted 19 June 2006 at 08:18 pm

sined said: "A while i go i read something about a guy claiming to be from the future on a couple diffrent popular forums online. He said something would happen in the year 2012 that would kill of 9/10 of the worlds population. I'm betting on the super volcano in yellowstone national park :]"

You mean this guy?


Arcangel
Posted 19 June 2006 at 10:05 pm

Oh sure Jason, just get Mr. Tutor up and running again. :)


SparkyTWP
Posted 19 June 2006 at 10:08 pm

USNSPARKS said: "I admit I only skimmed over this but I never saw any mention of just who built it and why. If it's on

private property which I would say it is I don't understand how people can want to tear it down. It's not inciting riots or such things. Then again since it mentions "faith" the ACLU will demand it's destruction since they abhor anything having to do with God or religion. It obviously took a certain amount of planning and money. I won't lose any sleep over it even though it can't be all that far from my home in SE TN."

Now you do realize that the ACLU defends people of all religious affiliations and fights for their freedom to worship, right? You also realize that they wouldn't touch it anyway because it wasn't government funded, right?


ballaerina
Posted 20 June 2006 at 05:16 am

"The thought on evading useless officials would mean eradicating ninety percent of the world’s politicians."

Haha. Rimshot.


1c3d0g
Posted 20 June 2006 at 07:01 am

Josh: nope, not at all. Not even a hint of anger. How do I do it? I simply don't care what other people think about me. Sadly, it seems, some people cannot cope with that... ;-)


Josh Harding
Posted 20 June 2006 at 07:19 am

1c3d0g said: "Josh: nope, not at all. Not even a hint of anger. How do I do it? I simply don't care what other people think about me. Sadly, it seems, some people cannot cope with that… ;-)"

Geez, and I was so hoping to scandal you with my scathing remarks. U-vui! Sigh! I guess I will have to go back to whatever it was I was doing before...except I can't remember what that was......


topnotch
Posted 20 June 2006 at 07:53 am

I believe in only 1 commandment.........Thou shalt not rock anybodys area


USNSPARKS
Posted 20 June 2006 at 07:57 am

Now you do realize that the ACLU defends people of all religious affiliations and fights for their freedom to worship, right? You also realize that they wouldn't touch it anyway because it wasn't government funded, right?

I DO realize a few things. Number one is that first sentence is a bald faced lie. Number two is the ACLU is
against everything and anything in this country that relates in any manner to God, religion, the American flag or most of the ideals that this country were formed with. Number three is the fact that they are an extremist leftwing organization. It's truly sad that anyone would believe the things you stated.


just_dave
Posted 20 June 2006 at 08:06 am

Dido said: "What idiot would sign a petition to knock down a set of rocks that have advice that if followed, would create a paradise? Like that will ever happen. I've noticed how on all websites like this, ones that post interesting stuff, the writers and readers seem to be against religion. I say we unite and create our own religion where we live by common sense!"

We follow this advice and we'll create a paradise on earth? Please.

And creating "our own religion"? What would be the object of our worship? These rocks?

I'm not for knocking down the stones (but it'd be interesting to see what a half pound of C4 midway up each of the four vertical stones would do!), but following their advice would be doubly foolish. As they stand, they can give us a glimpse into what sort of horrible world could result if too much power is given to one person or one group.


sulkykid
Posted 20 June 2006 at 08:20 am

Dido said: "What idiot would sign a petition to knock down a set of rocks that have advice that if followed, would create a paradise? Like that will ever happen. I've noticed how on all websites like this, ones that post interesting stuff, the writers and readers seem to be against religion. I say we unite and create our own religion where we live by common sense!"

OK, I agree with just_dave's reply to Dido and I would add that I would expect uncommon sense from my religion.


SparkyTWP
Posted 20 June 2006 at 10:48 am

Did you even read the link I put into the comment?

Because I could make up a bunch of stuff, say it in a angry/condescending manner, and make people think I'm right too. But I didn't. (Hint: This is where you supply information that supports your argument).

BTW, I don't support the ACLU on some positions, but I find it amazing funny that most people I've heard railing against them don't even know what they stand for except for some strawman that Pat Robertson makes up.


Sandra Thurston
Posted 20 June 2006 at 11:16 am

I say: leave the stones alone! They "rock"!

:)


Xiphos
Posted 20 June 2006 at 01:25 pm

just_dave said: "We follow this advice and we'll create a paradise on earth? Please.

