Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
Skim Milky

Puma Punku

684 posts in this topic

Man, you gotta love The History Channel. Most people, apparently, myself included, had never even heard of the ruins of Puma Punku in Bolivia. I saw a video on this site and decided to start a discussion on this incredible topic. If you aren't familiar with Puma Punku, go google it. Why isn't this garnering more attention? The ruins really do look as if some great force, (perhaps an earthquake?) literally tore this site apart. The precise cutting and drilling seen all over the site is unreal. I've read that diamond-tipped tools are a neccesity in order to cut this extremely hard rock, (granite and diorite), which reportedly yields only to diamond as some of the hardest substances on Earth. Also, some of these stones weigh over 800 tons. With no trees in the area to build any type of ramps or pulleys, how did they transport these huge blocks with the nearest quary being 10 miles away? The blocks themselves fit together like an elaborate puzzle to form....something. How could individuals plan and execute such an ambitious project without even basic writing? Are the history books in our schools the real science fiction? Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I havent actually seen that documentary but the whole Tiahuanaco area has fascinated me for years as have the pyramids. Does it say in the documentary how old they believe the site is and what method(s) they used to come to this conclusion? I know they have used carbon dating but cant find any other means of dating used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I havent actually seen that documentary but the whole Tiahuanaco area has fascinated me for years as have the pyramids. Does it say in the documentary how old they believe the site is and what method(s) they used to come to this conclusion? I know they have used carbon dating but cant find any other means of dating used.

The site was settled about 1500BCE but the majority of it is 1700-1500 years old.

Skim, the History (lol) Channel is full of crap mate, you can can drill granite with steel.

The site has had plenty of attention, but the pseudo-History channel isn't interested in telling you that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Skim, haven't seen you on UM for a while. Welcome back!

There seems a bit of renewed interest in Puma Punku, and I was wondering why - I should have realised something on TV was the instigator!

I haven't seen the show myself, but it seems there are a few inaccuracies in it. For a start - which stone blocks weigh in excess of 800 tons?

Here is a site devoted to Puma Punku, and it cites one stone weighing around 440 tons (still impressive), but none of the weight the tv show seemed to indicate? As for the large stone blocks that are there, well Puma Punku was a port and the biggest blocks are where the piers were. Not to difficult to reason they were floated into place then partially sunk.

I've also read online reports of the site being "14,000 years old". That seems to be a little myth grown up around confusing the elevation of the site (it sits around 14,000 feet above sea level - on what was a large lake) with it's age.

Even the site I linked to has some dubious reasoning on it. The diorite could quite easily have been drilled with hard wood or copper drills - provided you have a little quartz dust or similar material to help with the abrasion (use the quartz, Luke, use the quartz!)

I'm trying to find a proper archaeological website with more info, but they seem scarce. Anyway, others might have more info about what is indeed a fascinating ruin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I havent actually seen that documentary but the whole Tiahuanaco area has fascinated me for years as have the pyramids. Does it say in the documentary how old they believe the site is and what method(s) they used to come to this conclusion? I know they have used carbon dating but cant find any other means of dating used.

I don't think there are any solid conclusions as to the date. Some believe it as little as a thousand years old, some as old as 10,000 years old. Not being in the field, I really can't say either way. But I will say that it's amazing no matter which side of the spectrum you align yourself with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Hey Skim, haven't seen you on UM for a while. Welcome back!

There seems a bit of renewed interest in Puma Punku, and I was wondering why - I should have realised something on TV was the instigator!

I haven't seen the show myself, but it seems there are a few inaccuracies in it. For a start - which stone blocks weigh in excess of 800 tons?

Here is a site devoted to Puma Punku, and it cites one stone weighing around 440 tons (still impressive), but none of the weight the tv show seemed to indicate? As for the large stone blocks that are there, well Puma Punku was a port and the biggest blocks are where the piers were. Not to difficult to reason they were floated into place then partially sunk.

I've also read online reports of the site being "14,000 years old". That seems to be a little myth grown up around confusing the elevation of the site (it sits around 14,000 feet above sea level - on what was a large lake) with it's age.

Even the site I linked to has some dubious reasoning on it. The diorite could quite easily have been drilled with hard wood or copper drills - provided you have a little quartz dust or similar material to help with the abrasion (use the quartz, Luke, use the quartz!)

I'm trying to find a proper archaeological website with more info, but they seem scarce. Anyway, others might have more info about what is indeed a fascinating ruin.

It's great to be back on here again. Good to chat with you once more.

I think we'll both agree alot of these sites seem somewhat biased.

I havent heard the theory of floating the stones into place. Very interesting. I wonder what type of vessel would be neccesary to float such a massive block.

Curious as to your opinion on this, what do you think about these individuals constructing such an elaborate puzzle without writing to plan and organize such an effort? Couldn't the historians be wrong, with evidence of writing long gone?

