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This topic has been archived.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

#4081    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

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

Posted 04 January 2013 - 07:01 PM

View Postseeder, on 04 January 2013 - 06:52 PM, said:

:w00t: :w00t: :w00t: :w00t: :w00t:

Just couldn't help myself!!!  Im such a sarcastic 'so and so' sometimes...

Edit:

Your fine seeder.  Don't worry.

Edited by zoser, 04 January 2013 - 07:09 PM.

Posted Image


#4082    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,109 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 04 January 2013 - 07:10 PM

View Postzoser, on 04 January 2013 - 06:35 PM, said:

Feel free to forward constructive ideas by all means.  So far all I see is evidence continuing to mount; slowly slowly catch the monkey is how I described it earlier.

My research time is limited now I'm back to work.  Every time I look at new close up images of these stones new features like this seem to be revealed and nothing is suggesting anything else but intense heat.

Maybe I'll find some new features tonight.  It's a great process and it's not relying on anyone's adding up; it does rely though on spotting detail.

Some of these dents and pockmarks could already have been present before the stones were cut from the quarry.

But weird as they may look, I still don't see them as clear proof of burning or excessive heat.


#4083    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,109 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 04 January 2013 - 07:16 PM

View Postzoser, on 04 January 2013 - 06:50 PM, said:

No doubt they are much more earthquake proof.  Is talking on behalf of the ancients really wise?  Can you back this statement up?  How many earthquakes did they actually experience?  How do we know?

Two things Abe I think we need to be careful about.  Assumption and translating everything into our terms.  Their terms were very different as demonstrated by their totally baffling architecture. Just like you accuse me of using the word 'evidence'.

The Inca most probably did the top layers after the original builders.  Lots of examples of this.  Back to the claim that there is nothing recognisable whatsoever in the megalithic building work in our frame of reference.

I hope you also read that scan of the 2 pages from John Hemming's book, "The Conquest of the Incas".

He clearly says that what many think are truely 'ancient' and pre-Inca structures were still being build during Incan times. And that was proven by archeological research.

And the whole Andes shakes continuously: it is a 'young' mountain range still in the process of growing. That will not have changed much even if you go back 10,000 years.


#4084    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,109 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 04 January 2013 - 07:21 PM

View Postzoser, on 04 January 2013 - 07:00 PM, said:

Interesting that Alfredo Gamarra also identifies 3 distinct styles.

Apart from that though very little of the above extract is supportable.  The dates, and attributing the work to the Inca is highly speculative and not supportable.

If someone could give a rational explanation as to why on the streets of Cuzco for example there is precision megalithic walls and only 3 meters away rough boulder and adobe work it may be a little more credible!

Other wise is goes on the same bookshelf as the other conjectures.

Hemmings didn't make it up: he based his words on archeological research. The guy is a true and acknowledged specialist in ancient cultures of South America.

And I have given you an explanation (4 times now) why some structures look sophisticated and why others look common.

Think cathedral and your own house.


#4085    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,109 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 04 January 2013 - 07:33 PM

View Postseeder, on 04 January 2013 - 06:16 PM, said:

:tu:  Hats off to your passionate research, its good to see a mystery getting fleshed out with places and names!  If zoser could put his heart into researching stuff, like a lot of us do, rather than just accepting the content of videos, we may see another side of zoser.  Who knows Abe, you just may solve a riddle and bring to the world an amazing substance that is long forgotten about!!

Well, maybe I am just a guy with no life and all the time of the world, lol. I can't talk for Zoser: he appears to have a life, and thus no time to really delve deeper into this stuff.

But here is more.

Lichen and certain microbes are able to dissolve rocks like granite using oxalates, and the process is (as already mentioned)  "chelation":

Biodeterioration of Stone in Tropical Environments: An Overview
by Rakesh Kumar,Anuradha V. Kumar

http://books.google....andstone&f=true


And back to a plant I think is the one we are looking for: Caladium.


