Human civilization, according to the history books, first began in Mesopotamia around 3500 BC. Acknowledged as the prototype for all subsequent civilizations, a fully-fledged society with cities, roads, monumental architecture, schools, courts, writing, and a bureaucracy to control everything, emerged without trace in ancient Sumer, modern Iraq. Why the original blueprint spontaneously generated in a rainless desert, where agricultural land had to be created by draining swamps and building artificial canals, and where stone, metal, and timber had to be transported from elsewhere, is not explained. It just happened that way. All the same, the cuneiform records of ancient Sumer ascribe an entirely different time frame to the advent of civilization, which is also corroborated in the chronicles of ancient Egypt, Greece, India, and in diverse global traditions. As far as the ancients were concerned, their societies were legacies of cultures that had existed for thousands, even hundreds of thousands of years. Citing lack of physical evidence, modern academics, across many disciplines, dismiss this notion as absurd. Who judges what constitutes physical evidence? The same academics. Universally recognized as the archeological method, the detailed empirical examination of monuments and artifacts allows researchers to draw reasoned conclusions and develop coherent theories about ancient societies. But is archeology art or science? Or is it something else? If it is art, then archeology is free from doctrine, creed, standard model or presupposition. Archeologists may interpret the data however they see fit. If it is science, then archeology is subject to principles of reasoning grounded in the scientific paradigm of the day. Archeologists must propose hypotheses to explain the evidence, and test these hypotheses via predictions which can be derived from them. Since the 1960s, this debate has raged long and hard in archeological circles, and the “scientists” are winning. But what does it matter how archeology is classified? For archeologists, the answer lies in selfperception. For the evidence, process, reasoning, and bounds deemed appropriate to archeology precede the selected investigations that reveal what archaeologists believe they are doing. So long as the emphasis on archeology’s scientific aspects produces testable hypotheses, then the subjective or “artistic” element is significantly reduced, if not totally excluded, and archeology aligns with mainstream science to become authoritative. At stake is our picture of the past. For example, an “artistic” archeologist, whose prognosis might incorporate influences from local folklore and ethnic tradition, would be less inclined to delineate human history as a gradual process of technological development than an archeologist who observes “scientific” methodology. And riding most of all on this scholarly impasse is a genuine account of the prehistoric past. Listed below are examples of ancient monuments and artifacts where, on the face of it, modern archeologists sacrifice common sense in favor of “scientifically correct,” but nonetheless irrational, hypotheses to satisfy a pre-existing template. In the famous words of Arthur Conan Doyle, however, “Once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, is the truth.” The reader can decide. Commentary is brief, and reference links are provided.
1. THE GREAT PYRAMID Accurately located at the earth’s geodesic center point, the Great Pyramid of Giza’s architecture, interior stone masonry, mathematical imprint, and the technological capability implicit in its construction cannot be traced to Egyptian pyramids deemed to predate it. Indeed nothing about the schematic of the Great Pyramid bears the hallmark of a society from the third millennium BC. Yet archeologists and Egyptologists consistently promote 2550 BC as its construction date. Why the next generation of Egyptian architects failed to inherit the knowledge and expertise of the builders of the Great Pyramid is not clarified. But as any tourist can testify, only crude pyramids, primitive in comparison, were subsequently produced, which have long since fallen into disrepair. Such a precipitous escalation and evaporation of technology is both implausible and without precedent. And even if the technology was suddenly and inexplicably lost, then whose technology was it in the first place?
Userkaf
Great Pyramid
Estimated date 2500 BC
Unas
Estimated date 2550 BC
Inside the King’s Chamber
Khaba Pyramid
Estimated date 2375 BC
Estimated date 2640BC
The King’s chamber, located within the Great Pyramid, forms a perfect rectangle, with a floor consisting of 15 granite paving stones, walls composed of 100 granite blocks each weighing 70 tons or more, and with a ceiling spanned by 9 granite blocks, approximately 50 tons each. Supposedly using only primitive tools, raw granite was chiseled with a degree of precision unattainable today, dragged many miles overland to the site, elevated 150 feet above ground, and maneuvered into position with seamless accuracy.