Also, I wonder, how long has this lake bed been dried up?

Edited by Skim Milky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's great to be back on here again. Good to chat with you once more.

I think we'll both agree alot of these sites seem somewhat biased.

I havent heard the theory of floating the stones into place. Very interesting. I wonder what type of vessel would be neccesary to float such a massive block.

Curious as to your opinion on this, what do you think about these individuals constructing such an elaborate puzzle without writing to plan and organize such an effort? Couldn't the historians be wrong, with evidence of writing long gone?

Also, I wonder, how long has this lake bed been dried up?

Having no system of writing doesn't mean drawing is impossible, Skim. These people had language, and the ability to draw, what else is needed for a plan? As for the boats, as far as I know, large reed boats (like rafts) are mooted as being the vessels used.

The lake in question (Lake Titicaca) is still there, but I don't believe the site of Puma Punku is on the actual shoreline any longer (?). Sorry, that wasn't clear in my first post and I realise I made it sound as if the lake no longer existed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Having no system of writing doesn't mean drawing is impossible, Skim. These people had language, and the ability to draw, what else is needed for a plan? As for the boats, as far as I know, large reed boats (like rafts) are mooted as being the vessels used.

The lake in question (Lake Titicaca) is still there, but I don't believe the site of Puma Punku is on the actual shoreline any longer (?). Sorry, that wasn't clear in my first post and I realise I made it sound as if the lake no longer existed.

I think you are correct, I've read somewhere that the level of lake Titicaca actually was a lot higher higher than now and Puma Punku was actually on it's shores at some time in history. The quarry for the blocks used in Puma Punku, was on the western shore of Titicaca, some ten miles away. So it stand to reason that they must have used some floating device / boat for the blocks. It would be the most effective way of easely getting them there and placing them.

I'll try to find the sources for my lake and quarry info again. Been quite a while since I came across it, so please give me some time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here they are trying to find out how and if the people who created Tiahuanacu/ Puma Punku used boats:

http://www.archaeology.org/interactive/tiw...experiment.html

It's an interesting website:

http://www.archaeology.org/interactive/tiw...pumapunku1.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here they are trying to find out how and if the people who created Tiahuanacu/ Puma Punku used boats:

http://www.archaeology.org/interactive/tiw...experiment.html

It's an interesting website:

http://www.archaeology.org/interactive/tiw...pumapunku1.html

Nice sites mate, plenty of good info. The experiment these people did, transporting a 9 ton stone from Copacabana to Tiahuanacu on a reed boat, was a success. Now we can assume, that during the construction phase of Puma Punku they did pretty much the same; the level of the lake being higher or not, makes in this case no difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's some film on it...

then add the Gobekli Tepe digs to it...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TU2qwoMfq-U

Do you think that perhaps there is any connection here?

age wise.. or styles.. craftsmanship.?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The expertise involved in the construction of these buildings seem to hint at vast knowledge..years of experience..

Chance? that somehow these ancients.. many thousands of years ago just happened to intuit how to build these vast constructions out of the blue... crafts that require exact measurements..precise placement of up to 40 ton blocks...

I saw one show where they hinted that they had some pulley system where they raised and lowered these massive blocks.. and continued to shave bits of the boulders until they fit cleanly.. so exactly that there wasn't a hair's breadth space between them... :rolleyes::unsure2:<_<:huh:^_^:no: No... can you imagine the ropes breaking .. slippage... whilst whittling down the sides.. creating and adjusting the connection points of the perfect grooves to join these blocks...

or even floating them into place...

I wonder can we duplicate this in an underwater scenario.. building high tide underwater constructions... float blocks into place.. chip off pieces till they fit exactly...?

Is there signs of water erosion on them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's some film on it...

then add the Gobekli Tepe digs to it...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TU2qwoMfq-U

Do you think that perhaps there is any connection here?

age wise.. or styles.. craftsmanship.?

It's not because Charlton Heston played Moses in the movies, that he knows what he is talking about. Actors have been wrong more often than not. There is no radiocarbon or stratigrafical evidence that Tiahuanaco, nor Puma Punku are 12.000 years old. The oldest city in America is Caral with 5000 years aproximativly, if I'm not mistaken.

Göbekli Tepe is another matter altogether. Funny fact, Göbekli Tepe is Turkish for "Hill with a Navel" :D ; It is a hilltop sanctuary built on the highest point of a mountain ridge about 15 km northeast of the town of Şanlıurfa (Urfa) in southeastern Turkey. The site was erected by hunter-gatherers in the 10th millennium BC (ca 11,500 years ago). Together with the site of Nevalı Çori, it has revolutionised understanding of the Eurasian Neolithic and is indeed the oldest found temple / settlement in the world.

