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

Who said anything about precise details. They had no written word remember.

That's a very good point! That had no written word! No way to communicate anything with any degree of accuracy! I wonder if that could result in miscommunication over five hundred generations making this folklore unreliable. What do you think, zoser?

Everyone remembers a severe cataclysm of that destructive power.

How would they not?

I guess there were no severe cataclysms in North America until the Europeans arrived because the natives couldn't recall any.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a good example of precision foundation work.

Notice how amazed Foerster becomes as he surveys the whole artefact.

Yeh Ive seen the same tone and expressions in Cheech and Chong :clap::tu:

Edited by seeder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only fools of modern times need them.

As I said you only need them if you need them.

They clearly didn't.

They were able to create precision both with and without right angles. Total virtuosity in stonework.

Notice the moulding marks in the above picture?

Then that's not very much virtuosity, is it, if they leave their moulding marks all over it. A real craftsman will tidy up things like that. You'd have thought they'd have given it a rub down or something before they went on.

Edited by Lord Vetinari

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a good example of precision foundation work.

Notice how amazed Foerster becomes as he surveys the whole artefact.

What part of that aqueduct was a foundation? You know, a structure upon which a building rests, created for stability?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only fools of modern times need them.

As I said you only need them if you need them.

They clearly didn't.

They were able to create precision both with and without right angles. Total virtuosity in stonework.

There are dry stone walls in my neighborhood which have this much precision. They weren't built by aliens unless my neighbors are keeping secrets from me.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eeeeh, kids these days, no respect for their Ancient Elders.

Indeed, especially those that think they couldn't shape stone without the aid of aliens and their techno-magic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You were trying to argue that they were trying to achieve right angles.

I say they didn't need them.

Anything they wanted to do in stone they could have because they had the technology to do so .

Simple.

Let me give you the most basic rule of masonry: make as many stones level and square as possible. This makes the strongest wall. That's what we humans do.

The humans who built this wall were not able to do this or chose not to because it's too much work. That's why the lines aren't straight and level. If they had the technology to easily cut square stones, they would have.

You can't have it both ways, zoser. You can't ramble on about your alien stone cutting technology then claim sloppy masonry like this was also built by aliens that clearly did not use this supposed technology.

Too bad they didn't possess the amazing technology known as cement that we humans developed.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed. I've never seen anything more precise or square...

fe50687497.JPG

Keep in mind that these blocks were designed to be interlocking and used "key blocks" to tie them together. This means dovetail-type interfacing surfaces that necessarily use angles of less than 90 degrees. The workmanship is superb and will outlast both eons of time and any wonky attempts to discredit it.

Some of the angles may not be precisely 90 degrees, but the smart money will bet they ARE precisely as intended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep in mind that these blocks were designed to be interlocking and used "key blocks" to tie them together. This means dovetail-type interfacing surfaces that necessarily use angles of less than 90 degrees. The workmanship is superb and will outlast both eons of time and any wonky attempts to discredit it.

Some of the angles may not be precisely 90 degrees, but the smart money will bet they ARE precisely as intended.

But wait a sec, in AA it has been said:

{...} its really been cut at very accurate right angles [...](05:47).

Edit: grammar

Edited by bmk1245
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But wait a sec, in AA it was been said:

{...} its really been cut at very accurate right angles [...](05:47).

Yeah I know. AA made themselves look stupid with that scene.

Many of the angles are 90 degrees and certain of them are not.

But then, they are not exactly aiming their show at the most critical of thinkers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are three ressons given by scientist give for the destruction Puma Punku, 1. A meteor, there is no crater. 2. A war, again no crater nor are the stones scorched. 3. A loclized flood, I don't think the nearby lake is large enough.

LINK

It has been offerred many times already, but as you are new to the thread, I thought it might be prudent to offer you this link.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So common sense says that some major cataclysm hit the area.

When and what we don't know. Flood, major earth shifting, whatever. It was something extremely violent.

It must have been to cause that level of destruction.

Total common sense.

So this is another issue that casts doubt on the archaeological dating. What was buried and when?

Not quite so Mr Engineer. That is not flooding erosion. The retaining wall are intact, and doing the job they were designed for. Major flooding carves noticeable causeways. I have been through several floods, they are reasonably common in south east QLD. All your picture casts doubt upon is your ability to objectively evaluate any site at all for any sort of realistic evaluation. Although I am not sure that any doubt actually did exist in that regard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the Incas forgot how to make metal tools?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are dry stone walls in my neighborhood which have this much precision. They weren't built by aliens unless my neighbors are keeping secrets from me.

Nah. I'm sure that the builders of those walls in your neighborhood had their green cards.

Harte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the Incas forgot how to make metal tools?

