10148 replies to this topic

[Abramelin]

Slave2Fate, on 10 December 2012 - 12:23 AM, said:

Hardly the stone age civilization zoser makes it out to be, for sure.

Sorry, you must read my edit:

"Hihuana" is not iron, it's some kind of black flint. Well, according to the Dutch translation of De Vega's book.

[Slave2Fate]

Abramelin, on 10 December 2012 - 12:37 AM, said:

Sorry, you must read my edit:

"Hihuana" is not iron, it's some kind of black flint. Well, according to the Dutch translation of De Vega's book.

Ok, i can accept no iron, yet they still had copper and bronze at the time, or have I read something wrong?

[DONTEATUS]

ANd that my Friends is just How it is ,in the World of U/M we look ,we read,some of us think, we reply,we read again,THen We Drink !
I`ll be in the Bar for the Latter !

[Slave2Fate]

DONTEATUS, on 10 December 2012 - 12:45 AM, said:

ANd that my Friends is just How it is ,in the World of U/M we look ,we read,some of us think, we reply,we read again,THen We Drink !
I`ll be in the Bar for the Latter !

Hell D, I may just join you. I'll have what you're having...only make it a double.

[Abramelin]

Slave2Fate, on 10 December 2012 - 12:44 AM, said:

Ok, i can accept no iron, yet they still had copper and bronze at the time, or have I read something wrong?

You read that right, as you can read in the post I linked to.

About the correct translation of "hihuana", the article I linked to in my post actually gives the original Spanish text:

“Los canteros no tuvieron más instrumentos para labrar las piedras que unos guijarros negros que llamaban hihuana, con que las labran machucando más que no cortando”.

http://peruenroute.w...ow-incas-built/

"Some black pebbles which they call hihuana."

.

Edited by Abramelin, 10 December 2012 - 12:56 AM.

[DONTEATUS]

S2F We just maybe the only ones in here that See that E.T stands for" Extra Therapy"

[Slave2Fate]

Abramelin, on 10 December 2012 - 12:48 AM, said:

You read that right, as you an read in the post I linked to.

About the correct translation of "hihuana", the article I linked to in my post actually gives the original Spanish text:

“Los canteros no tuvieron más instrumentos para labrar las piedras que unos guijarros negros que llamaban hihuana, con que las labran machucando más que no cortando”.

http://peruenroute.w...ow-incas-built/

"Some black pebbles which they call hihuana."

.

Now I'm curious to know what this hihuana was and what it was used for. Do you have any further information or links?

So far I have found this: http://books.google....hihuana&f=false

On page 228 #37 it seems to indicate that Garcilaso may have been mistaken and meant hihuaya which translates to a 'heavy dark rock'.

Edit: That seems to be the gist of what I have found so far in that hihuana may be a misprint or mistaken for hihuaya. In effect though, they indicate the same thing, that they were stones used to shape other stones by rubbing or grinding.

Edited by Slave2Fate, 10 December 2012 - 01:27 AM.

[Slave2Fate]

DONTEATUS, on 10 December 2012 - 12:49 AM, said:

S2F We just maybe the only ones in here that See that E.T stands for" Extra Therapy"

And I may need some yet before the end of my days

[psyche101]

Somethings Not Right, on 07 December 2012 - 08:16 PM, said:

Hi Psyche101

Gidday Mate

Getting back to the PM's I have an ordinary connection ATM, this is my third attempt at this very post. Always happens at Xmas, the IT kiddies are out of school for the break, and flexing their newly found IT muscled with DoS attacks and so forth, ah there will be some lessons to be learned in the coming weeks........ for some

Somethings Not Right, on 07 December 2012 - 08:16 PM, said:

Just the last bit... It is a good hole though... for it.s age.

Age is the key factor here. like the grand canyon, all stone wears down with age. The surrounding rock indicates the smoothness that we do see is a result of this. I can still very clearly see coring and other marks made during it's creation. The examples with bits of the core broken and stil in the hole are absolute proof this is the work of man. And it is proof of the methods used.

Somethings Not Right, on 07 December 2012 - 08:16 PM, said:

Just as important I think is the question' WHY they would put so much effort into trying to get thing's so spot on?
Was they just showing off or just proud of their acheivments! Or was it the most proficient way to do things, Did they know well built structures lasted longer or maybe they were just getting better better over time... look at what's being built in this age for example. Skyscrapers, Airports & Aircraft, Stadiums, Shopping mall's ect... Every Super power has it's day, get's to it's pinnicle...... Sometimes, just before their demise!

