Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * - 7 votes

The Ancient Alien Theory Is True


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
10148 replies to this topic

#4891    Harte

Harte

    Supremely Educated Knower of Everything in Existence

  • Member
  • 9,109 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2006

Posted 14 January 2013 - 09:03 PM

View Postzoser, on 11 January 2013 - 07:13 PM, said:

http://www.videopedi...ire-Part-3-of-6

Go to 7:00

"The joint that we've gotten is certainly not as good as the ones in the ruin (Sacsayhuaman)"

I must say I would have to agree.

They say that people are prone to understatement don't they.  

If you don't believe me go to the video yourself.

Nothing more to be said here.

Edit

And by the way the stone doesn't look like andesite either.  They claim it is.  But they did use cold steel chisels!

Total garbage.

A guy shaping andesite, by hand and on camera, a guy with a professional reputation to lose, is refute by a blind man sitting on his ass at home with the words "they didn't use cold steel chisels!"

Perhaps that means that you don't need cold steel chisels one might be led to suppose.

But not one like Zoser.

Riiiight.

Harte

I've consulted all the sages I could find in yellow pages but there aren't many of them. - The Alan Parsons Project
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong. - Thomas Jefferson
Giorgio's dying Ancient Aliens internet forum

#4892    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,110 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 14 January 2013 - 09:09 PM

View PostHarte, on 14 January 2013 - 09:03 PM, said:

A guy shaping andesite, by hand and on camera, a guy with a professional reputation to lose, is refute by a blind man sitting on his ass at home with the words "they didn't use cold steel chisels!"

Perhaps that means that you don't need cold steel chisels one might be led to suppose.

But not one like Zoser.

Riiiight.

Harte

The guy in the video was being modest.

He and his team did a great job.

And all that in a short time.

Now imagine lots of people having "all the time in the world" , happily hammering and pounding these rocks for days on end.


.

Edited by Abramelin, 14 January 2013 - 09:37 PM.


#4893    seeder

seeder

    Nut Cracker

  • Member
  • 10,182 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2012

Posted 14 January 2013 - 09:17 PM

View PostAbramelin, on 14 January 2013 - 09:02 PM, said:

Disneyland?? (I've never been there, btw).

Hmm... I think I spoiled the fun, lol.


.

not for some of us - no...

just be sure you're not a part of the fun if you dont want to spoil it!

Edited by seeder, 14 January 2013 - 09:29 PM.

Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me... It's all the rabbit poop you stumble over on your way down...
“It's easier to fool people - than to convince them that they have been fooled.”  Mark Twain

"The tragedy of life is not that it ends so soon, but that we wait so long to begin it"

#4894    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009

Posted 14 January 2013 - 09:44 PM

View Postseeder, on 14 January 2013 - 08:51 PM, said:

IMPOSSIBLY HIGH PRECISION ONCE AGAIN.. posted above... so precise they cant build corners..

my sons and wooden blocks built better walls than those advanced twerps

Ok thanks.

A few things; the Coricancha images.

The rougher stonework (crude boulders, adobe etc) is architecture that Foerster, Gamarra, de Jong, and others attribute to the Inca.  Built most probably just before the Spanish arrived.  Always seen built top of precision work as fill in work or some kind.  The only one exception I know of is at Ollyantaytambo were it looks as if Inca dragged already cut megalithic blocks and put them on top of a rubble base or ramp.  For what reason I don't know,

It's vitally important to distinguish between building styles.  Those responsible for the rough adobe boulder constructions were clearly not the same people who did the precision megalithic work at Sacsayhuaman or the more uniform cuboid walls of Coricancha.  Gamarra asserts that they were different people of very different technology and time.

On the documentary by de Jong summarising Gamarra's work there is this; look at the different styles.  Always the rougher work is built on top of the precision work.  Quite the opposite of what one would expect:

Posted Image




Posted Image

Posted Image


So the technology was different and logically so were the people that built these differing constructions.  Remember that AA proponents are only chiefly interested in the precision work.

Regarding the picture of the Coricancha wall you posted showing gaps; I'm not sure what you are highlighting here?  Are you indicating mistakes made?  Maybe they are maybe they are not.  The Spanish worked extensively in that area to build churches etc.  What damage did they do?  What of earthquakes over the centuries?  In any case a clear point need to be made.  They obviously were highly capable of achieving extreme precision.  The question of whether they were able to do this 100% of the time is of less concern than the fact that it was actually done in lots of places if you get my point.  