Sources: http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Egyptian_pyramids.htm http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1WvmB4f3Xg Graham Hancock, Fingerprint of the Gods, Three Rivers Press, 1995
2. AGE OF THE SPHINX The Sphinx was purportedly built by Pharaoh Khafre (the alleged author of the Giza complex) 4500 years ago, but its carved limestone base demonstrates water erosion incompatible with that date. From extant records, scholars know the body of the Sphinx has been under sand for approximately 4000 years of its history. Is the Sphinx truly a vestige of Dynastic Egypt? As the size of the head is disproportionate to the rest of leonine body, and as carving marks are visible on the face, the relatively small Pharaonic head appears to be a later modification of the larger original head.
Fissues caused by rain erosion on the carved base of the Sphinx are obvious. The period when heavy rainfall occurred in Egypt ended approximately 10,000 years ago.
Ninetenth century photograph showing the Sphinx under sand
Sources: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TsofKUDXds4 http://www.davidpbillington.net/sphinx4.html John Anthony West, Serpent in the Sky, Quest Books, 1993 Robert M. Schoch, Pyramid Quest, Penguin, 2005
3. THE YONAGUNI MONUMENT Discovered by divers in the 1980s, the Yonaguni monument is an underwater rock formation off the coast of Japan consisting of vertical walls, promontories, terraces, straight lines and right angles reminiscent of ancient monuments found in South America. The location of the monument is understood to have been above sea level between 9,000 to 10,000 years ago. Nevertheless, western academic authorities (who have not dived at the site) insist the structures are the result of natural processes, are therefore not artificial, and that no further investigation of them is warranted.
Sources: Graham Hancock, Underworld: The Mysterious Origins of Civilization, Three Rivers Press, 2002 Patrick D. Nunn, Vanished Islands and Hidden Continents of the Pacific, University of Hawaii Press, 2008 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q14Ks5i15xI&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRc_yYo6VPc&NR=1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPCq3yo4SLc&NR=1
4. VITRIFIED FORTS Vitfried stone (mostly granite and basalt) hill forts are a worldwide phenomena, but the vast majority are located in Scotland. Vitrification (liquefying into glass) occurs when stone is subjected to temperatures of over 1000 degrees centigrade. Archeologists claim that the vitrification of the forts was a premeditated act by their respective occupants, but have not explained why. Nor have they identified the process or circumstance that would cause granite to melt. Heat was not applied from below the stone blocks, as the earth has no traces of fire. Nor was it applied at the side, as the outer facings have generally retained their original form. Nor was a furnace lit on top of the blocks, as heat radiates in every direction. Downward colored streaks in the vitrified stone indicate that concentrated heat was directed from a vertical or elevated source. Observed at some sites, small bubbles made by trapped escaping gas suggest the vitrification process was as rapid as it was intense.
Tap O’North, Aberdeenshire, Scotland
Knockfarrel Fort, Rosshire, Scotland
Vitrifed Stone, Knockfallen Fort, Scotland
Vitrifed Stones, Knockfallen Fort, Scotland. If not melted by defenders of the forts, then the stones were melted by attackers, who possessed the corresponding knowhow. Hill forts are usually dated between 300 BC and 900 AD, albeit on formerly prehistoric sites. But who developed laser technology?
Sources: Sheep Hill Fort, Scotland: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-sAnIIhuGQ Dunideer, Scotland: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6Ju6eNjxlU For ongoing research into vitrified forts in Britain: http://www.brigantesnation.com/Home.htm
5. WALLS OF CUZCO 11,500 feet above sea level, Cuzco is the site of the Inca capital in Peru. Spanish conquerors dismantled many edifices for their masonry, but some proved impossible. Tourists know them as “jigsaw puzzle� walls. Polygonal stones of great size and odd shapes that are fitted together with astonishing precision and without mortar. No hammer marks, grooves, or ridges are to be seen. Many stones are 15 feet high, and from 10 to 14 feet in width and thickness. One colossal boulder is twenty seven feet high, and weighs over 300 tons. Studies have shown that the stone was quarried miles away, and transported over mountains, valleys, gorges, and rivers. So whose handiwork is it? The Inca had no iron or steel, no oxen or carts, no ropes or pulleys, and no level roads existed. The texts books are non-commital. But one thing is certain. Whoever was responsible had the technology not only to excavate and convey, but to soften, mold, elevate, and reset the stones, which implies knowledge of structural principles far beyond the range of modern architects.