(...) phytochemical analysis showed that caladium species had significantly higher levels (P < 0.05) of  Oxalate (10.10 %) and cyanogenic glycosides (5.20 %) than the rest of the samples.  The samples were found to be rich sources of macro minerals as well as some trace elements.

http://www.transcamp...2Dec200913.html


Cyanogenesis is the ability of some plants to
synthesize cyanogenic glycosides, which when
enzymically hydrolyzed, release cyanohydric acid
(HCN), known as prussic acid (Harborne, 1972,
1986, 1993)
.

http://www.scielo.br...n5/a06v43n5.pdf

http://www.botanical...cglycosides.htm

All The Parts Of The Caladium Bicolor Contain Toxic Substances
http://greensplant.b...or-contain.html


Caladium spp.

Family: Araceae
Malay Name: Keladi
Other Names: Mother-in-law plant, elephant’s ear, Angle-wings, Fancy-leaved Caladium, Candidum, Exposition, Pink cloud, Seagull, stoplight, Texas wonder, Caladium X hortulanum cv.caladium.

Information
These types of herbal plants have rhizomes. Daunya heart-shaped and has a green color and patterned red, white or other colors.

Use

Ornamental plant site

Poisoned

Toxic Part: Entire plant

Active ingredients: Calcium oxalate
Effects of Poisoning

Calcium oxalate is a sense of irritation with the glow and fire effects on the tongue, mouth and throat. Breathing difficulty occurs when swelling occurs at the pharyngeal tract. spasms in the abdomen and delirium. Other toxicity was reported numbness, nausea and vomiting.

Emergency Treatment

Clean the remaining plants from the body. Clean with soap and water if exposed to the skin. Gargle and drink water or milk if ingested as it can dissolve toxins in these plants. Sucking ice cubes to reduce pain in the mouth. Get medical attention immediately.


Posted Image

http://allabout-racu...ladium-spp.html

This is indeed some nasty weed.


.

Edited by Abramelin, 04 January 2013 - 08:02 PM.


#4086    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

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

Posted 04 January 2013 - 07:37 PM

View PostAbramelin, on 04 January 2013 - 07:10 PM, said:


Some of these dents and pockmarks could already have been present before the stones were cut from the quarry.


Unlikely.

But then if it was a handling mark why not discard the piece and start over?  Manipulating these blocks clearly wasn't difficult.  Suggests to me that it was done after initial build.

Posted Image


#4087    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

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

Posted 04 January 2013 - 07:41 PM

View PostAbramelin, on 04 January 2013 - 07:16 PM, said:

I hope you also read that scan of the 2 pages from John Hemming's book, "The Conquest of the Incas".

He clearly says that what many think are truely 'ancient' and pre-Inca structures were still being build during Incan times. And that was proven by archeological research.


Proof is proof, conjecture is conjecture; I've only managed to find a few paragraphs of de La Vega, but from what I have read he clearly saw nothing but only wrote hearsay.  I strongly suspect this guy is from the same camp.

I'm just watching a documentary of Gamarra's research.  If he has some good insights I'll let you know.

Posted Image


#4088    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,109 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 04 January 2013 - 07:46 PM

View Postzoser, on 04 January 2013 - 07:37 PM, said:

Unlikely.

But then if it was a handling mark why not discard the piece and start over?  Manipulating these blocks clearly wasn't difficult.  Suggests to me that it was done after initial build.

No, you have shown us very different protuberances.

There are those (like the horizontal ones on the stones of Ollantaytambo) that were very clearly human made. Either they used them for the attachment of ropes, or they used them as pivot points for levers (I had found a pic that showed exactly that, but lost it. No worries, I will find it again).

You say it was a handling mark, I say that some (not the Ollantaytambo ones) were there already. They found a layer of rock that suited their purpose. They split it to make building blocks. They noticed some of the blocks carried those already present and naturally formed protuberances. They still used these blocks because they would fit perfectly to the one that they spilt of from it.


#4089    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,109 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 04 January 2013 - 07:49 PM

View Postzoser, on 04 January 2013 - 07:41 PM, said:

Proof is proof, conjecture is conjecture; I've only managed to find a few paragraphs of de La Vega, but from what I have read he clearly saw nothing but only wrote hearsay.  I strongly suspect this guy is from the same camp.

I'm just watching a documentary of Gamarra's research.  If he has some good insights I'll let you know.

Archeological proof has nothing to do with what some chronicler said.

If you only knew who John Hemmings was, you wouldn't have said what you just said.

.


#4090    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,109 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 04 January 2013 - 08:49 PM

I think the last dozens of pages could be moved to the "Alternative Histories" forum.

