10148 replies to this topic

[Babe Ruth]

psyche101, on 04 December 2012 - 01:34 AM, said:

I am afraid this is not the case at all. My roughshod description recalled form the dark corners of my mind might appear in the fashion when I have generalised, but go ahead and prove me wrong. What I have outlined are basics are we know them, not a guess of the top of my head. I leave that to the ETHers.



Well no worries, thank you for this reply. Please forgive if my tone sounds terse, when I try to explain things in detail I come across that way sometimes. Do not take any remark in this post as personal. I think it I make it quite obvious when someone does irk me

Coulda shoulda what exactly? Diamonds are the hardest substance know to man. As I pointed out to Zoser, a phosphor bronze blade is used to cut diamond today. How does bronze, a copper alloy, cut diamond which is much harder the red sandstone, the primary content of Puma Punku?

You said common sense insisted man was given this knowledge. That is not even a coulda shoulda. That is simply not the case as I pointed out, common sense indicates necessity is the mother of invention. There is no reason whatsoever to claim that man had help. there is no need to invoke such, nor any evidence. There are some wild unsupported theories which are largely based on outright lies pertaining to the type of material, the actual construction sizes and the dates. And we know those three items in particular are definitely lied about when the AA people talk about them. How does one base common sense on known lies?

Common sense says that if Bronze can cut Diamond, then copper can cut sandstone wouldn't you say? Leading edge and abrasion are terms you need to become familiar with here to better understand the process.



Ed Leedskin. A housing to protect the pulley from the elements. I really, really hope you are not suggesting it is an anti gravity box or some such nonsense. The tripods were not very portable as you can see. A good nights rain could sieze up the system. Just a preventative maintenance measure. The pulley Ed used were electric and powered by his own hand built generator. The man was a master tradesman, not an Alien counterpart.

See the cables leading to his motor?



and the generator he built to power them



I'd like to look into the claim a bit deeper, I have herd that he made his own motor windings as well, and used stainless as opposed to copper. Be interesting to see how the resistances tolerated.

They did not use tripods on the Pyramids like that LOL, that is a funny suggestion. Nearly as funny as the Mammoths in the movie 10,000BC. Ramps and logs, leverage and labour, ropes and pulleys. But that is going off topic, and should be in the Ancients section. And I am sure that kmt_sesh could clear this up much better than I can. Note I said can, not could.

Again I draw you to a modern comparison. If it is impossible to move such things I can show you if you ever visit Downunder one of these going in - timing permitting.




Have a look at that bottom rail. One piece. These things weigh in the order of tonnes. I know a guy who had one fall on his leg one time. Snapped it like a matchstick. Yet we manage to get these behemoths into rooms they barely fit into, once the ceiling and room is complete with only man power, no machines.

How do we do it? No machines mind you. Just manpower. Are electricians aliens?



You have seen the tools used, the were bows and copper. Things that rot away in no time. Yet the same methods are still deployed today to create the same effects and using the same flimsy tools. Why would you expect a bow to last 1,800 years? Thats a bit unreasonable isn't it? I am not sure how that is not documented evidence, and much, much more qualifies than any alien theory. We still do it, so why do we need aliens? Because the finishes are nicely rounded after the last 1800 years or so? Heck, water in the environment does that. Look at the Grand Canyon. It's called weathering, but not enough to remove the telltale grooves left inside the holes that match the examples of today nicely.

I do not see any argument from you at all to be frank. Nothing, just objections to the methods shown to you that are used to accomplish the same structures and effects today. You have not qualified a single objection, you have just made them. If the above holds no answers for you, I have to consider that you do not want answers, as I would like you to point out how and why they would be inadequate, if you still hold that opinion. You have not cited any specific information offered in my post, but just offer a general objection. If you can narrow down any objections, perhaps we can address each one at a time. I am sure I have given you plenty to work with?

I cannot prove you wrong sir, and you cannot prove yourself right either, insofar as proving that this planet has never been visited by ET or that they have interacted with humans.

That is my only point here--that the circumstantial evidence strongly suggests visitation and interaction, probably even interbreeding.

Some of what I call circumstantial evidence may actually be direct evidence, and maybe that is the theme of the AA theory.  I don't know.