I would be surprised otherwise to be honest. I Know most trades today try to do a good job so they can walk away holding their heads up, and saying I did that. It is called "A tradesman like manner" which sadly seems to be a dying tradition.  These structures were created for the highest authority these people could fathom. The God they had chosen to represent siad aspect of their lives, and this was to please the God for good fortune. A higher power or "gods" have always had a place in the human psyche. As does the spectre type image that makes us fear the boogeyman. This helps us make sense of that around us - we rationalise and make decisions. These decisions become better and more accurate with time. It's just another aspect of evolution.

Bit of pride, and I think some showing off comes hand in hand with that

Somethings Not Right, on 07 December 2012 - 08:16 PM, said:

I know Egypt didn't exactly go forwards with their building abalities.. Maybe it was it was just too damn uneconomical & Remember.. Christianity was very popular at one time in the UK but now it's unpopular, I mean, to be a 'Real Christian', so they probably didn't see it as much an issue anymore...Like the way Churches are being replaced with mosques.. No offence, I'm just stating the fact that no matter how long it takes.. Nobody, Nation or Religion stays on top Forever!... Churches stop being built & then.. eventually they get replaced. Basically They changed their attitudes.

I think weather is probably a more daning aspect? It is the most likely cause for the demise of man cultures, even in South America. Even modern times. Kokura was sparred becoming the second site that a nuclear weapon would be used upon, cloud cover sent Bocks Car to Nagasaki instead.
No offence taken, I consider myself agnostic.
But Egypt was a lush beautiful pace with cities spread along life giving rivers. Today, its a sandy desert.


LINK - Climate and Drought Lessons from Ancient Egypt
Large decreases in the proportion of wetland pollen and increases in microscopic charcoal occurred in the core during four different times between 3,000 and 6,000 years ago. One of those events was the abrupt and global mega-drought of around 4,200 years ago, a drought that had serious societal repercussions, including famines, and which probably played a role in the end of Egypt’s Old Kingdom and affected other Mediterranean cultures as well.


LINK - Sudden Climate Warming Took Place 2,000 Years Ago, Weizmann Institute Study Reveals

A sudden warming of climate lasting several centuries took place in equatorial Africa some 2,000 years ago, according to a new study reported by a Weizmann Institute of Science-led team in the August 14 issue of Science.

LINK - Past Climates

Around 5 500 years ago, in the early stages of the development of the ancient civilizations of Egypt and the Middle East, the climate began to cool gradually and become drier. These changes were small compared with the sudden shifts at the end of, and during, the last Ice Age. Nevertheless, some of the changes were profound. The Sahara dried up.

Somethings Not Right, on 07 December 2012 - 08:16 PM, said:

Or maybe even, they DID 'Know about the gods in the sky' & I'm sure back long ago there were meant to be more than one god & this is about Ancient Aliens from all eras of the past so they might have wanted to show how they've progressed To 'those' who gave them a kickstart... I mean, Right at the beginning.

Well they certainly had Gods in the Sky, we saw lightning, and could not explain it, so like UFOlogists today, some simply took the easy road of simply attributing the anomaly to a higher power. I suspect to look knowledgable, and perhaps attain a position of power and or respect in primitive communities where they could not be challenged.

So they Had Thor and Zeus to explain lightning and thunder. This they knew about in a sense, as having made them up, they became the highest authority with regards to any information pertaining to the entities.

Bu no God ever threw lighting, or pounded a mighty hammer to create thunder.

Somethings Not Right, on 07 December 2012 - 08:16 PM, said:

Maybe they were more shall we say' inclined to believe in the idea they were 'Helped' by or given the 'knowledge' even if it was indirectly... passed down over time & maybe across religions & races too but still had come from E.t.Originally.. & that's why they.. reffered to them as Gods & dedicated Almost every thing to 'Their Gods' Including making thing's look nice

Somethings Not Right, on 07 December 2012 - 08:16 PM, said:

If the world was unpopulated tomorrow & had to start again & there were very few survivors.. If these survivors happen to believe in the idea that 'God' or 'The Gods' Created everything... Even if they had no proof.. The Legend would last forever... Even if it did change over time......& the legend would turn into a 'myth' or a 'religion'

Possibly, I am not entirely sure how man would go a second time round, but as we are stil making the same uninformed claims to explain anomalies today, you most certainly have a strong point. todays Zeta Reticulan's are just Yesterdays Greek Gods to explain UAP.