Images of Sacsayhuaman, Cuzco, Peru
Sources: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AuNNi4ughZA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goWllkLpY_s&feature=related http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacsayhuamรกn.htm Zecharia Sitchin: The Lost Realms, Harper Collins, 2007
6. NAZCA LINES The Nazca Lines are a series of stylized geoglyphs made on a high, arid plateau in the Nazca Desert in southern Peru, stretching for more than 50 miles. The largest figures are over 650 feet wide and can only been seen from a high altitude. Some are geometric designs that cover several square miles. Made by removing reddish brown pebbles to reveal light-colored earth beneath, archeologists believe the Nazca Lines are a product of the indigenous Nazca culture, sometime between 400 and 650 AD, and are credited with an unspecified religious purpose. Oddly enough, the figures are designed as single line drawings, with the start and finish points unconnected. Absent any logical explanation, and since manual drawings are not composed this way, a mechanical component is implicit in their creation. Adding fuel to this argument, some of the lines are perfectly straight and run as long as 15 miles. But most incomprehensible of all are the evidently artificial mountain plateaux on which most lines are drawn.
Nazca Glyph Designs
Spider Glyph
Monkey Glyph
No “scientific� explanation for the flattened mountain tops has been given. But if natural geological forces were not responsible, then how was it accomplished?
Leveled mountain top.
Some of the line formations resemble landing strips. Unable to explain the geometry, archeologists maintain that natives made the lines to please the gods. Local legend suggests the gods made the lines to please themselves.
Sources: http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazca_Lines.htm http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRNNjbBCGMI http://nazcamystery.com/palpa_valley.htm
7. OLMEC HEADS Unearthed in Mexico, huge basalt carved heads, ranging from 5-11 feet high and weighing up to 50 tons, have been dated to the Mesoamerican Olmec culture, 1400 BC - 400 BC. As stone cannot be carbon-dated, the age of the heads is estimated based on their archeological “context.” In other words, from carbon-dating charcoal remains found nearby, and attributing the same results to the stones. Each head depicts a unique individual with facial characteristics alien to the region, and wears a distinct protective helmet in the style of a miner. To date, seventeen of these cold, expressionless faces have been discovered, but their identities are a mystery. Archeologists believe the heads represent unknown Olmec “kings,” and attribute their obviously African appearance to chance - creative stylization. So not only are they anonymous, these hefty, thickset “foreigners” are depicted as a race apart.
Each helmet has unique, and undecipherable, symbols that presumably identify its wearer
Distance to the nearest basalt quarry is 100 miles, and no evidence of the transportation method exists. As the area is without iron or copper, no metal tools were used to carve the features. A theory that stone harder than basalt was used to carve the heads is unworkable in reality. But if the locals did not have the technology to produce them, then perhaps the “foreigners” did. But for what purpose? Were the giant stone heads intended to impress the natives, or intimidate them? The origin, and sudden disappearance of the Olmec “kings,” is as mysterious to scholars as the stone heads themselves.
Did the “Olmec kings” come from West Africa? Miners from the Gold Coast?
Numerous sculptures depict “Olmec kings,” sometimes holding a child, emerging from, or sitting at entrances to tunnels into the ground. Generally accepted as “altars,” connected with rituals of infant sacrifice, the impression of the “Olmec king” is nonetheless one of a guardian to what is effectively a mine or underground repository of some sort. Were the “Olmec kings” digging for gold and precious minerals? Resented by locals forced into slave labor? Evidence on several stone heads, and on other sculptures, indicates subsequent attempts were made to deface or destroy them.
Stone carvings show “Olmec kings” emerging from tunnels into the ground. Why?