And creating "our own religion"? What would be the object of our worship? These rocks?

I'm not for knocking down the stones (but it'd be interesting to see what a half pound of C4 midway up each of the four vertical stones would do!), but following their advice would be doubly foolish. As they stand, they can give us a glimpse into what sort of horrible world could result if too much power is given to one person or one group."

Amen, brutha. Though I'm not for knocking them down either, I do take offense that a person or group of people are arrogant enough to think they know what's best for "humankind" and the world in general. Heck, if I want to have 56.4 children (perish the thought), who is anybody to tell me "no?" Who decides which laws or officials are "petty?" What if I LIKE pie? And what does "in harmony with the infinite" mean, anyway? No - while there are a couple of good points, I don't find much "reason" on these stones.

Again, I'm not for pulling them down - I just don't like the sense of arrogance that that is oozing out of those rocks. I may not agree with everyone in the American government, but at least I had a say in who gets there and makes decisions.


rhea_sun
Posted 20 June 2006 at 05:04 pm

this is just another point of view, it just happens to be be in granite.

it won't be the first and certainly not the last, no reason to tear it down.


sierra_club_sux
Posted 20 June 2006 at 05:12 pm

Vandalism, I tell you...


sierra_club_sux
Posted 20 June 2006 at 05:18 pm

Create your own religion... ...didn't David Koresh try that? There's a monument there as well. Guess it needs torn down too?


Zaphod2016
Posted 20 June 2006 at 06:48 pm

I will admit that a worldwide population of 500,000,000 sounds small to me. Especially considering that these were erected in 1980.

It begs the question: what was R.C. Christian's motive?


Vivendi
Posted 20 June 2006 at 07:35 pm

dday said: "

seems like a waste of perfectly good rock"

ahha that's what I was gonna say.

Any "reason" behind coming up with the 500,000,000 people figure.

"Prize truth—beauty—love—seeking harmony with the infinite." Yes people, let's be reasonable and prize those things inside lies and hate and whatever. What a profound thing to say, on a stone in Georgia no less.

Some guy got big of himself, imo.


blingblang
Posted 21 June 2006 at 10:50 am

I love lamp


Emmy
Posted 22 June 2006 at 01:00 pm

With the population idea, WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON? We're against abortion, but still are working on nuclear weps to blow up the world....? MAKE UP YOUR MINDS ALREADY!!! Do we want a polluted rock ball jam-packed and teeming with hungry mouths? Or do we want a peaceful, rural Earth where everyone is happy, coexisting with nature? There ya have it, my strongly biased, passionately hateful views.

--The preceding comment contains curse words and should not have been viewed by young children.--


sulkykid
Posted 22 June 2006 at 06:28 pm

Emmy said: "With the population idea, WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON? We're against abortion, but still are working on nuclear weps to blow up the world….? MAKE UP YOUR MINDS ALREADY!!! Do we want a polluted rock ball jam-packed and teeming with hungry mouths? Or do we want a peaceful, rural Earth where everyone is happy, coexisting with nature? There ya have it, my strongly biased, passionately hateful views.


–The preceding comment contains curse words and should not have been viewed by young children.–"

1) What's a wep? (Oh, never mind, I figured it out.)
2) Nice idea to put the warning at the end of your comment.
3) I cannot envision "passionately hateful" people coexisting happily.

These "guidestones to reason" sure do inspire a lot of goofiness.


HunterKiller_
Posted 22 June 2006 at 07:45 pm

I don't understand why people care so much, they're just a few slabs of rock, why waste money demolishing it? Some people are really stupid.


sined
Posted 23 June 2006 at 03:39 am

Jason Bellows said: "You mean this guy?"

Yes Yes That guy!! haha how funny is that. I read about him in a myspace group dedicated to the guy.


needles
Posted 23 June 2006 at 09:24 am

Survival of the fittest doesn't happen anymore, because any out of shape, sick, or unhealthy person can be helped with medicines, doctors, etc. and still reproduce. I'm not saying you should take any of these things away, I'm just making a point. Because isn't evolution caused by natural selection?


sulkykid
Posted 23 June 2006 at 11:32 am

needles said: "Survival of the fittest doesn't happen anymore, because any out of shape, sick, or unhealthy person can be helped with medicines, doctors, etc. and still reproduce. I'm not saying you should take any of these things away, I'm just making a point. Because isn't evolution caused by natural selection?"

