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

I read them and your explanations are more interesting than anything zoser has posted. It's a shame that he can't be bothered to read them.

Also, radiation and heat won't cause granite to turn brown. It will cause it to flake and eventually crumble but it will still retain its original color. That's one of granite's renowned qualities.

Thanks for that!!

Plus I must say I don't get his issue at all - about the color of the granite being an anomaly. Every pic we see of the coffer is a different shade due to light and photographic conditions at work...but he will just regurgitate verbatim those nutters who so impress him and perpetuate such silly stories ... wont he?

If you Google up Red Aswan Granite and then switch to Google images, you wont see much red granite that even looks the same as the other pics. It is quite brown to start with, and every shade in-between!

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read through he posts. I'm not surprised. There is nothing but swearing and protest. No technical refutation to account for the huge anomalies in the upper part of that pyramid.

Here is what I've concluded from reading work of serious researchers and the responses to the points I raised here yesterday:

1) Nothing can account for the serious discolouration.

Lots of things can account for it, especially considering you're only working from a photograph without even a hint of on-site compositional analysis.

Denial by Mr O will not do. Soot can be and has been cleaned. What we are looking at with the chocolate brown granite is a depletion by some intense prolonged energy.

The sarcophagus is only four feet or less from the nearest surrounding walls.

sarcophagus01.jpg

How is it the walls aren't discolored as well? Interesting thing, in every picture I've looked at, the sarcophagus has a distinct reddish tinge.

The sarcophagus is probably the most touched part of the GP. Have you ever seen how much skin oil alone can discolor an object? I have.

Soot is a surface accumulation.Generally it wipes right off. Other types of staining which penetrate the pores of the surface or bind to it chemically do not .

2) Despite banal attempts to explain the cracks they could only have occurred from within.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/banal

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_novelty

This assertion is made on the basis of the fact that the granite is not secured to the core masonry. It was designed to resonate freely. Anything serious enough cause a crack in the granite in the way of external shock would have wrecked the building all over.

Like it or not, the king's chamber is not isolated but is in some contact with the surrounded masonry. They minimized contact but they did not eliminate it.

It is not floating in mid-air or mounted on springs like the Cheyenne Mountain command center. As long as there's any contact, there's an avenue for the transmission of kinetic energy. That's how your precious vibration works. Can't have it both ways.

The last time I checked too, compression stress was also internal. The fact that the cracks are at the edges where the ceiling makes contact with the wall rather than the unsupported weak point in the middle is significant.

3) The grand gallery ceiling marks are not soot. They are scorch marks. I thing Dingo misunderstood. They are clearly not torch marks. Something powerful, electrical in nature caused these and whatever it was it sat in the gallery slots. Part of the generating equipment.

And you know this again just from looking at a picture. Tell me, do you know what scorching is, how it occurs? You're effectively burning the material and carbonizing it.

What is there in granite to burn?

Stone age man could not have constructed building so perfectly, or known of the principles of radio active or electromagnetic energy.

As long as they had metal working technology, they were not in the stone age. Any assertion otherwise is a bald-faced lie. And for the umpteenth time, you are assuming the conclusion before the fact.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what that woman Morris suggested. Another reason I was hesitant to bring her up, she has some great ideas, as most theorists do, but it seems some cannot appreciate what ancient man could achieve. Molds would suggest identical sized blocks right? But are they?

http://en.wikipedia....rete_hypothesis

I have no excuse for not finding this in Wikipedia other than the top of my Google search was a bunch of sad wacko sites.

Utilizing scanning electron microscopy, they discovered mineral compounds and air bubbles in samples of the limestone pyramid blocks that do not occur in natural limestone.

Wow, there might be something to this.

When I rewatched the movie version of "Chariots of the Gods" a year ago they showed a site made of large flat stones that was obviously where aliens launched their rockets into outer space (aliens didn't have advanced propulsion technology back in the 1970's). I wondered why these aliens didn't use concrete which holds up to our rocket launches very well.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read them and your explanations are more interesting than anything zoser has posted. It's a shame that he can't be bothered to read them.

Also, radiation and heat won't cause granite to turn brown. It will cause it to flake and eventually crumble but it will still retain its original color. That's one of granite's renowned qualities.

Actually, radiation can discolor some minerals. This is potentially a strike against him though. Depending on it's chemistry, some quartz can change color to smoky quartz or amethyst when irradiated.

http://www.ohio.edu/riskandsafety/radiationsafety/irradiated.htm

Some feldspars also exhibit a noticeable shift to specific colors due to radiation:

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:6JFX_opIchsJ:www.minsocam.org/ammin/AM71/AM71_95.pdf+feldspar+radiation+color&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgK77-YXMX6kwKfhJsWt2w2MIo0O3Y3M1wxylir01J3uN5tyFlgYeqknspaU8yiUFPViAXYJsZIWxs9MRWNO7-bQcfJiQirDQsgsRD8kKo52Nrk3qi3ajUtJ8RTO8kyOT9efs65&sig=AHIEtbSYu_1tQPJaFAiO0HVQwY4xbnLWJA

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00654342

The lack of any of these color variants then would tend to argue against the presence of radiation, depending again on the chemistry. An examination of a sample of Aswan granite would prove the matter conclusively.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of things can account for it, especially considering you're only working from a photograph without even a hint of on-site compositional analysis.