Somethings Not Right, on 07 December 2012 - 08:16 PM, said:

I'm talking pre Samerian & all that... Aliens Came Down & went
'Look, you don't wanna do it like that... You wanna do it like this'.....

Why would they not show us useful things though? Like medecine and food production? Or smelting aluminium. Why come here and stack some rocks together? It strikes me that all the anomalies that scared man, such as thunder and lightning - nature in total - mostly come from the sky, and even those that came from beneath our feet (such as earthquakes) were still attributed to the gods o=in the sky. So it seems pretty normal to me that such people would point to the sky for their explanations.
I feel everything that is impossible for man to have done is not impossible at all, and I believe the examples of the Pantheon right through to the modern construction of Coral Castle is direct proof of this.

Somethings Not Right, on 07 December 2012 - 08:16 PM, said:

& then there was light'

And you could see for freaking miles (Rowan Atkinson)

Cheers.

[psyche101]

zoser, on 07 December 2012 - 09:06 PM, said:

Their spirit guides were ET?  Interesting theory.

No, not interesting in the slightest, old hat that has been regurgitated already, and unfounded. And disrespectful.

[psyche101]

zoser, on 07 December 2012 - 09:07 PM, said:

And the dozens and dozens and dozens of other suspicious non-human looking statues and pictures?????

Have all been explained as they have been presented.

zoser, on 07 December 2012 - 09:07 PM, said:

The best of luck my friend.

Luck is not required, critical thinking is.

[psyche101]

DingoLingo, on 07 December 2012 - 09:15 PM, said:

I am talking about the Australian ones lol

Nice try zoser but unfortunately your wrong about that one.. Forget what Von d and the rest have said.. And read up on it.. I would say come to Australia and speak to the arhnam land elders since that is where a lot of those drawings come from...

They will happily tell you the old tails about the spirits.. How the rainbow serpent created the rivers.. How the first kangaroo was originally a man

Exactly, this is what people do have the right to remove and insert alien where desired.

[psyche101]

Quaentum, on 07 December 2012 - 09:15 PM, said:

Interesting site.  They have based their conclusions on the writings of Zecharia Sitchin, Graham Hancock, Colin Wilson, Michael Cremo, Charles Hapgood, James Churchward, and Immanuel Velikovsky.  Somehow they missed Von Daniken or else it would be a complete set.

Maybe you can ignore the fringe authors and post some scientific articles that show the Inca didn't build them.

The only downfall here being that Zoser cites Stiticin as a valuable source of information.

Yeah, I know.

[Abramelin]

Slave2Fate, on 10 December 2012 - 01:06 AM, said:

Now I'm curious to know what this hihuana was and what it was used for. Do you have any further information or links?

So far I have found this: http://books.google....hihuana&f=false

On page 228 #37 it seems to indicate that Garcilaso may have been mistaken and meant hihuaya which translates to a 'heavy dark rock'.

Edit: That seems to be the gist of what I have found so far in that hihuana may be a misprint or mistaken for hihuaya. In effect though, they indicate the same thing, that they were stones used to shape other stones by rubbing or grinding.

That is what I found too: that Garcilaso made a typo, but it's still about rocks/pebbles, not iron.

I found some interesting books and pdfs on the topic:


The Inca World: The Development of Pre-Columbian Peru, A.D. 1000-1534
Cecilia Bákula,Laura Laurencich Minelli

http://books.google....ne inca&f=false


Inca Quarrying and Stonecutting
Jean-Pierre Protzen, University of California, Berkeley

http://www.scribd.co...-PIERRE-PROTZEN


There are several books on the stonework of Peru in my library, and I like each of them for different reasons, but I’m particularly fond of one I recently acquired, INCA ARCHITECTURE (Indiana University Press, 1980) by two Venezuelans, Graziano Gasparini and Luise Margolies. Most books on the Incan culture are written by archaeologists, historians, art historians, fanatics and fantasists; Gasparini, however, is an architect, Margolies, an anthropologist, and their combined specialities make this a distinctive exploration.

Gasparini brings a builder’s perceptivity to bear on the subject. His concerns with technical details and his conjecture about the motivations and sensibilities—the mind set—of Inca masons who were responsible for these tectonic marvels will resonate with readers who are also builders.

