Abramelin Posted February 20, 2013 #7151 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Pyramid issue all proven. Not stone age men. Not tomb. Advanced power generator. The work of ancient aliens. Anyone researching the issue particularly looking at the work of Dunn and supporting ideas from other contemporary researchers would naturally reach the same conclusion. Zoser, you said you had been an engineer. Well, I have a brother who is head-engineer of an American company here in Holland, and he regularly travels to Russia, Sweden, Italy and so on for his work. I showed/sent him this thread, and he just asked me this simple question, "Why do believe this man Zoser is an engineer?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted February 20, 2013 #7152 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Why do some appear pointed and some not? Could it be that some bulged out more than others? Come on chaps think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted February 20, 2013 #7153 Share Posted February 20, 2013 (edited) Zoser, you said you had been an engineer. Well, I have a brother who is head-engineer of an American company here in Holland, and he regularly travels to Russia, Sweden, Italy and so on for his work. I showed/sent him this thread, and he just asked me this simple question, "Why do believe this man Zoser is an engineer?" Come on Abe; your a clever chap. Look at the pics and try and explain it any other way. Edited February 20, 2013 by zoser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted February 20, 2013 #7154 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Come on Abe; your a clever chap. Look at the pics and try and explain it any other way. No zoser, do not swerve when asked a direct question. Answer it., Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abramelin Posted February 20, 2013 #7155 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Their traces are clearly discernible. Try and explain the three distinct types of marks if you would. Nice avatar btw. Why leave marks like that? No, I tried to ask you where you get the info from that the artefacts were made using alien technology. All you can say that you don't know how it was made, but not that aliens did it. Meaning: you will have to compare it with known alien technology, and I doubt you can. == The avatar is based on an old book by Priestley. I added the 2 raven banners on top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DingoLingo Posted February 20, 2013 #7156 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Come on Abe; your a clever chap. Look at the pics and try and explain it any other way. we already know the answer.. so back to you zoser.. why would they leave it like that if the stone was made soft.. why didnt they just smooth it out.. what purpose for leaving the marks in it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted February 20, 2013 #7157 Share Posted February 20, 2013 No zoser, do not swerve when asked a direct question. Answer it., Answer what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaentum Posted February 20, 2013 #7158 Share Posted February 20, 2013 No zoser, do not swerve when asked a direct question. Answer it., Don't expect him to answer it. He'll avoid it like my post where I totally disproved the "Great Pyramid is a reactor/generator" theory 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted February 20, 2013 #7159 Share Posted February 20, 2013 (edited) we already know the answer.. so back to you zoser.. why would they leave it like that if the stone was made soft.. why didnt they just smooth it out.. what purpose for leaving the marks in it? Did they need to make them completely flat? Obviously not. The Coricancha wall petty much is completely flat so there is proof that they could. It looks to me as if there were only interested in removing some bulges. Your turn; what are the marks doing there? Edited February 20, 2013 by zoser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted February 20, 2013 #7160 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Don't expect him to answer it. He'll avoid it like my post where I totally disproved the "Great Pyramid is a reactor/generator" theory Precisely. One can expect very little from zoser except youtube vids with no explanation in advance, and constant back and forth between subjects. He knows he is wrong...I firmly believe he just gets bored and so wants to bait everyone.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abramelin Posted February 20, 2013 #7161 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Come on Abe; your a clever chap. Look at the pics and try and explain it any other way. Smart enough to say that we maybe don't know YET how the ancients may have done it, but not that it is proof aliens did it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted February 20, 2013 #7162 Share Posted February 20, 2013 I maintain: 1) Stamping 2) Scraping 3) Pointing. All in a condition of softened stone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DingoLingo Posted February 20, 2013 #7163 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Did they need to make them completely flat? Obviously not. The Coricancha wall petty much is completely flat so there is proof that they could. It looks to me as if there were only interested in removing some bulges. Your turn; what are the marks doing there? those are just shaping marks.. your point? it could have been a bump that needed to be removed.. maybe a odd color patch.. your turn.. what are the marks doing there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abramelin Posted February 20, 2013 #7164 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Did they need to make them completely flat? Obviously not. The Coricancha wall petty much is completely flat so there is proof that they could. It looks to me as if there were only interested in removing some bulges. Your turn; what are the marks doing there? All these numerous little dents. I just love'm, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted February 20, 2013 #7165 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Smart enough to say that we maybe don't know YET how the ancients may have done it, but not that it is proof aliens did it. That's ok. There is also the 'why'. If that was not softened stone then why do it. Some pointed some not, some stamped some not, some scraped some not. Why are they there at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abramelin Posted February 20, 2013 #7166 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Don't expect him to answer it. He'll avoid it like my post where I totally disproved the "Great Pyramid is a reactor/generator" theory What? Did you? Where?? LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DingoLingo Posted February 20, 2013 #7167 Share Posted February 20, 2013 I maintain: 1) Stamping 2) Scraping 3) Pointing. All in a condition of softened stone. remove no 1 and you also have it from stone carving and shaping.. again.. your point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted February 20, 2013 #7168 Share Posted February 20, 2013 those are just shaping marks.. your point? it could have been a bump that needed to be removed.. maybe a odd color patch.. your turn.. what are the marks doing there? Why put shaping marks there when they obviously could produce flat stone (Coricancha)? They had to be moulding marks. The same effect is exactly reproducible in clay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted February 20, 2013 #7169 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Frankly, if they did leave all those bulges and marks and creases in it when they built it with the incredible precision using their mind blowing technology, then a pretty shoddy job they did of it. Suppose you'd hired a firm of builders to build you an extension, and they'd left drill holes and chisel marks and chipped bits off and squeezed anything in wherever they could fit it any old how; you'd call them a right bunch of cowboys, wouldn't you. Frankly this looks like anything but mind blowing precision. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abramelin Posted February 20, 2013 #7170 Share Posted February 20, 2013 That's ok. There is also the 'why'. If that was not softened stone then why do it. Some pointed some not, some stamped some not, some scraped some not. Why are they there at all? Zoser, why and how we may never know, or not exactly. But because we may never know doesn't automatically mean alien intervention. THAT is my pioint. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted February 20, 2013 #7171 Share Posted February 20, 2013 (edited) * see below. * Edited February 20, 2013 by Lord Vetinari Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted February 20, 2013 #7172 Share Posted February 20, 2013 This has been stamped. My guess is that they needed to press the bulging stone back in. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DingoLingo Posted February 20, 2013 #7173 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Why put shaping marks there when they obviously could produce flat stone (Coricancha)? They had to be moulding marks. The same effect is exactly reproducible in clay. ok quite true.. but also like clay.. you can remove the molding marks.. so again.. why were they left? you asked us why they were they.. we are asking you the same thing.. we say its from the stone carving.. you say its from molding.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abramelin Posted February 20, 2013 #7174 Share Posted February 20, 2013 This has been stamped. My guess is that they needed to press the bulging stone back in. Good, so let's say they softened the stone by a yet unknown process. But where is the proof of aliens? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted February 20, 2013 #7175 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Zoser, why and how we may never know, or not exactly. But because we may never know doesn't automatically mean alien intervention. THAT is my pioint. I see your point Abe. Other evidence supports the use of high tech. It's when the weight of evidence all stacks up to the same conclusion. ok quite true.. but also like clay.. you can remove the molding marks.. so again.. why were they left? you asked us why they were they.. we are asking you the same thing.. we say its from the stone carving.. you say its from molding.. No need to do that with stone carving. No one carves stone with stamp marks (think about it). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts