email - July 2004
by Do-While Jones

Ica Stone Reaction

Subject: Ica Stones
From: Peter
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 17:52:11 -0400

Mr. Jones,

I love your site and normally find your arguments against the 'science' of evolution to be ingenious; though I personally have nothing but doubt about any 'creation', literall [sic] or metaphorical. Allow me to offer the following advice concerning the Ica Stones. They are obvious fakes. The fakers have admitted their faking. This matter has been looked into by archaelogist [sic] Neil Steede and documented in the video 'Juraissac [sic] Art', which is available at Of course fakers need models for their fakes. These models exist and South American Museums keep them in their basements because of their embarrassing similarity to the Ica Stones. The stones in question depict scenes in the artistic motifs of ancient Sumer, and are controversial for that reason. There are no dinosaurs. Steede also debunks the 'Acambaro Figurines' of Mexico which show interaction between humans and dinosaurs. You should get the film and consider this evidence. I'm certain you will change your mind. Maybe you could show it at your one of your fourth Tuesday videos?


The main quarrel we have with Peter is the word “obvious”. That is the one word that makes this email worth discussing.

Most $50 bills are real, but there are undoubtedly some counterfeits in circulation. Most of the dinosaur tracks that were cut from the Paluxy River are genuine, but certain people have admitted carving fake ones and selling them to gullible tourists.

No doubt there are some fake Ica Stones, and some of those fakes might show dinosaurs. (More of the fakes probably show lewd acts because they have more consumer appeal.) But we find it hard to believe that all of the thousands of stones that depict dinosaurs or pornographic themes are fake. There are just so many of them.

Furthermore, nobody makes fake $25 bills because there aren’t any real ones. Hucksters don’t try to sell dinosaur tracks supposedly cut from the Mississippi River because there aren’t any known dinosaur tracks in the Mississippi River. Fakes depend upon the existence of genuine articles to make them valuable. They must resemble the genuine article closely enough to pass as real. If there weren’t any real Ica Stones with dinosaurs and pornographic situations on them, nobody would make fake ones like them.

But let’s get back to the word, “obviously.” What would make the stones obviously fake? If the lines cut in the stones had no signs of erosion, no oxidation, or no accumulation of “desert varnish” or lichen, then they could be said to be obvious fakes. Many people would immediately recognize them as fakes. But, apparently, some of the dinosaur stones do not have any of these obvious signs. If they are fakes, then they are very good fakes, not obvious ones.

The stones in question were apparently so convincing to Peruvian authorities, that the police were called in to investigate the illegal sale of antiquities. The people who sold them did tell the police that they were fakes (or perhaps, “museum quality replicas” ). They may have been telling the truth; or they may have been telling a lie to avoid spending the rest of their lives in a Peruvian prison. If you found some genuine artifacts, sold them, and were arrested for selling them, would you tell the police they were real?

The Treasury Department does not keep real $50 bills hidden in the basement because of their embarrassing similarity to counterfeit $50 bills. It seems strange the South American museums would keep genuine artifacts hidden in the basement away from public view because they look so much like fake Ica Stones. It seems more likely that they would display the real and the fake side-by-side, showing the “obvious” differences. Nor do museums keep Venus de Milo, David, and other such statues, away from public view because some people are offended by nudity.

Here is the point: The only reason one would say they are “obvious fakes” is because they have dinosaurs on them, and the theory of evolution says that dinosaurs died out millions of years before man evolved. So, belief in the erroneous theory of evolution contaminates archeological analysis of artifacts, potentially leading to incorrect conclusions.

We don’t know how the Egyptians (or Incas) could have built those huge pyramids. They just didn’t have the technology. So, by the same reasoning, those pyramids are “obvious fakes”, built with modern technology to fool tourists.

Quick links to
Science Against Evolution
Home Page
Back issues of
(our newsletter)
Web Site
of the Month
Topical Index