[synchronomy]

psyche101, on 04 December 2012 - 01:14 PM, said:

I am hoping your not the tights type either You might have to join up with us lol.


Exactly. How often do these AA guys lean on people like Tesla to push their nonsense?


And when we see what happened to Tesla with regards to the radio, it seems these people have no shame at all. They are repeating that very wrong.

You are completely right, and that is what upsets me when I see people who have taught in classrooms denying history it's rightful place. It's like a doctor violating the hippocratic oath.

And your right, with the access the Internet gives us today, as opposed to the "good old days" of libraries snail mail and newspapers, there is no excuse for such blatant ignorance. It's unforgivable

Free speech. Pffffttt.

No, I'm not the tights type
I would glady join your cause.  I've stated in a few of the topics here that these Las Vegas Hustlers, conmen, and conwomen make me sick.
I am particularly disgusted by those with distinguished credentials, such as medical doctors, lawyers, professors, and yes, the Hoagwash from librarians!
Same formula applies every time.  Build up credibility using past experience whether it be education and/or accomplishments...even if you just know someone with accomplishments like "my uncle designed the Lunar Lander" (gee, who's that?)  Then test the waters with a few "believable" cases usually consisting of the tried and tested ones, then add some "hyperdimensional" buzzwords and blend in some "newagey" stuff then moneytize the website with t-shirts and coffeemug sales, and some incomprehensible jibberish disguised as "books"....oh, and don't forget the compulsory three hour diatribe on coast to coast am.  Brag about your "contacts" in the military and black-ops circles.  And don't forget to throw in some Tesla, HAARP, and the odd reference to chemtrails.
If you think about it, many of us here could do it, I know I certainly could...but I suppose the moral values my parents taught me keep me out of it.

There's the formula and if you can sleep at night living a life of lies, you've got a good steady income.
To change this would require a monumental effort.  Discussion forums such as this are one of the best IMHO.

Edited by synchronomy, 04 December 2012 - 02:48 PM.

[Quaentum]

zoser, on 30 November 2012 - 06:50 PM, said:

Thank God for Von Daniken, Dunn, Hancock, Bauval, Tsoukalos, Childress, and all the modern thinking men that have successfully challenged the dinosaur half brains of the past few hundred years and who have helped make the truth available to thinking world.

Cheers.

Yep if it wasn't for a man like Von Daniken, a pioneer who spent his time while he was serving his jail term in Europe for fraud, researched and wrote his second book I believe.  Just think of the magic he used to do onsite research while still in jail.  It boggles the mind.

[Quaentum]

Babe Ruth, on 30 November 2012 - 08:14 PM, said:

Yes, it could have been this, or might have been that, or possibly was something else, you say.

And the AA folks say it might have been alien intervention.

So far, on both sides, it is a 'shoulda coulda woulda' thing.

It seems to me that foreign intervention is the most likely explanation, all things considered.

Stonework with such precision could not have been done by primitive men, sorry.

When you factor in all that must happen for an advanced alien race to reach the Earth, why they would help us build structures that are designed as humans would design them, and why they would choose to work in stone when they could manufacture lighter, longer lasting materials, alien intervention becomes the least likely.

[Quaentum]

Babe Ruth, on 01 December 2012 - 03:05 PM, said:

Agree 100%.  I offer the same unsolicited advice to any and all.

I'm willing to accept that the old man who created the Coral Castle in Homestead had somehow discovered and mastered some method for defeating gravity.  Perhaps it was the same method involved in building the pyramids and other similar sites all 'round the planet.

But common sense suggests humans were given this knowledge by mentors.  I doubt hunter-gatherers would have stumbled upon the method as they were out chasing animals.

Considering that diamond-tipped bits would be necessary to cut stones with such precision, common sense tells me that hunter-gatherers were not in possession of such diamond tools.  Nor do excavations reveal any such tools.

Common Sense!  Yessir, I'm all for it.

Yes common sense is a good thing and every bit as necessary as logic and critical thinking.  I'm glad you're all for it.  Take the time to research Coral Castle and you will find that Ed used simple machines (Levers, etc...) when constructing the castle.  There was no anti-gravity involved.