Sources: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEjU5apUInk&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7vfP4tBDf8&feature=related Zecharia Sitchin: The Lost Realms, Harper Collins, 2007
8. ADAM’S BRIDGE Adam's Bridge (also known as Rama's Bridge), is a 18 mile long chain of coral reefs, limestone shoals, and sandbanks between the southeastern coast of India and the northwestern coast of Sri Lanka, which was reportedly passable on foot until it broke in a cyclone during the fifteenth century. The bridge is first mentioned in the ancient Indian epic Ramayana, which most scholars think was written between 400 BC and 100 BC, compiled from earlier oral traditions. According to the Ramayana, the bridge was built by the Vanara, a race of amphibious ape-men, on the instructions of Lord Rama. In 2003, a series of photographs relased by NASA provoked a storm of controversy that still continues. Satellite images clearly show a bridge, with almost perfect curvature, connecting India and Sri Lanka. Geological opinion is sharply divided on whether such a natural formation is even possible. In a case related to a controversial Indian government canal project, the Madras High Court issued a verdict that the bridge was a man-made structure, based on evidence of archeological finds which included Mesolithic-Microlithic tools and human fossils dated between 7000 BC and 2000 BC. Meanwhile, the government sponsored Archeological Survey of India stated that the structure is not man-made. Radiocarbon dating tests on the age of coral samples, conducted by the Geological Survey of India (GSI), conclude that the bridge is a natural phenomenon that was exposed sometime between 16,000 and 5,000 BC. However, a former director of the Geological Survey of India claims that such a natural formation is
impossible because a layer of loose sand exists underneath corals for the entire stretch. Corals normally form above rocks. A 2007 publication of the National Remote Sensing Agency said that the structure "may be man-made," contradicting the both the GSI and the Archeological Survey of India.
Aerial view of Adam’s Bridge. India is bottom left, Sri Lanka top right.
Could the bridge be artificial, and not man made? Until scholars can provide an alternative and convincing explanation for the bridge’s existence, then the Ramayana’s version cannot be dismissed. The mysterious “Vanara,” may or may not be the “missing link,” or the inspiration behind Planet of the Apes, but as myriad statues and images of Hanuman, leader of the Vanara, testify, millions of Hindus take their existence for granted. Despite its heavily stylized language, does the Ramayana shed light on a genuine historical event?
Landsat 5 image of the bridge
Landsat 7 image of the bridge
Hanuman and the Vanara build the bridge to Sri Lanka
Typical representations of Hanuman
Sources: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwwoeZrm22I http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam's_Bridge.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanara Hindu Campaign to save the bridge: http://www.ramsethu.org
9. GIANT STONE SPHERES Originally assumed to exist only in Costa Rica (right), giant stone spheres have now been located on all continents. As yet, scholars have not identified the creators of the stones, nor offered any feasible explanations for their method of construction, their purpose, or their widespread distribution. Nothing indicates that the spheres were produced manually, and the shape of the stones cannot be the result of slow “concretions” of carbonate or other compounds, as has been suggested, since the forces that formed them were spherically symmetric. Given enough time, gravitational pull or frictional movement might produce stone “domes,” but not orbs, not in some of the locations where spheres are discovered, and not in clusters of the same size.
Road-builders in China have unearthed numerous stone spheres of various sizes. One location in Hunan Province is reputedly known as “stone egg mountain.”
New Zealand
One of many stone spheres in Bosnia.
Spain
Mexico
France
Many stone spheres have been found elevated on plinths. Did ancient societes associated them with divinities?
Evidence that some stone spheres have hollow interiors
New Zealand. How did this stone sphere get there?
Numerous crater fields in the Palpa Valley, Peru, appear to be the result of aerial bombardment. Did giant stone spheres “fall from heaven� as local myths recount?
Strangely enough, the surface of Mars is also dotted with stone spheres of unknown origin and of different sizes. Some Martian crater fields appear a direct result of bombardment by these large stone spheres. Could there be a connection between the giant stone spheres of Mars and those of Earth?