Of course survival of the fittest still works. The environment has changed, so different traits are now being selected. Size, speed, strength, agression, etc. do not matter as much as they did previously.


sulkykid
Posted 23 June 2006 at 03:04 pm

sulkykid said: "Of course survival of the fittest still works. The environment has changed, so different traits are now being selected. Size, speed, strength, agression, etc. do not matter as much as they did previously."

A-G-G-R-E-S-S-I-O-N I hate spelling mistakes. My own, that is. How agravating.


needles
Posted 24 June 2006 at 12:07 pm

good point


Cappy
Posted 26 June 2006 at 05:15 am

How about we set a date and time and have Arthur C. Clarke show up with a few monkeys to see what would happen?

I kept waiting for someone to look at it this way and was surprised to see that no one did. I guess the real reason for this is that the monolith had no inscriptions on it that anyone could argue over. Maybe this time the monkey sould throw a package starting with a camputer chip. The rest of the package could hold all the world's current knowledge on DVDs and a machnical throwing device to help the money launch it. Heck, it might even contain pie!


paalexan
Posted 29 June 2006 at 09:06 pm

"Despite some glints of good advice, most anyone can quickly spot items that are unpalatable."

Don't confuse "unpalatable" with "unnecessary" or "unwise"...


to-be-betrayed
Posted 29 June 2006 at 09:34 pm

hmmm...surely keeping the population under 500,000,000 would kinda handicap keeping genetic diversity. i mean, wouldnt kepping the diversity require a large gene pool? [although i can see their point in eliminating all the mentally deficient people that seem to be ever growing in our population, e.g. the ones that sit around and giggle, shop, gossip, and watch such shows as big brother *silently mimes disgust*]

anyway, surely in this day and age if we were going to leave and appropriate monument to our society, shouldn't someone think of preserving information? like the laws of physics, how to make a generator, how to make steel, and other useful things? i know that now its seems somewhat doomsday-ish but surely its a good idea to protect against the potential loss of it?


sulkykid
Posted 30 June 2006 at 01:10 pm

to-be-betrayed said: " ... anyway, surely in this day and age if we were going to leave and appropriate monument to our society, shouldn't someone think of preserving information? like the laws of physics, how to make a generator, how to make steel, and other useful things? i know that now its seems somewhat doomsday-ish but surely its a good idea to protect against the potential loss of it?"

Been there: http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=414


njoy_life_2
Posted 08 July 2006 at 08:55 pm

Just a curiosity;

Back in the 60's (?), probably in a scifi magazine, there was a short story about humans finding out the 'end of the world' was fast approaching, and the population was already greatly lessened.

Humans pooled their resources and devoloped a nigh indestructable 'super metal' which they made into huge pillars preserving, as nearly as possible, the totality of human knowledge.

Things as basic as making steel re above, were included, as were many mathmatical formuli (is that right lol?)

Deciding where to place these sites was a problem, but eventually many were scattered thruout the world, one set being put in the Washington state area.

The people finally finished their project and sat back to deal with the rest of their lives in whatever way they saw fit. Of course eventually some revisited the places where the 'forever pillars' were placed.

When the Washington state area was revisited the people were astounded by huge quanity of wildlife that had reestablished itself in that area. Paticularly astonishing were the multitude of sea otters, which had made that area near the sea a playground for their kind.

The group inspected the site, reread the markers, and watched the otters play in the vivid sunset, wistfully sad at the coming 'end' ........ Then went to rest for the night, before going back to one of the few populated areas remaining ....

Upon rising, knowing that they would not come back this way again, one person walked thru a small band of onlooking otters, to connect with the pillar once more. Standing there, in the chill fog of the morning
she glanced over the text again.

Then, like a bolt from the blue, she saw, clearly..Many formula had been xed out, and tiny irregular scratchy marks of numbers and symbols inserted between the lines.

;-) who knows

-Eve


GeeBee
Posted 09 July 2006 at 08:16 pm

"Perhaps the person/group who funded the monument realized the faux pas he/she/they committed in printing some of their advice, because no one has ever stepped forward to claim credit for the work. It was built by the Elberton Granite Finishing Company on public land at the behest of a man known only as “R. C. Christian”. It is that name that is engraved on the explanatory tablet as the author, but it also marked as a PSEUDONYN—which I can only assume means “pseudonym”."