What is there in granite to burn?

A great post Mr.O!

Plus...there's a tonne of products on the market for removing stains from granite. (That zoser thinks cant be stained).

Red wine, oils, spinach, coffee, tomato juice, grape juice, lemon, lime... (basically anything acidic) ... to name just a few.... will easily make stains, and (without proper cleaning) remain as a permanent stain. But this argument is a non starter as like I already said, Red Granite isn't exactly the rose color. Dunn says it should be.

Edited by seeder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oniomancer, scowl, seeder, if it wasn't for you guys I'd have bailed on this thread long ago. I think the recent posts you guys have shared has met my quota for 'learning something new every day' for a month. Don't worry, I'll be back tomorrow too. :tu:

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But this forum is called UNEXPLAINED MYSTERIES.............why dont you guys head over to EXPLAINED MYSTERIES...... then everyone will be happy

They have lost this one. Mr O's attempts make no sense. The discolouration is everywhere in the Upper Chamber and the Grand Gallery.

Nothing explains it. No chemicals, nothing.

All total nonsense.

They have all been well and truly Dunn done and they know it.

The rest is just saving face and survival so that they can continue the flat earth society here for another decade.

At least it's kept them busy I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No amount of data sheets from Mr O are going to solve this one.

Listen to the people who have been there.

Here's another:

zoser107_zps4ba3e2d1.jpg

zoser108_zps1f979daf.jpg

http://books.google....pyramid&f=false

I'm sorry. But is is all true.

There is absolutely nothing that can be done or said to change it.

It's done.

Mr O I do admire and respect you. You are a great man really. Perhaps it's time to rethink some life long held views?

See you soon.

Z

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No amount of data sheets from Mr O are going to solve this one.

Listen to the people who have been there.

Here's another:

I'm sorry. But is is all true.

There is absolutely nothing that can be done or said to change it.

It's done.

Great then kindly stop posting if its all over and Dunn. :tu:

haha, all the bolded words show exactly what you searched on... 'Great Pyramid granite'...what a poor search, you could have just gone to his website and copied/pasted. ...thats really clutching at straws. More importantly, why do keep posting stuff FROM A FICTIONAL BOOK?

I posted 3 rock solid links about the cracks, researched hands on by people who had been doing research for 20 years in the mids, were given permission to scan, drill, take samples etc....(BTW did Dunn have permission to do actual testing as just mentioned -or did he just have a look about? do you even know?).

All 3 links posted reached the same conclusions. One lot even did the 3d modelling sequence...and even the computer said YES!

Go back and read them

.

Edited by seeder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Irrelevant nothing to to with GP.

Or bad link?

More irrelevancies.

On the contrary: drivels you are posting have much, I mean, MUCH less sense than god ol' turbo-encabulator. If you didn't liked paper, you can take it from YT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldn't resist this.

The skeptics orchestra.

titanicbandplayedo_2187023b.jpg

r2_2062331a.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldn't resist this.

The skeptics orchestra.

That's coz all losers, zoser...resort to sarcasm when they have nothing left

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great then kindly stop posting if its all over and Dunn. :tu:

haha, all the bolded words show exactly what you searched on... 'Great Pyramid granite'...what a poor search, you could have just gone to his website and copied/pasted. ...thats really clutching at straws.

I posted 3 rock solid links about the cracks, researched hands on by people who had been doing research for 20 years in the mids, were given permission to scan, drill, take samples etc....(BTW did Dunn have permission to do actual testing as just mentioned -or did he just have a look about? do you even know?).

All 3 links posted reached the same conclusions. One lot even did the 3d modelling sequence...and even the computer said YES!

Go back and read them

It's time to hang up your gloves on this one seeder. Isolated granite is not going to crack from external shocks unless 75% of the pyramid is going to be destroyed with it.

Basic physics. That's all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's coz all losers, zoser...resort to sarcasm when they have nothing left

Total hypocrisy.

You boys have been hurling insults, foul language, cynical posts, for weeks now.

The orchestra analogy is just very appropriate to the situation.

Don't take it seriously.

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's time to hang up your gloves on this one seeder. Isolated granite is not going to crack from external shocks unless 75% of the pyramid is going to be destroyed with it.

Basic physics. That's all.

Go read the 3 pasted links... before they get re-posted over and over till it sinks in your noodle

the cracks had PLASTER in them...

.