Sources: Central America: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJQcHXuVNPI Bosnia: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbMWp5ymbHg New Zealand: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BRIqdR386Q http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stone_spheres_of_Costa_Rica.htm http://nd.water.usgs.gov/lewisandclark/photos2.htm-=889090For the spheres on Mars: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOHrsN8jjx4 http://www.viewzone.com/mars3.html
10. EGYPTIAN ANACHRONISMS Discovered in a First Dynasty tomb at Saqqara, Egypt, and dated 3000 BC, the so-called “Schist disc” defies explanation by conventional theory, which insists the wheel was first introduced into Egypt in the second millennium BC. As schist is a brittle stone, and thus unsuited to sculpture, the creation of this disc required an extraordinary level of patience and craftsmanship, though its actual purpose remains elusive. One rationalization for the disc’s arduously produced metallic appearance is that it was copied to resemble an earlier metallic original.
On display at the Cairo Museum, the schist disc is 2 feet in diameter.
Granite vases, plates, bowls, and other items dated by archeologists to the pre-dynastic era, the earliest recognized period of ancient Egypt, can be seen in the Cairo museum and in other museums around the world. Many of these items exhibit perfect symmetry, perfect angles, flawless surfaces and precision cuts, which can only be manufactured today with advanced lathe technology, if at all. Some granite vases are fashioned and hollowed out in ways that require an absolutely perfect equilibrium, and categorically allow for no error in the wall thickness - effects that cannot be reproduced by modern machinery. Stoneware of this caliber and craftsmanship, which is not found in any later era of Egyptian history, is decidedly anachronistic. Most items were discovered at Giza and nearby Saqqara, but are dated earlier than the Giza complex solely because names of pre-dynastic kings have been crudely scratched on them. Still, as the Great Pyramid builders and the granite potters both knew how to manipulate granite, surely both belonged to the same, so far unacknowledged, historical era.
Due to its faultlessly symmetrical wall thickness, this vase balances perfectly on a tiny rounded base. Such is the density of granite; it would otherwise lean or fall over. Machinists can reproduce this vase, but not in granite.
The primitive skills used to scratch the name betray it as a later addition
Inscribed granite bowl scratched with a name from a much later era - Hotep, first king of the Second Pharaonic Dynasty
Depicted on stone reliefs in the Hathor Temple at the Dendera Temple complex, are two sculptures often referred to as the “Dendera Lights” because they evoke modern electrical lighting or even drilling systems. Egyptologists interpret them as archetypal images from Egyptian mythology.
Twin “Dendera Lights”
Single “Dendera Light”
Although a light source was needed to carve the sealed chamber walls at Dendera, no traces of soot exist. Archeologists suggest that copper plates were used as reflective mirrors, but this method produces insufficient light. Copper-topped poles, mentioned in texts at Dendera, are believed to refer to unspecified “magical” practices. But copper is an excellent conductor of electricity, and how else but “magic” would priestly scribes label electric power?
Sources: http://www.s8int.com/shistdisc.html Modern machinist on Egyptian granite pottery: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUpkrkU1BfY For an excellent summary of ancient Egyptian stone technology: http://www.theglobaleducationproject.org/egypt/articles/stonetech.php Dendera Lights: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTwjW-ofOCY&feature=related http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dendera_light.htm
11. THE UNDERGROUND CITIES OF CAPPADOCIA One of the world’s greatest archeological enigmas is probably one that receives the least attention from archeologists - a network of over 200 underground multi-storied cities, discovered in Central Anatolia, Turkey, the ancient region of Cappadocia. Most were discovered since the 1960s, and many more underground cities are believed to exist. A few have been partly opened to the public. The largest, Derinkuyu, is one of five inter-connected underground complexes with a total estimated capacity of 100,000 people. Derinkuyu has 18 storeys ( 8 are accessible to the public), is 85 meters deep, with fresh flowing water, ventilation shafts, individually separated living quarters, communal rooms, schools, hospitals, wells, warehouses, wine presses, tombs, and even bars. Water was supplied by an underground river, and the complex was air conditioned throughout - 52 air shafts have been discovered so far - a fact that astonishes present day engineers. Entry into the cities is through small openings covered by massive stone circular doors. Some entrances are above ground, situated in Troglodytes or “fairy needles”, unique geological formations of volcanic rock that resemble minarets. Each storey could be sealed individually, and remarkably, no floors overlap, and the lower the storey, the higher the ceiling. Evidently, several million people - an entire civilization - chose to live in a subterranean rock labyrinth.