All this, vitrification of stones, or chemically altering stones, herbs, birds, and so on....what has all that got to do with 'aliens'?

Not much, right?

That's unless one of you think 'aliens' used one of the techniques Zoser and I posted about.


.

Edited by Abramelin, 04 January 2013 - 08:52 PM.


#4091    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

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

Posted 04 January 2013 - 08:59 PM

Here are more pieces of the jigsaw puzzle.

In my summary on precision architecture I stated that the lips and steps in the stone wall joints were not intended but the result of different weight blocks acting on soft clay like stone.

Here is the proof in the form of blocks from a dismantled wall.  The images are snapshots taken from a documentary summarising Gamarra's findings:

Posted Image

Posted Image

Here is one picture that you would most probably have seen from the youtube clip on the subject of vitrification.  I didn't appreciate the significance of it until now.

Posted Image

The shine is the vitrification effect again.

The striking thing is the depth of the moulding.  This piece was again done when the stone was in a clay like condition and some moulding tool was run down the stone to create the snake effect.  The stone to the far right of the block must have been subject to the heat of the whole block because it too is vitrified but it wasn't smoothed to the same degree with the flat  moulding tool.

This is exactly the same effect you would get if a moulding tool was run across a piece of soft clay.  Then smoothed with a flat implement.

Can this be explained chemically?  It's too deep for that.  Unless the stone was hacked out to a certain depth first.  I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt here Abe.

It does look more and more to me like the result of heat however.  We know that heat does this.  We don't know that chemical does.  We also don't know that they had the quantity of any chemical to carry out burning to this degree.

Another smoking gun.

Edited by zoser, 04 January 2013 - 09:52 PM.

Posted Image


#4092    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

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

Posted 04 January 2013 - 09:01 PM

View PostAbramelin, on 04 January 2013 - 08:49 PM, said:

I think the last dozens of pages could be moved to the "Alternative Histories" forum.

All this, vitrification of stones, or chemically altering stones, herbs, birds, and so on....what has all that got to do with 'aliens'?

Not much, right?

That's unless one of you think 'aliens' used one of the techniques Zoser and I posted about.


.

Nice try Abe.  Better look at the above post first.

Posted Image


#4093    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

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

Posted 04 January 2013 - 09:03 PM

View PostAbramelin, on 04 January 2013 - 07:46 PM, said:

No, you have shown us very different protuberances.

There are those (like the horizontal ones on the stones of Ollantaytambo) that were very clearly human made. Either they used them for the attachment of ropes, or they used them as pivot points for levers (I had found a pic that showed exactly that, but lost it. No worries, I will find it again).

You say it was a handling mark, I say that some (not the Ollantaytambo ones) were there already. They found a layer of rock that suited their purpose. They split it to make building blocks. They noticed some of the blocks carried those already present and naturally formed protuberances. They still used these blocks because they would fit perfectly to the one that they spilt of from it.

The ones I produced were close ups.  No ropes could be attached to those.

Posted Image


#4094    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

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

Posted 04 January 2013 - 09:07 PM

View PostAbramelin, on 04 January 2013 - 07:21 PM, said:

Hemmings didn't make it up: he based his words on archeological research. The guy is a true and acknowledged specialist in ancient cultures of South America.

And I have given you an explanation (4 times now) why some structures look sophisticated and why others look common.

Think cathedral and your own house.

The explanations are not convincing Abe that's the problem. Regarding Hemming we need proof not more adherence to the party line.  There is so much hear say that only proof will do it now.  That is best acquired by looking at the evidence.

Edited by zoser, 04 January 2013 - 09:07 PM.

Posted Image


#4095    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

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

Posted 04 January 2013 - 09:23 PM

Playing devil's advocate and looking to see how it could not have been heat,  I came across this:

The same effect again.  Handling marks, or mistakes show up all the time; whatever they were they are undeniably deep mould marks.  Not chemically formed.  Again as if something dug in to the clay like blocks.  Just like as if someone put their foot into it and left a footprint.  The evidence is everywhere.  

Posted Image

The following image really proves the point.  Another example of dismantled blocks showing the sinking in effect.  Too deep for chemicals to penetrate.  The whole block was soft and it just sank in too much.  

Posted Image

Edited by zoser, 04 January 2013 - 09:23 PM.

Posted Image