SagCan, on 08 March 2011 - 01:58 PM, said:
I'm not assuming anything, I said the debate is still open. And for what I read of what Kmt Sesh states, it's his opinion these hieroglyphs are false. An opinion he shares with many others. But that doesn't make it so. He's got some arguments, others got theirs. To me he doesn't really help his case by stating since no 'legitimate scholars' took it serious, nobody should. Doesn't reveal what you would call an open mind on things. So like I said, the debate is open.
And again, my article doesn't revolve around these hieroglyphs. I only mentioned them because Harte claimed there's nothing to suggest a culture knowing the Zodiac ever came in contact with Australia.
Ah, but the hieroglpyhs there are a hoax, it's been proven, they caught the man that actually did it. Find below an excerpt from
this site. The glyphs were made by a mentally ill person, so we don't know the reasons as to why he did what he did.
The area around Lyre Trig, where the Gosford heiroglyphs are located, is famous for numerous Aboriginal carvings, including figures of giant kangaroos, men holding nulla nullas and spears, as well as carvings of hands and tools. The Aboriginal carvings, many in very inaccessible places, have been well researched and their positions noted long before the discovery of the so-called Egyptian hieroglyphs.
At the southern base of the Lyre Trig, in a very accessible location, two parallel sandstone cliffs, 1.5 m apart and 3 m high, run up the hill for about 15 metres. On both cliffs there are carved familiar Egyptian hieroglyphs, but among them are some stranger figures - a stick man hanging out the washing, a dog's bone, a very un-Egyptian bell and several symbols that look like flying saucers.
Alan Dash, a surveyor with the Gosford City Council between 1968 and 1993, first noticed the carvings about 1975. Thoroughly familiar with the area, he revisited the site several times over the next 5 years, each time observing that more and more carvings appeared on the rock face. He considered the engravings the work of an irresponsible vandal.
Neil Martin himself found the man responsible. "In 1984 1 was in the area helping to put out a fire", he told me. "As I came around the base of the hill, I could hear a noise like someone chipping stone. I walked over to the cleft and found an old Yugoslavian man, chipping the stone with a Sidchrome cold chisel. Because this was national park property, I confiscated the chisel and the man left. Because he was mentally handicapped, we took no further action, but I later gave the chisel to the local historical society. We never saw the old man again."
So yes, a hoax, proven to be a hoax, person who perpetrated it is known. End of story. And sorry but Harte is correct, there is no proof or solid evidence, that any civilisation knowing this particular zodiac and it's usage, came into contact in ancient times with Australian inhabitants. And there really is no solid evidence of it at all, nothing, nada, rien.
SagCan, on 08 March 2011 - 01:58 PM, said:
Wrong again. The correlations between the two signs, other then both being part of the Zodiac, came up separately. It was when I learned of this correlation, my interested for the place, got more serious. And again, all the qualities of the site are there, even if these 'depictions' are not. It's when you reason the other way around, considering that if any depictions made sense to be depicted here, it would be exactly these once, that gives merit to the idea there's something more then just coincidence to this site. Granted, if I was never struck by the apparent resemblance of the site withe two signs, I wouldn't not have noticed the other qualities and facts surrounding this site.
I do not see anything in the images you posted, other than natural erosion, sorry. I could understand that someone with a lot of good will and imagination could see a crab, but that's about it. Sagitarius, sorry, but no, not seeing it.
The astrology your refer to, is quite datable as well, since it is based on Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos, from about the 2nd century AD. For this too work, there would have to be some evidence from those days, as to a trip that long or an effort that big, would have been somehow either documented or refered to. There is plenty of material of the 2nd century AD surviving and it becomes more from then on. For the idea to work, it can only work from then on as before that, there was no zodiac as we know it.
Also you refer to the tropics and the equator, well there is something that bugs me about that. I'm not sure if you considered the precession of the equinoxes, because as we speak, according to International Astronomical Union boundaries, the Sun now is in Taurus at the June solstice. According to sidereal astrology, which divides the zodiac into 12 equal parts, the Sun is in Gemini at that time.
I'm uncertain that any of it adds up to be honest, there are too many "what if", or "maybe" factors, for this to even be a viable idea.
SagCan, on 08 March 2011 - 01:58 PM, said:
Since I state I don't claim this to be the 'real thing' and my whole goal is nothing but more research, I don't really understand your criticism which seems to be aimed on a supposed arrogance or claim on my part, which I can't place.
What negative correlations you would have in mind, escapes me for the most part. I state there's no exact resemblances. I point out the Zodiac was not supposed to be known in these parts of the world. I make clear I'm not claiming anything, I'm just pointing out some of the facts and qualities I found.
But though nothing I said I claim as the truth, to me people tend to dismiss to quickly the fact that all coincidental facts and apparent qualities seem to tell a coherent story in line with a story or site as could be expected from 'the ancient'. It's the sum of all things considered that made me write this article. Just stating coincidences happen seems a little thin to me to just shove it aside. But I guess for people like Harte, who can't be bothered to even read the things they comment on, that's sufficient. Like I said, a shame.
Sorry, but the sum of all things considered, doesn't weigh a lot, if you scrutinise the idea too closely. And no it does not make for a coherent story since there are too many unknown factors, lack of any evidence or facts. Laudable effort none withstanding, it has to be said. And unless you can get someone to go and take an actual look, to see if any of it is man-made, this is a very moot discussion anyway. BEcause I'm sure most will agree, Google Earth is no proof of anything. It's just images.
Ah yes, and I would be cautious as to Kmt, the man can actually read hieroglyphs and translate them, which is more than can be said about you or me. So if he says it is a hoax, I'd be tempted to believe him as opposed to you, who in his 13 posts has not proven that he can do the same.
Oh and if you think that Harte is harsh and Flash is unkind, wait till you meet some of the other sceptics.
1