Images of Derinkuyu
Derinkuyu
Derinkuyu
Kaymakli, connected to Derinkuyu by a tunnel 5 miles long
Trogladytes of Cappadocia
Tourist guides explain that the underground cities were most likely built by Hittites, about 4,000 years ago, either as protection from the elements, or to hide from Greek invaders. Later, they were used by Christians fleeing persecution from the Romans. Most scholars believe the cities were excavated during Roman times, because the technological capability to do so is presumed to have not existed previously. Actually, nobody can explain who built the underground cities, because no record exists of them being built, the architectural style is unrecognizable, and no identification marks have been found. Other than hewn rock, which is millions of years old, none of the usual archeological evidence exists. How could a theoretical enemy be unaware of a logistical undertaking of this magnitude, requiring so much paraphernalia, so many people, and so much time to complete? But if the cities were built to escape from an environmental condition of some kind, then what condition?
The lower levels at Derinkuyu are flooded with sediment, which makes them virtually impassable. Alluvial deposits imply the city was flooded. The region was last underwater after the Black Sea deluge of 5500 BC, which most geologists believe is the foundation for Mesopotamian flood legends. Since the inhabitants would have drowned, underground cities were not built to escape flood waters. The cities, therefore, predate that flood, and possibly others. Logically, the only reason to live in underground cities is to escape surface conditions. Temperature underground remains constant at about 11 degrees centigrade, so the cities were ideal locations from which to survive the deep freeze of the last glacial period or Ice Age (approximately 22,000 BC - 11,500 BC). As tunnels must have been cut before cold temperatures rendered the rock too hard, the builders must have anticipated the freezing. Forewarned, the underground nation was their response.
Sources: Derinkuyu: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaMAEYF1TdI&feature=related Kaymakli: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIItg4sRX20 http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_noah.htm http://www.xpeditionsmagazine.com/magazine/articles/turkey/turkey.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_glacial_period
12. THE KING LISTS In the search for the truth of human origins, timeline is paramount. Present-day textbooks explain that modern humans, Homo sapiens sapiens, emerged in Africa about 100,000 years ago, and gradually expanded to the rest of the world. Preoccupied with basic survival issues, humanity was essentially primitive until the 4th millennium BC. No archeological evidence testifies to the existence of a prior civilization. Wherever they surface, apparent references to gods, antediluvian societies, and “golden ages,� are explained as fictional myths designed to legitimize the power structures that formulated them. But to the cultures that provide modern scholars with the archeological material to date the origins of
civilization, a correct timeline was of paramount concern. Without the meticulous chronologies, painstakingly etched or carved by ancient scribes in Egypt and Sumer, historians and archeologists would not have the names of kings and lengths of reign, necessary to accurately reconstruct the past.
Drawing of the Turin King List
Most statistics in these ancient timetables cannot be verified by archeologists, so are customarily dismissed as propaganda. The Turin Papyrus dates to the 13th century BC, and is a list of all the Egyptian kings and pharaohs that encompasses 40,000 years. The Palermo Stone fragment dates to 2400 BC, and is an incomplete king list carved in basalt, which identifies 120 kings of the pre-dynastic era that ended in 3100 BC, only 700 years before the list was compiled. Sumerian king lists are even more problematic. The earliest, the Larsa kings list, dates at 2000 BC, and is an inscribed clay tablet that itemizes the names of kings and lengths of rule stretching back 450,000 years. In all these cases, chronology for recognized historical periods is vindicated by archeology.
Larsa Kings List
Palermo Stone
Sources: http://www.en.wikipedia.org/List_of_ancient_king_lists.htm Reading from the text of the Isin Sumerian King List. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etY-yFpbPJ4 http://www.en.wikipedia.org/Sumerian_king_list.htm http://www.en.wikipedia.org/Turin_King_List.htm