Many seem to lack the understanding that those who built the pyramids and other large structures had stopped being simple hunter-gatherers long before they started the construction of those monuments.

[Quaentum]

zoser, on 01 December 2012 - 09:10 PM, said:

More evidence of machined artefacts:

http://www.gizapyram...new article.htm

You of course are making the assumption that it was bow drill and not something designed to spin in one direction only.  I'm also curious why a civilization that would be thousands of years more advanced than us, would resort to what, would to them be, primitive tools to make holes?

[Quaentum]

Questfortruth, on 02 December 2012 - 04:59 AM, said:

The evidence need not be physical, as the skeptic with ones head buried in the sand will force their mind to see and believe whatever they want it to, it is one of the greatest weaknesses of mankind.

The evidence surrounding the ancient astronaut theory is very simple and inarguable. Most believers make the mistake of making the arguement too complicated and fantastic, much like religion.

When in reality to simplistic evidence is all that is needed to assure the BASIC accuracy of the theory; Every single civilization since the beginning of time has documentation of humaniod beings coming from the skies and meddling in the affairs of man, posing as Gods. Their fantastic abilities easily explained by todays technology and that which is imminent in the future.

When one hears of a God described as a bronze bird spitting fire that blocked out the sun and shook the ground, not making the connection can only be explained by denial, and fear. The so called "theory" is so simple compared to every other explaination that has been offered to us, our minds have simply been trained since birth to reject such things.

To delve deeper, I challenge anyone on this earth to explain how we evolved into intelligent creatures overnight in terms of evolution. Where as every other thing takes hundreds of millions of years to make the slightest change our evolution occured at a literal magical rate.

Physical evidence is probably the most important thing when determining the validity of a claim.

Skeptics, by their very nature, are less likely to be taken in by those peddling their unevidenced, unsupported version of history as if it were fact.  In reality, skeptics would love to believe that aliens were and are here but combine Common Sense, Logic, Critical Thinking and available evidence to come to their conclusions.

You do realize don't you, that every religion has borrowed from other religions and/or pagan rites don't you?  For example, the Romans reused a great deal of the Greek mythology when creating theirs.  As far as their fantastic abilities, can you, using today's technology, explain the ability to create the universe,  change themselves into other creatures or into another substance, for example stone?  Have you looked at the artwork depicting the gods or read the descriptions?  Did you notice that in virtually all cases, the gods look exactly like the people that that worship them?

You do understand that the vast majority of stories in the writings of the various religions are not based on fact but are simply meant to teach a lesson don't you?

As far as evolution, this thread really has nothing to do with evolution so you  should start another topic on that so it doesn't derail this one.

[bmk1245]

Oniomancer, on 02 December 2012 - 06:01 PM, said:

He actually got access to the core and checked it using the high-tech method of wrapping a string around the groove. He was personally called on the accuracy of this over on graham hancock's forum. Even so, this doesn't eliminate the possibility that the marks were made in the process of removing the core or a jammed tool. To my knowledge, no other extant cores have been examined for, and thus shown to have, similar marks.

My thoughts were along this line as well.

Edit to add: if we will believe in Dunn's claims.

Quote from from the same book pictures were posted:

Quote

Horizontal striations similar to the ancient ones on rose granite were visible both in the wall of the hole (Figure 4.26), and upon the core.

(Experiments in Egyptian Archaeology: Stoneworking Technology in Ancient Egypt, Denys A. Stocks, Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2004, page 135)

Edited by bmk1245, 04 December 2012 - 06:44 PM.

[bmk1245]

Paxus, on 02 December 2012 - 08:11 PM, said:

Hey bmk!
I think what zoser was talking about is that the resultant hole is very wide, irregular and rough. He's right there. It is very crude and rough when compared to the wonderous examples AA theorists usually talk about. You know the ones, I'm sure you've seen them, they look like they have 0.001mm flaws!

I'm not saying that this means it was ET, but when Zoser said that hole was a mess, he was spot on.

Oniomancer, psyche, S2F already answered this, so repeating isn't necessary, I guess
Zoser claimed that copper pipes couldn't have been used for hole drilling. When showed it can be and was used to demonstrate on actual granite, he simply started I will grasp whatever straw routine.  Just look at his masterpiece of mind:

zoser, on 02 December 2012 - 05:40 PM, said:

[...]If the pipes were not perfectly circular then neither would the holes in the granite.  Think about it.

