10148 replies to this topic

[seeder]

zoser, on 20 December 2012 - 12:56 PM, said:

It's not precision architecture in stone is it?  We are talking specifically about that feat.  They had no extruders to fabricate steel joists, no high speed cutting equipment to cut bricks on a production line, no hydraulic drills to cut foundations.

Yet they still produced an amazing feat of architectural genius.  It's no good discussing the Panama canal or the Empire state building.  You must compare like for like.

The argument is could we do that in stone today?

and as the link I shared above - if read - states we could do better.  But no-one has the will to try...because... you'd need a single leader with a vision and great power over the workers, and huge wealth, plus many thousands of workforce with a shared vision and determination, youd need to house them, feed them, water them, youd need to find a spot to build on with enough localised raw materials.... youd need to let your workforce know this was a job for life..

None of the above will ever happen again. BUT IT COULD BE DONE! And in stone too!

Zoser its not that it cant be done....its just that...its 'already been done'.... and we've moved along. To building bigger and better things, and yes the panama does count in this discussion, as do skyscrapers...

Edited by seeder, 20 December 2012 - 01:36 PM.

[zoser]

LRW, on 20 December 2012 - 01:01 PM, said:

A common argument of skeptics when they are getting thoroughly and utterly destroyed in a debate is to bring out the "modern man builds better" card.

Modern man destroys the natural environment and creates devastating pollution that wrecks the ecosystem. Their buildings are also less aesthetically pleasing as ancient stone buildings that correlate with the cosmos beautifully.

Modern mans creations don't fit in as nice as the ancient structures around the panama canal.  Modern cities look revolting compared to the ancient stone monuments around the area.



If there was a beauty contest between ancient mesoamerican structures and mesoamerican modern cities, then mesoamerican ancient structures would win easily.

That's right; I personally will never look in awe at the Panama Canal and wonder how it was done; but I always do when I look at the GP, PP or the Peruvian artefacts.

[seeder]

LRW, on 20 December 2012 - 01:01 PM, said:

A common argument of skeptics when they are getting thoroughly and utterly destroyed in a debate is to bring out the "modern man builds better" card.

Modern man destroys the natural environment and creates devastating pollution that wrecks the ecosystem. Their buildings are also less aesthetically pleasing as ancient stone buildings that correlate with the cosmos beautifully.

Modern mans creations don't fit in as nice as the ancient structures around the panama canal.  Modern cities look revolting compared to the ancient stone monuments around the area.

If there was a beauty contest between ancient mesoamerican structures and mesoamerican modern cities, then mesoamerican ancient structures would win easily.

Youve so missed the point and deviated into aesthetics (and polution), perhaps you didnt take the time to read the posts with provided links?  The last 2 are corkers, especially the bit about the ugly' pyramids, I mention that as it may appeal to your value of aesthics!

And about being a skeptic, on the contrary, Id love to believe in aliens and all that jazz...its just theres one trifling thing lacking in all the theories..

PROOF!

we can talk all day, you can believe what you want, but the facts are out there, Ive provided more solid info about the buildings than anyone here has - in respect of aliens/lost technology ad infintum...

Edited by seeder, 20 December 2012 - 01:28 PM.

[seeder]

zoser, on 20 December 2012 - 01:04 PM, said:

That's right; I personally will never look in awe at the Panama Canal and wonder how it was done; but I always do when I look at the GP, PP or the Peruvian artefacts.

I expect thats an age related thing, time and further knowledge may help that along. Its good to wonder, its good to think, but its not good to close your ears and eyes to solid facts. I know, I know it hurts - to have your illusions dashed...

Personally Im in awe of the pyramids too, what a great HUMAN accomplishment!

[Abramelin]

zoser, on 20 December 2012 - 01:01 PM, said:

Alluding to the presence of visitors with special abilities perhaps?

It doesn't surprise me in the least.

Well, at least I don't hold back anything.

GdlV wasn't some 'Caucasian' with a prejudice towards South Americans, he was one of them. And having full beards wasn't common among them. Or 'facial hair', as he also calls it.

Btw, many think "Viracocha' was some white guy with a beard, but no: he was a native American. However, his 'invisible' helpers did have beards. Doesn't mean there are no NDNs with beards, but not like the Spaniards had (or I have now, lol).

