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 14
Alphamale06

The Ancient Alien Theory Is True

10,149 posts in this topic

very crude attempt at diversion....you posted the skull, you insinuated the mystery, I as always provide evidence and facts

So great researcher, you post your silly fascination with skulls, you call yourself a researcher, yet why didn't you find the dna tests as per my efforts? Rather keep your posts going huh?

you do no research, any evidence that trounces your ill gotten theories is ignored time after time

.

What DNA?

Are you saying that you have DNA evidence of the Paracus skulls? If that is the case was Foerster wasting his time do you think?

All I found was that they ate fish and chips. As I said that's as profound as modern archaeology gets.

I'm sorry to sound crass; just sick of reading modern archaeological mindless pap

Nothing in that report to indicate who these people were, and why they looked the way they did. Pathetic.

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe it is possible that some ETs have visited earth in ancient times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and I believe it's possible Atlantis existed.

Sadly, it's not about what we believe, but wht we can prove.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are walls all over the UK built of the same stuff. A testament to intense labour, not high precision technology.

The latter is the basis for the visitor hypothesis.

PS I like your avatar name!

who was talking about the UK? I have provided ample evidence of the same style wall bullding asd found at PP all around the med.

and if you really really believe that no precision is used to build an arch...and then to build another on top of it....without any mortar..you really want to go get a check up from the neck up. I have no doubt on this statement alone you will get further ridiculed

anyway gotta go snowboarding while we have the snow...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and I believe it's possible Atlantis existed.

Sadly, it's not about what we believe, but wht we can prove.

I'm waiting for your proof against WoH. Presumably you have it?

who was talking about the UK? I have provided ample evidence of the same style wall bullding asd found at PP all around the med.

and if you really really believe that no precision is used to build an arch...and then to build another on top of it....without any mortar..you really want to go get a check up from the neck up. I have no doubt on this statement alone you will get further ridiculed

anyway gotta go snowboarding while we have the snow...

No precision in those photographs.

Just like dry stone walls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can somebody tell me if my following appraisal of this thread is correct, based on what I've seen so far?-

With a breathtaking display of open-mindedness and fearlessness in pushing the envelope of modernistic out-of-the-box thinking, Zoser and his devotees are running rings round the rest of you close-minded neanderthals, is that a fair assessment?.. ;)

Edited by Crikey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can somebody tell me if my following appraisal of this thread is correct, based on what I've seen so far?-

With a breathtaking display of open-mindedness and fearlessness in pushing the envelope of modernistic out-of-the-box thinking, Zoser and his devotees are running rings round the rest of you close-minded neanderthals, is that a fair assessment?.. ;)

Thanks for the compliment; one small correction though. I have no devotees other than maybe some silent observers.

It says to me that denial no longer works and that the mainstream explanations are rapidly losing credibility.

Short of a space ship being dug up at the Coricancha this debate is done as far as I can see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can somebody tell me if my following appraisal of this thread is correct, based on what I've seen so far?-

With a breathtaking display of open-mindedness and fearlessness in pushing the envelope of modernistic out-of-the-box thinking, Zoser and his devotees are running rings round the rest of you close-minded neanderthals, is that a fair assessment?.. ;)

Neanderthals? There were no neanderthals, they in fact were the ETs .

...hey, I think I might be on to something here ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no devotees other than maybe some silent observers..

Too true mate, you never know who's up there in geostationary orbit monitoring this forum-

"God sits on the circle of the earth" (Isa 40:22)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can somebody tell me if my following appraisal of this thread is correct, based on what I've seen so far?-

With a breathtaking display of open-mindedness and fearlessness in pushing the envelope of modernistic out-of-the-box thinking, Zoser and his devotees are running rings round the rest of you close-minded neanderthals, is that a fair assessment?.. ;)

Then maybe you should reread this thread, and show us where you see a sign of close-mindedness.

I talk for myself here when I say I have posted several alternative ways to explain the things discussed here. ways none of you socalled 'open-minded' people ever even dreamt of because you solely rely on the words and videos of your YouTube guru.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the compliment; one small correction though. I have no devotees other than maybe some silent observers.