Well the platitudes sound like they came right off a bottle of Dr. Bronner's Soap. His bottle's labels have zillions of similar little sayings printed all over them.
I suspect "R.C'Christian" is Bronner or someone emulating him.


AKALucifer
Posted 11 July 2006 at 11:21 am

Jasonb said: "I have four "viruses", I mean children. Which would you like to kill first? I suggest the infant, as he would probably scream the least.

As for the monument, It doesn’t bother me. Kafka on the other hand, scares me."

He said "reproduce endlessly like viruses" which means something completly different to "I want to kill your children"; sure we shouldn't kill people, but how about trying to control birth rates? One child per person seems a completly sound policy to me as it would very quickly reduce the population. (I assume by half each generation) It would of course have the capitilists and general usurers (by which I mean anyone who makes absorbent profits at the expense of people's quality of life or at the cost of the enviroment. Yes I know it technically means someone who lends money) quaking in their boots as they rely on the population getting bigger and bigger, growing exponentially each and every generation until we all wallow in the toxic sludge of centuries of 'progress'!!!

Yeah this topic makes me...emotional.


PRiME
Posted 14 July 2006 at 03:20 pm

Interesting stuff, most of the messages do imply the demise of allot of the worlds population in a round about way as we know it.

This may very well be a future paradox, with all the problems of today ranging from natural to man-made. You could take your pick at any and feel pretty confident the day will come when it claims its fair share of human population.

The wave can only peak so high until it caves in on itself...


Bash
Posted 15 July 2006 at 07:10 am

I like how The Resistance likes to compare them to the 10 commandments, completely neglecting that there were 613 commandments on the tablets Moses brought to the Hebrews. Even with the just 1st 10 few denominations keep the Sabbath day as the 7th day of the week. Many follow the Roman tradition of celebrating it the 1st day of the week, curiously enough Biblically that was the day of the week to pay tithes. Maybe that shows where many churchs have their focus.


Worm
Posted 13 December 2006 at 09:41 pm

The recommendations seem good to me, although I agree that #1, the most important one, is unrealistic. Might be good for future space colonies, though.

As for the "500 million" figure in #1, no, I don't think it's arbitrary. I'm guessing it's based off a study published some years ago which concluded that 500 million was the number of people which the Earth could sustain indefinitely at a per-capita resource-consumption equal to that of the USA.
No, sorry, I don't remember the name of the study, but I do remember the estimate.

As an aside, I don't think the stones are intended for the present. Someone spent a lot of cash and effort to put them there, and he used granite (which is very hard and resistant) and wrote the message several times in several languages... I'd say those stones are intended as guides for a future post-apocalyptic world.
They're intended to help a recovering civilization in a distant future avoid repeating our mistakes.


ksuwildcatfan
Posted 17 December 2006 at 08:28 pm

Worm said: "The recommendations seem good to me, although I agree that #1, the most important one, is unrealistic. Might be good for future space colonies, though.


As for the "500 million" figure in #1, no, I don't think it's arbitrary. I'm guessing it's based off a study published some years ago which concluded that 500 million was the number of people which the Earth could sustain indefinitely at a per-capita resource-consumption equal to that of the USA.
No, sorry, I don't remember the name of the study, but I do remember the estimate.

As an aside, I don't think the stones are intended for the present. Someone spent a lot of cash and effort to put them there, and he used granite (which is very hard and resistant) and wrote the message several times in several languages… I'd say those stones are intended as guides for a future post-apocalyptic world.
They're intended to help a recovering civilization in a distant future avoid repeating our mistakes."

What a bunch of baloney! This study is obviously very flawed as the earth has supported much more than the equivalent of 500 million Americans for several decades now.


Worm
Posted 26 December 2006 at 08:45 pm

ksuwildcatfan said: "What a bunch of baloney! This study is obviously very flawed as the earth has supported much more than the equivalent of 500 million Americans for several decades now."

Several decades is, however, rather shorter than indefinitely; as far as I can tell the study was not wrong in its conclusion.
At present resources are depleted at a pace so that the UN estimates a second Earth is needed just to maintain status quo. If everyone alive on Earth today used as much resources as an american, you'd need 9.5 additional Earths for it to be sustainable.
However, we only have one Earth, and at present resources - wood, ore, oil, water... - are depleted much faster than it is regenerated.

Improved technology and resource distribution would help a lot, but it is not possible to both give 7 billion people west-style living standards AND stay within the Earths "resource budget". The Earth is, quite simply, overpopulated.