Are both Göbekli Tepe and Puma Punku connected? I really don't see how, given that they are on different continents and stem from totally different times. Also there are the notable differences in architecture, styles and craftsmanship. These two sites are totally unrelated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An ancient site next to Tiahuanaco in Bolivia.

A short 7 min video that focusses on the engineering enigmas.

Sensible comments please - no theories about copper hammers, pounding, blocks and tackles, and 2 mile long ramps.

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An ancient site next to Tiahuanaco in Bolivia.

A short 7 min video that focusses on the engineering enigmas.

Sensible comments please - no theories about copper hammers, pounding, blocks and tackles, and 2 mile long ramps.

Just Realised that this topic has been raised in the Alien Astronaut thread - I did'nt mean to repeat a thread - honest!

Diorite and Granite - why these two specific types of stone? Why not use a softer more easily workable material?

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zoser, in a new thread with the same name]

An ancient site next to Tiahuanaco in Bolivia.

A short 7 min video that focusses on the engineering enigmas.

Sensible comments please - no theories about copper hammers, pounding, blocks and tackles, and 2 mile long ramps.

Say Zoser, are the comments in this thread not 'sensible' enough for you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess the truly great mysteries just will not go away :rolleyes:

Anyway, here is an interesting point that I believe up until now has been missed:

Stonehenge - Sarsen and Bluestone

The Great Pyramid - Limestone and Granite

Puma Punku - Diorite and Granite

There could be something in this. I am thinking along the lines of positive/negative, or northpole/south pole. I recall touching the stones at Stonehenge and one felt warm, the other cold to the touch.

Is the fact of the two stones coincidence, or purposeful?

If the ancients went to the enormous trouble to construct these sites, it is sensible to me to conjucture that they must have derived some kind of functional purpose from them. I mean other than simply the usual banal explanations such as ritual practise, defense or homage.

What if the interaction between the two types of stone produced some kind of energy?

This is where we need experts on the properties of stones.

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess the truly great mysteries just will not go away :rolleyes:

Anyway, here is an interesting point that I believe up until now has been missed:

Stonehenge - Sarsen and Bluestone

The Great Pyramid - Limestone and Granite

Puma Punku - Diorite and Granite

There could be something in this. I am thinking along the lines of positive/negative, or northpole/south pole. I recall touching the stones at Stonehenge and one felt warm, the other cold to the touch.

Is the fact of the two stones coincidence, or purposeful?

If the ancients went to the enormous trouble to construct these sites, it is sensible to me to conjucture that they must have derived some kind of functional purpose from them. I mean other than simply the usual banal explanations such as ritual practise, defense or homage.

What if the interaction between the two types of stone produced some kind of energy?

This is where we need experts on the properties of stones.

To produce energy they would need to have an exothermic reaction, this doesn't happen. Basic chemistry. However, granite can commonly contain uranium and is commonly radioactive.

Was one side of the stones in direct sunlight by any chance? There is nothing magical about them.

Granite is a attractive rock, it looks nice and it shines.

Why do you think the banal explanations have to be dismissed?

Also those 3 monuments where all built at completely different times 3100 BCE for stonehenge (though finish was over 1000 years later), 2650BCE for Giza and 300CE for Puma Punku

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The dates are not important really to my conjecture (and I firmly dispute them anyway).

The Sarsen and Bluestone at Stonehenge are displayed at the entrance to the site, and visitors are encouraged to touch them to feel the effect - it is very noticeable.

Your comment about the uranium in granite interests me though.

My main point also is this:

Is it feasible that the ancients had the time and resources to produce 'luxury architecture'?

I know that we do today. We produce 'folly architecture' and modern art as two examples. A lot of our architecture indicates an exhuberent culture where art and architecture sometimes merge. Is this likely that our ancients built things out of these sentiments, or is it more likely that to them architecture was far more practical and purposeful?

I tend toward the latter, but I will leave you to form your own judgements.

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Say Zoser, are the comments in this thread not 'sensible' enough for you?

Apologies for creating another thread - I will search the DB in future :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Topics merged :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tend toward the latter, but I will leave you to form your own judgements.

thanks zoser for your kind words in the other thread.... much appreciated...

puma punku is indeed something outside the realm of our 'traditional' understanding ;)

though all the anomalies are mind boggling... i find these artifacts... 'cant think of an adjective' ^_^

tia.staple.jpg

138.jpg

how did they achieve that????

havent checked the video links in this thread....

but here is another link.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sy59Dk6hxPU skip to 6:39

cherio

Edited by mcrom901

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There will be no thruths for the masses. Anything 'discovered' will never contain truths of any value because anything of value is always withheld. From CNN to NASA, you can't trust anything they say at all that you couldn't deduce from simple facts that you or your neighbor is aware of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.