Dark_Lord Posted September 6, 2014 #1 Share Posted September 6, 2014 Much has been written on the subject of Inca stone masonry and the technology employed for quarrying, dressing and fitting enormous blocks of stone, some of which weighing in excess of 250 tons, with very simple tools and without knowledge of the wheel. What is perhaps less discussed is the widespread evidence of vitrification on many of the stones found at sites across Peru and Bolivia. Sites such as the Qorikancha in Cusco, the giant megalithic fortress of Sachsaywaman and the ruins of Ollantaytambo all bear traces of vitrification under conditions of extreme heat and pressure. What is perhaps even more puzzling, vitrification doesn't seem to be the consequence of some catastrophic event, but rather a technique deliberately employed by the ancient megalithic builders for some yet unknown purpose, possibly to strengthen their constructions or to increase the resistance of the joints. There is no explanation as to how vitrification of enormous masses of stone, sometimes including entire cliff faces, could have been achieved in the open air and without the massive furnaces required to reach temperatures greater than 1,000 degrees Celsius. The evidence for extensive vitrification of megalithic structures is hidden in plain sight throughout a number of sites in ancient Peru and Bolivia. Here is but a very limited overview of some of these sites and the anomalies that can be found there. I hope this will spur an interesting debate and conversation. Link: The Vitrified Ruins of Ancient Peru (With Pictures) http://unchartedruin...cient-peru.html 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted September 6, 2014 #2 Share Posted September 6, 2014 Oh dear lord.. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabby Kitten Posted September 6, 2014 #3 Share Posted September 6, 2014 That's really interesting. Thanks for the post OP 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Hammerclaw Posted September 6, 2014 #4 Share Posted September 6, 2014 From the Latin, vitreum--glass. Doesn't necessarily require heat. Certain chemical reactions also result in glass. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swede Posted September 7, 2014 #5 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Much has been written on the subject of Inca stone masonry and the technology employed for quarrying, dressing and fitting enormous blocks of stone, some of which weighing in excess of 250 tons, with very simple tools and without knowledge of the wheel. What is perhaps less discussed is the widespread evidence of vitrification on many of the stones found at sites across Peru and Bolivia. Sites such as the Qorikancha in Cusco, the giant megalithic fortress of Sachsaywaman and the ruins of Ollantaytambo all bear traces of vitrification under conditions of extreme heat and pressure. What is perhaps even more puzzling, vitrification doesn't seem to be the consequence of some catastrophic event, but rather a technique deliberately employed by the ancient megalithic builders for some yet unknown purpose, possibly to strengthen their constructions or to increase the resistance of the joints. There is no explanation as to how vitrification of enormous masses of stone, sometimes including entire cliff faces, could have been achieved in the open air and without the massive furnaces required to reach temperatures greater than 1,000 degrees Celsius. The evidence for extensive vitrification of megalithic structures is hidden in plain sight throughout a number of sites in ancient Peru and Bolivia. Here is but a very limited overview of some of these sites and the anomalies that can be found there. I hope this will spur an interesting debate and conversation. Link: The Vitrified Ruins of Ancient Peru (With Pictures) http://unchartedruin...cient-peru.html How truly insightful. The "blog" of a newly minted MBA graduate. Apparently of circa the mid-latter 20's in age. Who would appear to have no significant education, training, or experience in geology, archaeology, the effects of lithic heat-treatment, cultural practices, environmental effects on lithic materials in a given environment, etc., etc. But does have the financial wherewithal (as demonstrated by the Harvard affiliation and travel expenditures), to physically follow the well trodden paths of a number of previous fringe "authors". The only true "mysteries" here would appear to be the application of his recently acquired and expensive MBA, the financial tolerance of his parents, and the (apparently) questionable value of a current Harvard MBA. There was a time when the forementioned institution produced qualified graduates. . 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenemet Posted September 7, 2014 #6 Share Posted September 7, 2014 "Mysterious vitrified stones" -- as others declared, labeled "vitrified" and "mysterious" by people who can't tell diorite from greywacke. Basically, the whole area is an intrusive batholith. It's igneous (which means that the "vitrification" was done in the earth by the volcano that produced the rock. http://www.adventurespecialists.org/mpgeology.html 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Hammerclaw Posted September 7, 2014 #7 Share Posted September 7, 2014 How truly insightful. The "blog" of a newly minted MBA graduate. Apparently of circa the mid-latter 20's in age. Who would appear to have no significant education, training, or experience in geology, archaeology, the effects of lithic heat-treatment, cultural practices, environmental effects on lithic materials in a given environment, etc., etc. But does have the financial wherewithal (as demonstrated by the Harvard affiliation and travel expenditures), to physically follow the well trodden paths of a number of previous fringe "authors". The only true "mysteries" here would appear to be the application of his recently acquired and expensive MBA, the financial tolerance of his parents, and the (apparently) questionable value of a current Harvard MBA. There was a time when the forementioned institution produced qualified graduates. . Apparently Vir has joined Ambassador Molari in his research. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harte Posted September 7, 2014 #8 Share Posted September 7, 2014 The only true "mysteries" here would appear to be the application of his recently acquired and expensive MBA, the financial tolerance of his parents, and the (apparently) questionable value of a current Harvard MBA. There was a time when the forementioned institution produced qualified graduates. Swede, If you're in the mood for a chuckle, check out the guy this fratboy lists as his 4th "reference" (the only reference having anything to do with vitrification.) Jan Peter De Jong The guy's a tour guide in Peru. The other info concerning the various sites the blogger claims comes from Protzen. Harte Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrooma Posted September 7, 2014 #9 Share Posted September 7, 2014 http://skeptoid.com/mobile/4326 . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmt_sesh Posted September 7, 2014 #10 Share Posted September 7, 2014 How truly insightful. The "blog" of a newly minted MBA graduate. Apparently of circa the mid-latter 20's in age. Who would appear to have no significant education, training, or experience in geology, archaeology, the effects of lithic heat-treatment, cultural practices, environmental effects on lithic materials in a given environment, etc., etc. But does have the financial wherewithal (as demonstrated by the Harvard affiliation and travel expenditures), to physically follow the well trodden paths of a number of previous fringe "authors". The only true "mysteries" here would appear to be the application of his recently acquired and expensive MBA, the financial tolerance of his parents, and the (apparently) questionable value of a current Harvard MBA. There was a time when the forementioned institution produced qualified graduates. . The dangers of the internet, Swede. I'd wager a Harvard education is still worth its weight, but that doesn't keep the degree holder from disregarding the quality education and going off on his own questionable track. It's been done before. But as for the internet, anyone can publish pretty much anything they want with no regard to proper research protocols or proper observation of extant evidence. And a blog, no less. I wouldn't be surprised if this fellow is using his MBA certificate as a drink coaster. Vetrification is hardly a new idea—it's been done to death right here at UM. But there's a reason the academic word pays it no mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark_Lord Posted September 7, 2014 Author #11 Share Posted September 7, 2014 (edited) http://skeptoid.com/mobile/4326 . Very interesting article. Thanks for posting it! If vitrification is indeed real, and was practiced in ancient times (see the case of the Scottish vitrified forts), then the question is by what means it was achieved and to serve what purpose. Logically, the four step research process applied in the case of the vitrified forts of Scotland could well be applied to the apparently vitrified ruins of ancient Peru: Is vitrification real? Is the observed evidence compatible with the application of intense heat/pressure or are there other,more simple, explanations? Could such an effect be achieved with the simple tools available at the time? And in that case, can it be replicated? If not, then what technology level does it imply for the people who built these structures? I would be happy if we could discuss these four questions with those here who have actually had a chance to observe the phenomenon by themselves or have at least looked at the photographic evidence. I trust we can all learn something from this enquiry. Edited September 7, 2014 by Dark_Lord Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaylemurph Posted September 7, 2014 #12 Share Posted September 7, 2014 How truly insightful. The "blog" of a newly minted MBA graduate. Apparently of circa the mid-latter 20's in age. Who would appear to have no significant education, training, or experience in geology, archaeology, the effects of lithic heat-treatment, cultural practices, environmental effects on lithic materials in a given environment, etc., etc. But does have the financial wherewithal (as demonstrated by the Harvard affiliation and travel expenditures), to physically follow the well trodden paths of a number of previous fringe "authors". The only true "mysteries" here would appear to be the application of his recently acquired and expensive MBA, the financial tolerance of his parents, and the (apparently) questionable value of a current Harvard MBA. There was a time when the forementioned institution produced qualified graduates. . To be fair, an MBA is a Master of Business Administration: it makes no claim other than its holder can tell how many beans makes five, or their suitability to sell icemakers to Inuits. It certifies no knowledge of any art or science. Even at Harvard. --Jaylemurph 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquatus1 Posted September 7, 2014 #13 Share Posted September 7, 2014 **Guys, let's tone down the knee-jerk reactions a bit. Yeah, I agree, we've seen it before, but this is a discussion forum, and not everyone has been here as long as some of us have.** **Save the frustration for when posters have demonstrated themselves to be willfully ignorant. Don't blow up on the first page. That just makes you a cynic, not a skeptic.** 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Wearer of Hats Posted September 7, 2014 #14 Share Posted September 7, 2014 (edited) So what could have caused the vitrification (assuming it is vitrification)? One theory, that appeals to the Doctor Who fan in me, is that such cities survived an alien war with nukes. Edited September 7, 2014 by Sir Wearer of Hats Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Spartan Posted September 7, 2014 #15 Share Posted September 7, 2014 is the OP the same long haired "Dark Lord" of U-M, of 2012 fame, who went to live in south america with his family to prepare themselves/save themselves from the "impending" cataclysm of 2012??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted September 7, 2014 #16 Share Posted September 7, 2014 I wouldnt say he's a nooby Joined:31 Dec 2004 Gender:Not Selected 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stereologist Posted September 7, 2014 #17 Share Posted September 7, 2014 The problem with vitrification is that people begin the word, assume it is true, and then try to explain how it happened. Step 1 is to examine the evidence Step 2 is to assign a label to it that is appropriate for the available evidence. There has been ample discussion here about vitrification. Typically, the person pushing the term has not been able to define the term. Even if they extend some semblance of a definition, which has taken up to 20 pages to accomplish, the next problem is that they never show any evidence that suggests vitrification. Instead they show polished rocks or wet rocks or issues dealing with digital cameras, etc. The onus is on the person proposing in this case it is you. So please tell us what this word means as well as show examples of vitrification. The web site you linked to showed no vitrification at all. The web site just made unwarranted statements about something being vitrified. If you look up the definition you will see that there is no mention of the properties indicating vitrification on the website. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harte Posted September 8, 2014 #18 Share Posted September 8, 2014 is the OP the same long haired "Dark Lord" of U-M, of 2012 fame, who went to live in south america with his family to prepare themselves/save themselves from the "impending" cataclysm of 2012??? You might be thinking of Darkbreed. Those "Darkies" are all the same. Darke 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toyomotor Posted September 8, 2014 #19 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Oh boy! How quickly some people turn to ad hominem attacks rather than arguing the topic. I'm not a scientist, nor do I have a scientific bent, so I can't say if what the OP has posted is correct or not, but if I had the knowledge to attack what he's written, that's what a forum is for, discussion and debate. Those who have attacked Dark Lord show a lack of knowledge of the topic so they go for the jugular. He wins, hands down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harte Posted September 8, 2014 #20 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Well, personally, I attacked his source. Harte 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toyomotor Posted September 8, 2014 #21 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Well, personally, I attacked his source. Harte Yes, you did indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stereologist Posted September 8, 2014 #22 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Oh boy! How quickly some people turn to ad hominem attacks rather than arguing the topic. I'm not a scientist, nor do I have a scientific bent, so I can't say if what the OP has posted is correct or not, but if I had the knowledge to attack what he's written, that's what a forum is for, discussion and debate. Those who have attacked Dark Lord show a lack of knowledge of the topic so they go for the jugular. He wins, hands down. The problem is that no one shows evidence for vitrification. Instead they show mineralized surfaces or polished surfaces and claim it is vitrified. If you look through the large of threads that have discussed the topic you will see that the proponents of the vitrified claim hardly ever try to define what is meant by vitrified. Instead they post and repost photographs showing shiny rocks. Those photographs do not support the claims of vitrification because they do not show that vitrification has occurred. You can review the threads to see that there are wet rocks and polished rocks and digital camera issues. The one report I recall even shows that the material is a mineral, i.e. not vitrified. After endless discussions that are not productive you have to realize people get tired of the spamming of threads with the same tired claims that never, ever attempt to support the claim of vitrification. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questionmark Posted September 8, 2014 #23 Share Posted September 8, 2014 The problem is that no one shows evidence for vitrification. Instead they show mineralized surfaces or polished surfaces and claim it is vitrified. If you look through the large of threads that have discussed the topic you will see that the proponents of the vitrified claim hardly ever try to define what is meant by vitrified. Instead they post and repost photographs showing shiny rocks. Those photographs do not support the claims of vitrification because they do not show that vitrification has occurred. You can review the threads to see that there are wet rocks and polished rocks and digital camera issues. The one report I recall even shows that the material is a mineral, i.e. not vitrified. After endless discussions that are not productive you have to realize people get tired of the spamming of threads with the same tired claims that never, ever attempt to support the claim of vitrification. What? I got a vitrified kitchen counter? Aliens in my kitchen! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stereologist Posted September 8, 2014 #24 Share Posted September 8, 2014 What? I got a vitrified kitchen counter? Aliens in my kitchen! We'll accept you at your word that aliens are in your kitchen and have applied rock softening technology since that is the only way it could possibly have happened. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark_Lord Posted September 8, 2014 Author #25 Share Posted September 8, 2014 (edited) Here is a possible definition of vitrification (from Wikipedia): "Vitrification (from Latin vitreum, "glass" via French vitrifier) is the transformation of a substance into a glass.[1] Usually, it is achieved by rapidly cooling a liquid through the glass transition. Certain chemical reactions also result in glasses" I believe it is interesting for the topic at hand that vitrification can be achieved both through the application of extreme heat followed by rapid cooling, or through chemical reactions. And here is what characterizes the vitrified stones visible at many sites in Peru: A shiny, glossy appearance that reflects light like a mirror The presence of a “layer” on the surface of the stone, where the apparent vitrification is visible Evidence of vitrification in places where it would be illogical or simply impossible to achieve a similar level of polish by any other more conventional technique (such as hammering, chiseling or polishing with an abrasive substance such as sand or quartz powder), for instance in the interior of caves and tunnels or on the contact surfaces of stones that would have obviously remained hidden from sight (as in the case of vitrified joints) An evident discoloration or change in color and texture of the stone in areas where the vitrification phenomenon is apparent Marks in the stone or other evidence that might suggest that the stone was indeed molten or softened at some point during construction In a number of cases, the presence of a residual magnetic charge in the stone, detectable by means of a compass (although it is unclear how this might be related to the vitrification observed, if at all) Edited September 8, 2014 by Dark_Lord Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now