Cf e.g.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_footprint

http://www.footprintnetwork.org/gfn_sub.php?content=overshoot


AntEconomist
Posted 26 December 2006 at 08:54 pm

Worm said: "Improved technology and resource distribution would help a lot, but it is not possible to both give 7 billion people west-style living standards AND stay within the Earths "resource budget". The Earth is, quite simply, overpopulated."

What you mean is, "the Earth is overpopulated by western standards." World per-capita GDP is circa US$10,000. That average is significantly greater than the median world per-capita GDP (circa US$6,000). Hence, if world income were redistributed (ignoring for the moment the massive reduction in productivity incentives that would result) most of the world would be better off.

By non-western standards, there is plenty of room for more people.


JoJo
Posted 24 January 2007 at 01:55 am

If what is written on them is what offends, why doesn't someone get a movement started to simply have the words removed? The slabs look rather attractive.


shillen
Posted 05 January 2008 at 11:31 am

Why do you all wonder how to decimate the world population? Nothing is easier than that. Find a secret lab, instruct a team of cute scientists to create a virus like AIDS, expose it in a poor country where teaching the people about its hazards is very difficult.
The alexipharmic should be "unknown" and only available for the elite of course.

It is only a guess.
BTW: Since when do we know AIDS? When are the Guidestones built?


urhanne
Posted 07 January 2008 at 11:22 am

In a few years time you will probably know what made someone erect this reminder of simple & human thoughts. Thoughts that has to friction against other thoughts to mature. Then we will wonder if it ever will be 500 000 000 in our lifetime.


RayNAustin
Posted 09 February 2008 at 03:53 pm

The number of dreadfully naive people who just don't grasp the implications of this, and the other Elitist propaganda is mind numbing.

So Worm and others, you think that reducing the population to 5,00,000,000 is a good idea aye? So which of you enlightened ones are going to volunteer to join the other 4.5 Billion viruses on their way to the gallows? Hmmm? Oh, you THINK you are going to be one of the 10% allowed to stick around, huh? What makes you think you are going to be one of the anointed ones? And at the rate of only 1 out of every 10 surviving this needed change, I suppose it will be alright by you that your entire family and friends are summarily dispatched, all for the sake of mother earth?

What a disgrace. First, there is no problem with population. 90% of the planet in unpopulated. The vastness of unpopulated regions of the earth are immense. As for environmental damage, the vast majority of it is being committed not by the average virus...err I mean Joe, but by mega corporations that massively pollute the air and water and land with their consolidated enterprises which have replaced traditional manufacturing and farming practices which operated quite well and in harmony with mother. The purposeful dependence on oil for energy has been maintained by those mega oil corporations to keep their energy monopoly, at the expense of alternative energy which they've successfully killed time and again. And this entire "man made" global warming scam is just that...another lie set up to increase energy prices and taxes. The earth has for thousands of years had cycles of warming and cooling, based on solar activity and not chevy suburbans. We see today a similar warming on Mars, and other planets and their satellites throughout the solar system.....are those little green men on mars driving too many SUV's too? Get informed, and stop letting the TV tell you what to think and believe.

The bottom line here is that the international "Elitists" who run this planet are in constant fear that the masses (like you) are going to wake up one day, revolt, and put an end to their rule (though it seems their fear is unfounded from the looks of things). That's why they want to reduce the population by 90%. Why 90%...because the remaining 10% would be much easier to control, and pose much less of a risk. And, that 10% is an adequate number by their estimates needed to properly serve them, else they might have to do an honest day's work themselves and get their own hands dirty, Satan forbid. And finally, what good is it to be a maniacal egocentric elite ruler if there is no one to actually rule? So yes dear viruses, you do have purpose.

Read my lips. You are not a virus. You are a human being. Perhaps a dreadfully ignorant one, but still a human being. CO2 is not a bad thing.....it is the "oxygen" for which ALL plant life requires to survive. When plants are most prosperous and prevalent (during periods of high CO2 and global warming), human populations thrive. That directly challenges the elitist's depopulation agenda (read: sustainable development) which is why we are being bombarded with the fear of global warming and impending doom. They are literally trying to convince us to willingly finance and enthusiastically participate in our own destruction. AND HOW STUPID ARE WE? We're doing it. That's how stupid we are.

Time to wake up, and use your head for something other than a hat rack.