It calls for

[zoser]

Quaentum, on 04 December 2012 - 04:39 PM, said:

You of course are making the assumption that it was bow drill and not something designed to spin in one direction only.  I'm also curious why a civilization that would be thousands of years more advanced than us, would resort to what, would to them be, primitive tools to make holes?

Not quite sure what your getting at; it's the archaeologists that are making that ridiculous claim about the bow, sand and tube.  To those with an ounce of reasoning the way they did it must have employed some advanced method such as light or sound.   Let's be clear; there is no other conventional explanation on the table other than the crazy bow and sand idea and that's what this debate is all about.

[zoser]

bmk1245, on 04 December 2012 - 06:28 PM, said:

Oniomancer, psyche, S2F already answered this, so repeating isn't necessary, I guess
Zoser claimed that copper pipes couldn't have been used for hole drilling. When showed it can be and was used to demonstrate on actual granite, he simply started I will grasp whatever straw routine.  Just look at his masterpiece of mind:



It calls for

You sound ridiculous.  You are avoiding the issue.  If they used pipes then tell us how they made them.   Simple.

Now I refuse to let you skeptics get away with this one.  Your either going to furnish the convincing argument as to how the ancients made deep holes in red granite, diorite and basalt, or you are going to retract the silly theories completely once and for all.

By holes I mean 2-3 inch diameter, and at least 2 feet deep.

An old boxing saying goes "You can run but you can't hide".

It's time to put up or shut up on this one.

Edited by zoser, 04 December 2012 - 07:08 PM.

[Babe Ruth]

Quaentum, on 04 December 2012 - 04:12 PM, said:

When you factor in all that must happen for an advanced alien race to reach the Earth, why they would help us build structures that are designed as humans would design them, and why they would choose to work in stone when they could manufacture lighter, longer lasting materials, alien intervention becomes the least likely.

Not necessarily.

As we make great strides in quantum mechanics and such, it becomes apparent that we humans are woefully ignorant of many laws of physics.

IF we have been visited, the visitors would have to build objects with what material was available, and in accordance with "local" physics rules, if you get my drift.

I'll reiterate my point--those who doubt the AA theory (and I'm happy to qualify it as a theory) do not offer a persuasive argument to the contrary.  What they offer as proof is mere speculation, with many instances of use of the words "it is possible", "perhaps", etc etc.

[zoser]

bmk1245, on 04 December 2012 - 06:28 PM, said:

Oniomancer, psyche, S2F already answered this, so repeating isn't necessary, I guess

No they haven't; if you think they have could you quote it please.  That hole you showed me was as rough as a rats tail.  Nothing whatsoever like the perfect holes seen in South America and Egypt.

[Rlyeh]

Babe Ruth, on 04 December 2012 - 07:10 PM, said:

Not necessarily.

As we make great strides in quantum mechanics and such, it becomes apparent that we humans are woefully ignorant of many laws of physics.

IF we have been visited, the visitors would have to build objects with what material was available, and in accordance with "local" physics rules, if you get my drift.

And yet we have the same materials as they had back then, just better technology. How does your response address these visitors playing with rocks?

BTW what you just said has nothing to do with QM. Maybe it was an analogy? I don't know.

Edited by Rlyeh, 04 December 2012 - 07:27 PM.

[LRW]

Quaentum, on 04 December 2012 - 04:12 PM, said:

why they would choose to work in stone when they could manufacture lighter, longer lasting materials, alien intervention becomes the least likely.

Maybe they liked stone? it is after all a natural element of the earth and has pleasing aesthetics.

Quaentum, on 04 December 2012 - 05:38 PM, said:

Physical evidence is probably the most important thing when determining the validity of a claim.

Can you provide physical evidence of the Great Pyramid being built with primitive ramps, pulleys and copper chisels? Seems not.  Nice try though, but you have failed to stick to the primitive tools to even build that abomination. They even had to bring in modern technology to complete it, because it was too hard to do with primitive tools, also look at the size of those blocks compared to the real pyramids.

What a pathethic attempt, Egyptologists ideas are no way better than even von daniken ideas.