My personal opinion
I didn't want to make this page a big part of this website, which I consider to be more Dr. Cabrera's than mine. (I was just the person making it on his behalf.) However, I will throw in my two cents worth so that the serious researchers will know the influences behind the direction this website has taken.
I agree with Dr. Cabrera that most of the stones in his collection are genuine antiquities. Some stones are probably fakes, though, and it is widely known that some stones (outside of his collection) were manufactured in recent times to be sold to the tourists who came to Ica. However, like a hoaxed crop circle, or a counterfeit twenty dollar bill, the existence of one or more fakes should not be used to condemn an entire type of object. The trick is being able to identify the real ones from the fakes.
Personally, I believe that most of the fakes would be of small size (manufactured to be small enough for a tourist to fit into their luggage). The engraving on this size stone could also be created in a reasonable time period. When you compare that concept with the majority of the more interesting stones in Dr. Cabrera's collection, though, you will see that most of his more important stones are much larger, some being too heavy for a single person to move. There is also the issue of the patina on the stone's engraving; if the patina is genuinely old, then so is the date of the stone's carving. Unfortunately, only blatant or careless hoaxes lack patina on the engravings, and expensive laboratory tests are required to sort out the newly-created "patina" of the better hoaxes from the genuine ancient patina on the old engravings.
In addition to the reports of Ica Stones being found in Inca and Pre-Inca tombs (probably considered to be ancient sacred relics even hundreds of years ago), there are also reports of some of the Ica Stones being taken by the conquistadors in the year 1562 and sent back to Spain. This shows that these curious stones were in existence for hundreds of years before the present (before man supposedly knew of the pre-historic beasts and dinosaurs that are depicted on some of the stones). If anyone has any further info on the stones taken by the conquistadors, please email me. There is also the fact that the stones were discovered in 1961, prior to the first known heart transplant in history, and yet there are quite a few Ica Stones in a series accurately depicting a successful heart transplant. This makes the claims that all the stones were carved by illiterate locals all the more ridiculous.
Dr. Cabrera gave each of us a souvenir stone to take home. The stone(s) that we received were not part of any known series, and do not portray anything outstanding. (It wouldn't have been right to accept them if they did.) The one that he gave to our guide (which she later graciously gave to us as gift, as she already had an Ica stone from a prior visit with Dr. Cabrera) shows a variety of objects/symbols. The most obvious symbol is the one of a monkey with a circular curved tail, and is almost identical to the monkey symbol that is found on the plain of Nazca (Peru). If I was going to guess, I would guess that there is a higher chance that this stone is of recent manufacture (since I personally believe that the majority of the Ica Stones pre-date the construction of the images made on the Nazca plain). However, the other two stones (one each that we personally received) I believe to be genuine antiquities. (And don't bother to email me about buying or borrowing the stones from us; if you want one, go to Ica yourself. Ours are going to stay in the bank safe deposit box for their safekeeping.)
Dr. Cabrera has a number of theories on ancient man and his abilities and past achievements, especially in the regions of Ica, Nazca, and Paracas. These theories include the concept of interaction with extraterrestrials. I do not personally agree with some of these theories, and in general I am more likely to believe that ancient man was more advanced than we gave him credit for (and had advanced technologies that have since been lost), but that these technologies were developed by man over centuries of development, rather than being gifts from the gods or E.T.
As far as mankind co-existing with dinosaurs, I don't rule the possibility out entirely. While it is hard to come up any evidence showing human beings existing in the "age of dinosaurs", I believe that it is possible that some dinosaurs may have existed up until relatively recent times, providing a potential overlap. (There is also the possibility that the civilization that created the Ica Stones could have merely been recording knowledge of ancient creatures that was passed down to them by an even older civilization.) While I am against creationism and its supporters, I also believe that there is ample evidence that Darwin's theory of evolution is also very flawed, and that the currently-accepted "timeline of history" is not as straightforward or as true as most scientists would have one believe.
To sum it all up, I would say that while I don't agree with all of Dr. Cabrera's ideas, I believe in the most important one, and that is that the Engraved Stones of Ica are a legacy from a long-lost ancient civilization, and that they deserve to be seriously studied by mainstream science. Unfortunately, I doubt that they ever will be, since it has become quite clear that "mainstream science" has no interest in pursuing any subject that might cause them to rewrite their precious timeline of history. However, if this website somehow keeps the story of the Ica Stones alive and inspires potential independent researchers to go to Ica and see the truth for themselves, then this website will have served its purpose.
- Dave H.