RayNAustin
Posted 09 February 2008 at 04:26 pm

And one more thing....don't tell me about the UN studies and how all of the great scientists have universally agreed with the cause and dangers of global warming. Those claims are patently false. It's junk science commissioned by the UN, and filtered....i.e. only those who agree are allowed to participate in the studies (read: receive grant money).

The earth has 100,000 years of recorded history trapped in polar ice samples which have been analyzed, telling us definitively that global warming is a cyclic and natural occurrence. In fact, today's CO2 levels are actually lower than they have been many times in the past. And the studies of the sun and surrounding planets that are also experiencing similar global warming trends prove this to be absolutely caused by the sun, while proving that the "man made" claim is not just an error or difference of opinion, but a total fraud without a shred of actual science supporting it. But like everything else, a lie told often enough ultimately becomes the truth.

It's the sun that causes global warming (98%) with man, and animal causing 2% of it. In other words, eliminating man altogether would not effect global warming one iota. But there is money to be made in buying and selling those carbon offset credits, the increase in energy prices, and the global taxes for environmental protection. And they fully intend to see to it that each and every one of you viruses pay your fair share for the damage you cause to the environment with your money, or your life, and ultimately, both.

Resistance is futile. Comply with your master's wishes, because it's all for your own good. Don't question it, just comply.


Inkdipt
Posted 11 February 2008 at 03:08 am

Seriously? Is this what we as a society want to leave for someone 4,000 years from now to read? It is inevitable for any society to look back and question the intelligence of the past generation, but why would we want to say something like this to them. So why fall into the rut of trying to offer a word of advice to the future and instead give them a hell of a recipe for say, the best damn chocolate chip cookies they would ever have. At least then we would be giving them something good and useful at any stage of human existence.


shillen
Posted 17 February 2008 at 06:49 am

The thing is that a small group of people (a kind of higher race) places itself a memorial for the future. A future where 1.000 people (the master race) can live on the fat of the land and another 499.000 people (slave race) have to live under total control. The climate hoax and the fairy tale about 9-11 are just the means to the end. Who cares about 3000 dead people whenkilling them eases the way of reaching the target carved in guide stones?
If I had the possibility, I'd blow the guidestones up.
When will mankind wake up?


Mirage_GSM
Posted 11 July 2008 at 08:21 am

sulkykid said: "A-G-G-R-E-S-S-I-O-N I hate spelling mistakes. My own, that is. How agravating."

Not to mention A-G-G-R-A-V-A-T-I-N-G...

Anyway... @RayNAustin:
It is true that the earth has been considerably warmer in the past than it is today. Core drills in the polar ice (which go back as far as 600.000 years by the way) are not the best evidence for that, because more than 600.000 years ago (and for a quite long time before that) the poles were free of ice, so evidence for the warmer periods cannot be found in ice. There is however other evidence - geological and fosil - to prove that the temperatures we have today are about as cold as the earth gets. The "small" ice age we had about 10.000 years back was just a negative extreme on a larger amplitude.
However there is a proven connection between the concentration of CO2 and other so-called greenhouse gases and the average global temperatures: Periods of warm climate were always associated with high CO2 levels in the atmosphere. For details see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoclimatology#Phanerozoic_Climate
Since humans started burning fossil fuels there has been a measurable increase in the atmospheric CO2 levels:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_the_Earth%27s_atmosphere
So I think two facts are undisputed today:
1. Higher CO2 levels in the atmosphere cause on average higher temperatures
2. Humans have caused higher CO2 levels in the atmosphere.
I don't want to dismiss the possibility that the sun's activity may account for part of it, but the correleation between CO2-levels and temperature is quite good, so the influence is probably a minor one.
So just how much anthropogenic warming are we talking here? Probably nothing the earth hasn't seen before. Certainly not the temperatures "we" had in the Precambrian. So why the excitement? It's been that warm before and the earth didn't mind much.
Well, the earth probably won't mind much today either. Sure a few species might go extinct, but that was always the way it was.
The problem is - will we mind? I do not believe in Al Gore's horror szenarios of great floods etc, but even a small rise in the sea levels can make life in coastal regions very inconvenient. Not so much in cities like New York but in countries like Myanmar.
People in North America and Europe will probably not feel the changes as much as people in africa who have enough trouble growing the food for their family to begin with.
That said, I also think many of the CO2 offsets are modernday indulgences. There are other way to do something and most of them - like having a fuel efficient car and conserving energy - have tangible financial benefits as well.
No, CO2 is not poisonous. It is a necessary ingredient of our atmosphere.
We just have to realize that unlike oxygen it has some side-effects that we have to know about.