[Abramelin]

LRW,

This is one of those socalled 'tired stones' that the Incas could not put in its place (Ollantaytambo) because the Spaniards arrived:



Would you call that a rude cut out stone, or do you think it's kind of very precise?

[LRW]

The ancient structures for sure just allude to something more in tune with the earth and its magneticism, its beauty, its majesty. The ancient structures were an extension of that, a harmony, whereas modern constructions are less in tune, less beautiful and more destructive of the environment, they don't seem to fit in as good, its like a conflict. Modern buildings look far less in tune.

Thats advanced and in tune, its like a symphony of music in tune with nature and not in conflict with it.




Their own water distribution system way up there and in tune with the environment, it does not look out of place.  



An absolutely stunning, majestic and magical feat of engineering.  

[Abramelin]

LRW, on 20 December 2012 - 01:01 PM, said:

A common argument of skeptics when they are getting thoroughly and utterly destroyed in a debate is to bring out the "modern man builds better" card.
.

I'd like to see you post a quote from this thread where any skeptic said just that.

[mcrom901]

zoser, on 20 December 2012 - 12:36 PM, said:

An account of a thousand Inca dragging a block up a mountainside proves nothing but how stupid they were.

[seeder]

Abramelin, on 20 December 2012 - 01:34 PM, said:

LRW,

This is one of those socalled 'tired stones' that the Incas could not put in its place (Ollantaytambo) because the Spaniards arrived:



Would you call that a rude cut out stone, or do you think it's kind of very precise?

Ever used a chisel?

[Abramelin]

LRW, on 20 December 2012 - 01:35 PM, said:

The ancient structures for sure just allude to something more in tune with the earth and its magneticism, its beauty, its majesty. The ancient structures were an extension of that, a harmony, whereas modern constructions are less in tune, less beautiful and more destructive of the environment, they don't seem to fit in as good, its like a conflict. Modern buildings look far less in tune.

Thats advanced and in tune, its like a symphony of music in tune with nature and not in conflict with it.




Their own water distribution system way up there and in tune with the environment, it does not look out of place.  


An absolutely stunning, majestic and magical feat of engineering.  

I deleted your pics to save space, LRW.

I have walked the Inca Trail in 1991, and I came across buildings  that had certain particular stones: stones with protrusions for the attachment of ropes. Also corner stones with holes through a corner. I will try to make a scan.

seeder, on 20 December 2012 - 01:39 PM, said:

Ever used a chisel?

No, but this is a stone that is supposed to be a rude cut according to Zoser.

Edited by Abramelin, 20 December 2012 - 01:42 PM.

[seeder]

Abramelin, on 20 December 2012 - 01:36 PM, said:

I'd like to see you post a quote from this thread where any skeptic said just that.

and -  "skeptics when they are getting thoroughly and utterly destroyed in a debate"

Oh yeh? destroyed? By whom exactly? Ive demonstrated quite simply with linked articles....factual articles.. things about the pyramids and the glaringly obvious fact they can be built...by man...

[seeder]

Abramelin, on 20 December 2012 - 01:41 PM, said:

I deleted your pics to save space, LRW.

I have walked the Inca Trail in 1991, and I came across buildings  that had certain particular stones: stones with protrusions for the attachment of ropes. Also corner stones with holes through a corner. I will try to make a scan.



No, but this is a stone that is supposed to be a rude cut according to Zoser.

according to zozer eh...  Im puzzled tho, whats a rude cut?  Do you mean crude cut?

[Abramelin]

seeder, on 20 December 2012 - 01:45 PM, said:

according to zozer eh...  Im puzzled tho, whats a rude cut?  Do you mean crude cut?

Yes, my language is also kind of crude because English is not my mother tongue.

But thanks for correcting my spelling, and for preventing me from not being taken seriously by the pricks.

.

Edited by Abramelin, 20 December 2012 - 01:52 PM.

[Abramelin]

It's always about skeptics this and skeptics that, and that they are no good.

I AM a skeptic, and that only means that if someone claims something, I like to investigate if what s/he claims has any sound basis.

Most often it is nothing but, "We don't know how it was done, so it must have been  aliens.".

That is the easy way out, if you ask me.

+++

EDIT:

A skeptic dares to doubt, even about what s/he thinks is most plausible.

Has anyone ever read a post of the AA believers that proves they have some doubts about their 'beliefs ' too?

I don't think so.

..

Edited by Abramelin, 20 December 2012 - 01:56 PM.