It says to me that denial no longer works and that the mainstream explanations are rapidly losing credibility.

Short of a space ship being dug up at the Coricancha this debate is done as far as I can see.

Denial of what? That it were aliens who built the Peruvian and Bolivian structures?

Throughout this whole thread you haven't posted a shred of evidence of alien intervention.

All you posted was 'Look at this, we can't so that. Ergo: aliens'.

And yes: a real spaceship beneath Sacsayhuaman or the Coricancha and so on would be the ultimate proof of aliens visiting in the past.

.

Edited by Abramelin
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And yes: a real spaceship beneath Sacsayhuaman or the Coricancha and so on would be the ultimate proof of aliens visiting in the past.

.

Not a likely scenario.

The best we have is the evidence they left behind that modern understanding can neither interpret or reproduce.

Apart from that we must wait for Foerster to complete his work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a likely scenario.

The best we have is the evidence they left behind that modern understanding can neither interpret or reproduce.

Apart from that we must wait for Foerster to complete his work.

I don't expect a spaceship either, but wouldn't that be great news!

But I would settle for some unknown machine or contraption made of an unknown alloy using an unknown energy source, and preferably found inside or beneath one of these buildings.

"The best we have is the evidence they left behind that modern understanding can neither interpret or reproduce."

No, what you call 'evidence' are only artifacts and building blocks made and processed in a yet unknown way, not evidence of alien intervention.

And I think Davidovits experiments and theories will help us find out about the 'how'.

Google "Davidovits" AND "Geopolymer". The main criticism on his theory of chemically molding rock was that the crystalline structure of his artificially made blocks had a different crystalline structure of the blocks of the Egyptian pyramids. But - yep, I lost the link - I read that he had his blocks examined in a geological laboratory in France, and they concluded it was natural rock.

And then enter the same search terms in YouTube, and watch what he is able to do with his invention (or discovery).

Now I am not saying his experiments and theory prove the ancients used plant acids, but he sure has a strong point. If anything, he proved the ancients were capable of more than we give them credit for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, what you call 'evidence' are only artifacts and building blocks made and processed in a yet unknown way, not evidence of alien intervention.

I'll settle for that admission from you Abe. It's the first time you have said such a thing to my knowledge and it calls for a respect from me.

Rest assured you have that respect. I also acknowledge the last part of your sentence so rest assured that I am not counting you to be among the converted just yet.

I would just offer some caution though on the geopolymer theory. As I understand it, all it seems to do is superimpose a more preferred science fiction based theory on top of a less preferred one.

Also I cannot see how it can be applied to quartz based rock.

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll settle for that admission from you Abe. It's the first time you have said such a thing to my knowledge and it calls for a respect from me.

Rest assured you have that respect. I also acknowledge the last part of your sentence so rest assured that I am not counting you to be among the converted just yet.

I would just offer some caution though on the geopolymer theory. As I understand it, all it seems to do is superimpose a more preferred science fiction based theory on top of a less preferred one.

Also I cannot see how it can be applied to quartz based rock.

I'm quite sure I have said the same thing a few times before.

And the Geopolymer theory is based on what the ancient Egyptians showed us, plus what the Peruvian Huankas did, plus what that Peruvian priest found out with his experiments with plants.

Add to that the accounts of people encountering some plant with fleshy, red leaves, a foot high, corroding their spurs and softening rock, in the Amazon jungle, and I think I am on the right track of finding out how it all was done.

--

Andesite is quartz based, but it also has a 6% amount of CaO (calcium oxide) which can be treated with oxalic acid, as I showed you before.

But then only the surface will be changed. altered, and that is that shine, that 'vitrification' you keep talking about.

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Andesite is quartz based, but it also has a 6% amount of CaO (calcium oxide) which can be treated with oxalic acid, as I showed you before.

But then only the surface will be changed. altered, and that is that shine, that 'vitrification' you keep talking about.

.

Which rules out the possibility that the Andesite blocks were 'poured'. The geopolymer theory even falls down when considering the pyramids because the GP contains a significant amount of red granite.