Edited by seeder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go read the 3 pasted links... before they get re-posted over and over till it sinks in your noodle

I've read them. Nothing there that's relevant to the facts. That's all the skeptics have been doing here for weeks. It's just an exercise in self delusion as far as I can see.

An empty granite box, no markings or artwork anywhere, precision granite for no reason whatsoever, ample evidence of huge power generation in the form of scorching, discolouration, and cracking in specific areas and you say it's a tomb???

Really?

Ah well, it's all good fun I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah well, it's all good fun I suppose.

youre a troll. and all you're doing now is trolling...

hows the daughter?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They have lost this one. Mr O's attempts make no sense. The discolouration is everywhere in the Upper Chamber and the Grand Gallery.

Nothing explains it. No chemicals, nothing.

All total nonsense.

They have all been well and truly Dunn done and they know it.

The rest is just saving face and survival so that they can continue the flat earth society here for another decade.

At least it's kept them busy I suppose.

Remember, you're talking about two different types of discoloration, the supposed color change of the sarcophagus, and the darkened areas.

In the quoted excerpt above, he says:

"this could not be explained away carbon residue and...carbon dioxide and water vapor"

How does he know this? He further says:

"The discoloration went right into the stone"

How does he know unless he sectioned the stone?

As stated, granite doesn't burn, so something else burnt would've had to've been deposited on it or some other agent soaked into it

We already know breath alone is causing salt and other minerals to precipitate out of the limestone, and moisture can move along seams. With it open to the air, the inside turns into a giant condensation trap all on its own. What happens if you get soot on the wall and something else hardens over the top of it? And there's all kind of other things, bat poop and urine, and who knows what the AE might have slathered on there.

You can't go strictly by appearances, which is all they've got. Cannot. You just can't do it. That would be like a cop arresting you because you looked like the criminal type. That's what this is, archeological racial profiling. You're stereotyping those walls just because they happen to be a little dark.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read through he posts. I'm not surprised. There is nothing but swearing and protest. No technical refutation to account for the huge anomalies in the upper part of that pyramid.

Perhaps you missed my post. No swearing, name calling or protest, just successfully refuting the "Great Pyramid was a nuclear reactor/electricity generator" theory.

Here's the link.

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=237842&st=6990#entry4662758

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't go strictly by appearances, which is all they've got. Cannot. You just can't do it.

I know you've likely read most, if not all of the thread, but that's the entirety of zoser's argument in a nutshell, what things 'appear' to be. To an untrained/uneducated eye, appearances are almost always deceiving, barring the occasional lucky guess. I'm still waiting on zoser's lucky guess, probability says it should have happened by now yet it hasn't...odd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know you've likely read most, if not all of the thread, but that's the entirety of zoser's argument in a nutshell, what things 'appear' to be. To an untrained/uneducated eye, appearances are almost always deceiving, barring the occasional lucky guess. I'm still waiting on zoser's lucky guess, probability says it should have happened by now yet it hasn't...odd.

Oh I know. We went over that fact several times just on the "vitrification".

Edited by Oniomancer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read them. Nothing there that's relevant to the facts. That's all the skeptics have been doing here for weeks. It's just an exercise in self delusion as far as I can see.

-SNIP- (because it's not relevant in any way either, but just another bout of nincompoopery)

If you had read them, you'd have to admit that it is rather strange that there would be plaster in the cracks, this would mean that the cracks were there already when the plaster was applied. Explain to me how this cannot be relevant, because it shows that the cracks were not caused by something internal. They would have been there before your imaginary reactor/generator was put into imaginary function.

You say it's all in the stones and you are correct, shame you can't read them.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont know why aliens must come in the past and built something or made genocide. Maybe they were here for their own scientific expedition. We ve done same expedition in the past. (europeans)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read them. Nothing there that's relevant to the facts. That's all the skeptics have been doing here for weeks. It's just an exercise in self delusion as far as I can see.

There is absolutely not a shred of evidence to demonstrate that ET's have even visited this planet. Not now, not a thousand years ago, not a million years ago. Nada. Hence, there are no relevant facts pertaining to the subject.

But...you conclude those who accept currently accepted theories are skeptics.

...and because they do not believe in evidence which does not exist...they are self delusional?

No offence but it seems that your own "wishful thinking" is causing some bias in your evaluation of what can only be described as speculative conjecture.

There is absolutely not a shred of evidence to demonstrate that ET's have even visited this planet....yet something in my gut keeps telling me to "believe" that they have.

For the record, I suppose, I believe that it's possible that they have visited in the past and maybe still are visiting.

...but I want to see proof.

Not big stones bashed into shape and put into place by brute force. I get p***ed when I keep hearing the term "precision" to describe right angles which are more like 85 degrees and "laser cut accuracy" to describe surfaces which are as flat as the highlands of Scotland.

4 people like this

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.