The book is obviously well-researched and the recorded observations of the early Spanish chroniclers of the culture offer valuable insights into the practices of the Inca builders. Garcilaso de la Vega says of the masons, “. . . they have no other tools to work the stones than some black stones they called hihuana with which they dress the stone by pounding rather than cutting. To raise and lower the stones they had no machinery at all; they did it all by willpower.” We learn that the structures that so astound us today were made possible by the mit’a, a system of mandatory public service whereby all citizens between the ages of 15 and 50 worked for the state in various capacities for a certain number of days each year. The mit’a brought the efforts of thousands of stonecutters and fitters to bear on a building project.

Not only is attention paid to the well-known structural ‘feats’ such as Machu Picchu and Saqsaywaman, but to civic planning, administrative architecture and the humble buildings that housed the populace. Mention is made of the visit to Peru in 1802 of Alexander van Humboldt, and of his observation about the consistency of building styles that “It seems as if a single architect built this great number of monuments.” The authors agree and suggest that the architect was the state itself, that building supervisors received training from a central authority and that once the style was ‘set’ there were few deviations from it (although the evidence suggests that masons had considerable liberty for creative expression).

The photographs, many of which were taken from other publications (and none of which, unfortunately, are in color), are mixed in quality, but ably illustrate the text (as do Gasparini’s drawings.) Several photos attributed to the authors are worthy of presentation in an art gallery—the photo on the preceding page of stonework with sunken joints in a wall in the ‘fortress’ of Saqsaywaman in Cuzco, for instance.

Excerpt from the chapter titled
TECHNICAL AND AESTHETIC PROBLEMS:

(and so on...)


http://stonefoundati.../stoneZine1.pdf

[psyche101]

zoser, on 08 December 2012 - 08:55 AM, said:

You are making assumptions based on what tools are available to us.  The Onion Man is doing the same thing by talking about sets of pilot drills.  Hence my sarcastic reference to Wall Mart.

They have the tools to show you, that is indeed your "Ancient wall mart" more commonly known as workshops in the day.

zoser, on 08 December 2012 - 08:55 AM, said:

We need to be extremely clear that we are talking about stone age people.  There were no high speed drills or drill bits.  The Onion Man is postulating that they used bows which rotated some mysteriously formed tube of copper on way and then the other.  Extremely cumbersome, painfully time consuming and in all honesty unrealistic.

The same method used today was shown to you. These people are not using high speed bits and drills to accomplish what you say is impossible. Cumbersome yes, tiresome yes, hard work yes. I can see where you are falling down here. I have never seen you display the latter here yet. But you left our patience. that too is required, and something you refuse to acknowledge with regards to any aspect of the debates you throw yourself upon.

What have you shown onionmacer with regards to alternate methods? Stupid kiddie musings of Sound and Light tools? That is so ridiculous I do not know here to start. Particularly coming from someone who has expressly shown absolutely no understanding of the principals involved with that which you call an answer.

zoser, on 08 December 2012 - 08:55 AM, said:

Without a cone point keeping trhe end of a bit steady to get a start in red granite would be virtually impossible and the end result would be a total mess.

On the other hand there is this:

1 - You do not know that they dod not use a cone shaped tool, which is a very old method of reaming a hole.

2 - All you need is patience, you need the cut to start, once that is achieved it just gets easier as you get deeper.

zoser, on 08 December 2012 - 08:55 AM, said:

Now look how perfect it is and tell me in all honesty if that could have been done by spinning a copper tube back and forth with a bow using sand while some poor soul holds it erect while applying weight.  I tell you know way.

Yes, it has been done by a copper spinning tube, and the score marks inside are evidence of this. But more likely the coring was done in one direction as opposed to back and forth.

zoser, on 08 December 2012 - 08:55 AM, said:

The final smoking gun is if you look carefully inside the hole there are two score marks.  This hole was cut with extreme abrasion to have left this behind.  The copper would have totally shredded experiencing that level of abrasion.

Extreme abrasion? That is not light or sound cutting at all, that is what a copper tubes does exactly. That is the cutting method of the tube apparatus Zoser. Sand is used as an abrasive. No, the copper would not have shredded at all, remember the bronze blades used to cut Diamond that we use today?

What you have done is contradict yourself here.

zoser, on 08 December 2012 - 08:55 AM, said:

The edges are perfect.  There has been zero tool wander.

So if the edges are perfect, why is the hole not?

You simply refuse to even acknowledge that weathering so much as exists don't you.

Damn, you are going to make drafting this proposal a pleasurable task.