Another theory is needed to account for the high precision work in the Kings Chamber for example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which rules out the possibility that the Andesite blocks were 'poured'. The geopolymer theory even falls down when considering the pyramids because the GP contains a significant amount of red granite.

Another theory is needed to account for the high precision work in the Kings Chamber for example.

And THAT'S why I posted before that only part of Davidovits' theory could be used to explain the Peruvian/Bolivian blocks..

I have never said the andesite blocks were poured, I have repeatedly said that only the surface of these andesite blocks could have been chemically altered/softened.

Zoser, why do you make me repeat what I posted over and over and over again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zoser and Crikey, if the two of you are REALLY 'open-minded', you will try to find a plant, with red, fleshy and spongy leaves that is able to corrode metal and soften stone. Preferably found in the Perené Valley in Peru,

Being open-minded means you are eager to explore alternative explanations, and not stick to something that thrills your fantasy nerves ("God", "angels" or "aliens").

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zoser, why do you make me repeat what I posted over and over and over again?

Relax and have a drink. I am.

DRUNK-02_zps6c352c16.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And NONE of the socalled 'open-minded' people even tried to touch the subject of Romans carving and transporting pillars weighing 60 tons each and for a 100 kilometers.

Relax and have a drink. I am.

DRUNK-02_zps6c352c16.jpg

I am quite relaxed, and I hope you ponder about what I posted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And NONE of the socalled 'open-minded' people even tried to touch the subject of Romans carving and transporting pillars weighing 60 tons each and for a 100 kilometers.

I am quite relaxed, and I hope you ponder about what I posted.

Well my answer for now is that we have never really discussed in any detail the hauling. All of my efforts have been directed at the skulls, vitrification, and moulding. Not that I'm convinced that the Ancient Peruvians man hauled the blocks at Sacsayhuaman, far from it. I think there was some exotic technology at play, and to see what that might have been one needs to look at the force of sound and the Leedskalnin mystery.

The Romans? Well it's amazing what an unlimited number of slaves can do. Hats off to their achievements but it will never be the subject of an Ancient Aliens Documentary. It's the precision that is the real mystery not the transportation. That's a secondary issue.

Now can I go and finish off my bottle of wine?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[....] Well it's amazing what an unlimited number of slaves can do. Hats off to their achievements but it will never be the subject of an Ancient Aliens Documentary. [...]

Romans did used slaves, but pre-Inca civilization no no? Bummer...

And BTW, what is unlimited? Didn't you said something about unlimited copper resources needed to drill the holes, while completely unaware of the total length of the holes, huh?

Edited by bmk1245

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well my answer for now is that we have never really discussed in any detail the hauling. All of my efforts have been directed at the skulls, vitrification, and moulding. Not that I'm convinced that the Ancient Peruvians man hauled the blocks at Sacsayhuaman, far from it. I think there was some exotic technology at play, and to see what that might have been one needs to look at the force of sound and the Leedskalnin mystery.

The Romans? Well it's amazing what an unlimited number of slaves can do. Hats off to their achievements but it will never be the subject of an Ancient Aliens Documentary. It's the precision that is the real mystery not the transportation. That's a secondary issue.

Now can I go and finish off my bottle of wine?

I hope you did watch those granite pillars?

They were smooth, and in one piece, each of them.

All of these pillars were transported with ropes, and for a 100 miles.

=-

And FYI, we HAVE discussed transportation.

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THe need for the deep water boots becomes more apparent !

:tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And NONE of the socalled 'open-minded' people even tried to touch the subject of Romans carving and transporting pillars weighing 60 tons each and for a 100 kilometers.

Whoa, the "jigsaw wall" question hasn't been satisfactorily explained by the skeptics yet, or have I missed it?

If they were carved by hand with primitive tools, why on earth didn't the ancient peoples make it much easier on themselves by carving square or rectangular stones instead of multi- angled ones like these?

Cuzco

Peru-033-Sacsayhuaman-Stonework-Cuzco-P19-08.jpg

Sacsayhuam

Sacsayhuam.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 14

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.