The fact is that we can point to numerous places where high precision was achieved.  That we can also identify places where it was not achieved first we need to look at was it the same people, and then has the work been subject to damage.  Then we are still left with the unarguable evidence that it was achieved elsewhere and that is what is of most interest.

By analogy Stan Freidmann makes the point that up to 95% of UFO sightings are explainable.  It's the 5% unexplainable that he is interested in.

The final point regarding what you speculate could be natural vitrification.  They have proved that with the rock and cave carvings that the vitrification is only on a thin surface layer:

Posted Image

Notice the vitrification top right; yet not evident on the fractured part.

Whatever it was that produced the vitrification it wasn't according to this sample endemic in the rock.  It was a result of the cut.

http://blog.world-my...stiges-of-peru/

Posted Image


#4895    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,110 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 14 January 2013 - 09:47 PM

View Postseeder, on 14 January 2013 - 09:17 PM, said:

not for some of us - no...

just be sure you're not a part of the fun if you dont want to spoil it!

Apparently the joke is lost on me.

I don't get it.


#4896    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009

Posted 14 January 2013 - 09:51 PM

View PostAbramelin, on 14 January 2013 - 09:09 PM, said:

The guy in the video was being modest.

He and his team did a great job.

And all that in a short time.

Now imagine lots of people having "all the time in the world" , happily hammering and pounding these rocks for days on end.


.

I would agree.  They did however admit themselves that their finished work was not as good as the precision work they inspected.  Nothing wrong with Protzen and his team enjoying some good honest labour in the Peruvian sunshine.

It's other people making claims about it that I would strongly challenge; claims refuted by the visual evidence.

Posted Image


#4897    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,110 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 14 January 2013 - 09:52 PM

View Postzoser, on 14 January 2013 - 09:44 PM, said:

Ok thanks.

A few things; the Coricancha images.

The rougher stonework (crude boulders, adobe etc) is architecture that Foerster, Gamarra, de Jong, and others attribute to the Inca.  Built most probably just before the Spanish arrived.  Always seen built top of precision work as fill in work or some kind.  The only one exception I know of is at Ollyantaytambo were it looks as if Inca dragged already cut megalithic blocks and put them on top of a rubble base or ramp.  For what reason I don't know,

It's vitally important to distinguish between building styles.  Those responsible for the rough adobe boulder constructions were clearly not the same people who did the precision megalithic work at Sacsayhuaman or the more uniform cuboid walls of Coricancha.  Gamarra asserts that they were different people of very different technology and time.

On the documentary by de Jong summarising Gamarra's work there is this; look at the different styles.  Always the rougher work is built on top of the precision work.  Quite the opposite of what one would expect:

Posted Image




Posted Image

Posted Image


So the technology was different and logically so were the people that built these differing constructions.  Remember that AA proponents are only chiefly interested in the precision work.

Regarding the picture of the Coricancha wall you posted showing gaps; I'm not sure what you are highlighting here?  Are you indicating mistakes made?  Maybe they are maybe they are not.  The Spanish worked extensively in that area to build churches etc.  What damage did they do?  What of earthquakes over the centuries?  In any case a clear point need to be made.  They obviously were highly capable of achieving extreme precision.  The question of whether they were able to do this 100% of the time is of less concern than the fact that it was actually done in lots of places if you get my point.  

The fact is that we can point to numerous places where high precision was achieved.  That we can also identify places where it was not achieved first we need to look at was it the same people, and then has the work been subject to damage.  Then we are still left with the unarguable evidence that it was achieved elsewhere and that is what is of most interest.

By analogy Stan Freidmann makes the point that up to 95% of UFO sightings are explainable.  It's the 5% unexplainable that he is interested in.

The final point regarding what you speculate could be natural vitrification.  They have proved that with the rock and cave carvings that the vitrification is only on a thin surface layer:

Posted Image

Notice the vitrification top right; yet not evident on the fractured part.

Whatever it was that produced the vitrification it wasn't according to this sample endemic in the rock.  It was a result of the cut.

http://blog.world-my...stiges-of-peru/

Gamarra was a dreamer, not a scientist.

The different style of stones make me think of a quick way to repair things.

The stones that were made in that very precise way were made when people had all the time of the world.


#4898    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,110 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 14 January 2013 - 09:55 PM

View Postzoser, on 14 January 2013 - 09:51 PM, said:

I would agree.  They did however admit themselves that their finished work was not as good as the precision work they inspected.  Nothing wrong with Protzen and his team enjoying some good honest labour in the Peruvian sunshine.

It's other people making claims about it that I would strongly challenge; claims refuted by the visual evidence.

Their finished work was not as good as the precision work they inspected, because they only had a limited time to experiment.


#4899    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,110 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 14 January 2013 - 09:57 PM

I like this photo:

Posted Image

It shows they were in a hurry, and the later it got, the less precise the stones were cut.


#4900    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009

Posted 14 January 2013 - 09:59 PM

View PostAbramelin, on 14 January 2013 - 09:52 PM, said:

Gamarra was a dreamer, not a scientist.

The different style of stones make me think of a quick way to repair things.

The stones that were made in that very precise way were made when people had all the time of the world.

Speculation after speculation.  Not all the rough boulder work was repair.  Lots of new constructions were made using the rough boulder style.  Nor can we say as you previously assert that difference was merely a class distinction exercise.  These pictures prove that point.  Who repairs King's property with rough boulders?

Posted Image


#4901    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,830 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005

Posted 14 January 2013 - 10:00 PM

View Postzoser, on 14 January 2013 - 07:28 PM, said:

Just ignore the skeptics I meant.


The basis for all your arguments you mean. Proof.... where I didn't see it On to the next one....... :innocent:

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#4902    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009

Posted 14 January 2013 - 10:02 PM

View PostAbramelin, on 14 January 2013 - 09:55 PM, said:

Their finished work was not as good as the precision work they inspected, because they only had a limited time to experiment.

Protzen spent 'several' hours on the small boulder, and the team spent 12 days on the 0.5 tonne block  Is that limited?  

How limited were the Ancient Peruvians?  Or did they have unlimited time and resources?  Maybe they did maybe they didn't.

Maybe they had unknown high technology that helped provide for their needs?  Is that why they had unlimited time?

Posted Image


#4903    Big Bad Voodoo

Big Bad Voodoo

    High priest of Darwinism

  • Member
  • 9,582 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2010

Posted 14 January 2013 - 10:28 PM

View Postpsyche101, on 14 January 2013 - 10:00 PM, said:



Psyche your signature made me to made my blog.

Thanks.

Edited by the L, 14 January 2013 - 10:28 PM.

JFK: "And we are as a people, inherently and historically, opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.
For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy..."

#4904    S2F

S2F

    Bloodstained Hurricane

  • Member
  • 6,730 posts
  • Joined:22 May 2008

Posted 14 January 2013 - 10:33 PM

View PostAbramelin, on 14 January 2013 - 09:55 PM, said:

Their finished work was not as good as the precision work they inspected, because they only had a limited time to experiment.

Agreed, think what someone could do with years of experience shaping stones. There is nothing in the joint recreation that can't be explained with a refined and experienced process the likes of which the Inca most certainly would have had.

"You want to discuss plausibility then you have to accept reality." -Mattshark

"Don't argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level then beat you with experience." -Obviousman

You know... the plural of ``anecdote'' is not ``data''. Similarly, the plural of ``random fact'' is not ``mystical symbolism''. -sepulchrave


#4905    S2F

S2F

    Bloodstained Hurricane

  • Member
  • 6,730 posts
  • Joined:22 May 2008

Posted 14 January 2013 - 10:36 PM

View Postzoser, on 14 January 2013 - 09:59 PM, said:

Who repairs King's property with rough boulders?

Oh I don't know, maybe a people who were no longer under a dictatorial yolk with practicality on the mind? Or perhaps they had other, more pressing matters to focus on?

Edited by Slave2Fate, 14 January 2013 - 10:37 PM.

"You want to discuss plausibility then you have to accept reality." -Mattshark

"Don't argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level then beat you with experience." -Obviousman

You know... the plural of ``anecdote'' is not ``data''. Similarly, the plural of ``random fact'' is not ``mystical symbolism''. -sepulchrave