shillen
Posted 01 August 2008 at 09:47 am

It is not that
Higher CO2 levels in the atmosphere cause an average higher temperatures
but:
An average higher temperatures causes higher CO2 levels in the atmosphere!
That is a small but important difference!
The part of CO2 in the atmosphere is 0,03%. Further its known that the human made part of it is 0,5 (the rest comes from volcanos, oceanc, etc.)
If we reduce our CO2-exhaust by 20% it is the effect of 0,00003% in the Atmosphere. Wow, we can change the world! You have to be silly to follow Al Gores Explanations. It's only to treat the sheep for money!
The politicians are not capable to satisfy hunger or to guarantee fpr peace on earth BUT THEY CHANGE THE COMPOSTITION OF OUR ATMOSPHERE! har har har......
What Lightheads are they?
And what stupid sheep are the people to vote them?


modeerf2
Posted 10 October 2008 at 09:00 am

The "TOTAL SUM" of these "TEN COMMANDMENTS = SLAVERY.
It looks like most "Blogging" are advocating Hell on Earth, not paradise…all of you have opinions and are expressing them freely…think of what it is going to be like; when you are forced into SILENCE…if you think the population should be cut, then volunteer…
Those of you paying homage to these stones, will indeed get to see, first hand, what it feels like to surrender your life to some diabolical leader. To be tortured, if you step out of line. But then again, you all will probably enjoy it, even more accurately, you will DESERVE it! Enjoy the "New World Order", because we're already pretty far down in the "rabbit hole". If you don't know what the New World Order is…then start researching. Read "Agenda 21, Sustainable Goals." The "Project for a New American Century," and other documents our Elite have been advocating…then tell me if that's the kind of world you really want for yourself, or your children…Don't be sheep, don't be decieved! Wake up!


jcmoscon
Posted 12 December 2008 at 05:22 pm

And somebody just went there and completely VANDALIZED it!!!
yeahhh!!!
see some pictures here:
http://exatanews.blogspot.com/2008/12/georgia-guide-stones-vandalized.html


ceecee8888
Posted 18 August 2009 at 04:20 pm

Sorry jasonb but having four kids means you are contributing to overpopulation and the environmental degradation and poverty that results from it. If everyone had four kids like you, the pollution and poverty in the world would be worse than it already is. It isn't so much that we should kill your kids - rather we should make birth control appealing to people like you so you won't have 4 in the first place. Scientists agree that a sustainable number for the world's population is one third what it is now. At most, everyone should only be having 2 kids. Compare the quality of life in Bangladesh to the quality of life in Canada. It's worse in Bangladesh, to a large degree because of the scourge of overpopulation, which is contributed to by overly defensive people like you.


dragondm6
Posted 21 August 2009 at 02:50 pm

Erecting monuments like this are important for future civilizations to find. For instance, it was a GREAT idea to put multiple languages on there. If future civilizations do find it, they can use it much like we used the Rosetta Stone. The fact that you can look through the hole and see the north star points out that we have some knowledge of engineering (although they will probably understand that when they find our cities). However, if people don't like what it says, you don't have to knock it down, just sand off the words, and etch new ones on there that make more sense.


logic-us
Posted 12 June 2011 at 12:04 pm

We are like the cancer on this planet. Every ten years our population doubles. Not enought money, food or jobs. Gas will continue to rise because we as a nation consume so much of it on just an everyday basis. The more people, the less of everything ( food, gas, clean water, jobs .....ect,...ect,...ect)
The more people that there are the more waste (trash, human waste) we have to figure where to put it. More people, more pollution. More consumption of products. More wellfare, more taxes, more drugs and abortions and drunks and more killings.
Long lines at airports, gas stations, food stores, restaurants, beaches, malls, schools, movie theaters, parks, and on the highways.

We are already 10 times over the population we should be at to keep a balance with nature and our Ecomony.
What do you think it will be like in 10 years when 436,000,000 people in the U.S turns into 800,000,000??? Then what?
It will just continue to get worse, unless we act soon.
I think the GuidStones make a great point. People are just so stuck on what they think to listen to any real "Reason". They make excuses for what ever suits their situation.


END OF COMMENTS
(New comments disabled on retired articles)