I understand that this particular area of history is quite arcane, but I'd suggest that you use google before making such a broad and inane statement again:

Inca bronze has been found to be remarkably pure, aside from very small quantities of sulphur. The proportion of copper in Inca bronze varies from 86% in some articles to 97% in others. Some archaeologists have taken the position that since the greatest quantity of tin is usually found in those bronzes that would seen to require it least, the presence of tin in Inca bronzes should be regarded as accidental. This hypotheses has been carefully considered by the experts of the largest copper companies now known that during World War II enormous quantities of tin were recovered from Bolivian mines where our manufactures were delighted to secure supplies to take the place of those that came from the Straits Settlements before the Japanese occupation. It is also well known that enormous deposits of copper are found in Peru and in Chile but not in combination with tin.

Source

Incan Warrior Axe (Bronze):

1471IncaWarriorAxeMuseoAmerica01.JPG

Thinking the sites are Pre-Incan so this doesn't matter? You're probably right about your timeline, but:

Other modes of artistic production practiced

by the Wari include metallurgy using alloys of gold, silver, and

copper;

PDF Source

The Wari were Pre-Incan and bordered on the Tiahuanaco Empire.

I'm far from an expert on South American Indigenous peoples, to say the least. However, it's not exactly difficult to find out that you ought not assume a very large assumption without at least a rudimentary check.

Also, marks left by pounding stones have been reported at PP and Tiahuanaco. The seemingly precisely cut stones at PP were almost certainly cut with copper saws and chisels. Possibly bronze.

Harte

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand that this particular area of history is quite arcane, but I'd suggest that you use google before making such a broad and inane statement again:

Source

Incan Warrior Axe (Bronze):

1471IncaWarriorAxeMuseoAmerica01.JPG

Thinking the sites are Pre-Incan so this doesn't matter? You're probably right about your timeline, but:

PDF Source

The Wari were Pre-Incan and bordered on the Tiahuanaco Empire.

I'm far from an expert on South American Indigenous peoples, to say the least. However, it's not exactly difficult to find out that you ought not assume a very large assumption without at least a rudimentary check.

Also, marks left by pounding stones have been reported at PP and Tiahuanaco. The seemingly precisely cut stones at PP were almost certainly cut with copper saws and chisels. Possibly bronze.

Harte

I did learn something Inca bronze was an accedent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did learn something Inca bronze was an accedent.

Huh? The article stated that some archaeologists think that the relatively high tin content in some Inca bronze may have been accidental. Of course it then goes on to say that the Inca were fairly adept at using tin laden bronze to manufacture intricate works. It never said anything about the bronze itself being an accident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did learn something Inca bronze was an accedent.

Care to show me how you got to that conclusion, considering the article says the total opposite?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Care to show me how you got to that conclusion, considering the article says the total opposite?

We must be reading different articles, because the I read that the tin in the bronze should be considered an accdent. This word is in the post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

~snip

Thinking the sites are Pre-Incan so this doesn't matter? You're probably right about your timeline, but:

PDF Source

The Wari were Pre-Incan and bordered on the Tiahuanaco Empire.

~snip

Harte

Thanks for the PDF Mr HArte, much appreciated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Erm don't remember what you said there?

I did learn something Inca bronze was an accedent.

Now you're saying ....

We must be reading different articles, because the I read that the tin in the bronze should be considered an accdent. This word is in the post.

See my confusion? One you the actual Inca Bronze was an accident, then you refer to the tin in the bronze, those are two different things. Also, only some archeologists believe this, there are opposing views on this. It isn't as clear cut as you might have understood. Hence my wonder about your statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Erm don't remember what you said there?

Now you're saying ....

See my confusion? One you the actual Inca Bronze was an accident, then you refer to the tin in the bronze, those are two different things. Also, only some archeologists believe this, there are opposing views on this. It isn't as clear cut as you might have understood. Hence my wonder about your statement.

The debate has at least two sides, and I can you a third. But, that is religous and wouldn't want t hear it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A good article on how the ancients used sound for drilling, lifing and shaping hard rock.

Advanced natural technology. Could explain why no machines have ever been found.

The technology could have been far more natural than we suspect.

Seems reasonable to me that an advanced culture would know how to harness natural forces; ours on the other hand are dangerous and toxic.

Fascinating reading.

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_fuerzasuniverso07.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I know. AA made themselves look stupid with that scene.

Many of the angles are 90 degrees and certain of them are not.

But then, they are not exactly aiming their show at the most critical of thinkers.

Yeap, but lets back to your interlocking/dovetail-type surfaces: we need another bloke block which could fit over, or, I think, it should be otherwise: bulged stone below dovetail's bum. Can we find one?

Hey, Zoser, you may find this challenging :whistle:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The debate has at least two sides, and I can you a third. But, that is religous and wouldn't want t hear it.

and then theres good old wiki

"Notable features at Pumapunku are I-shaped architectural cramps, which are composed of a unique copper-arsenic-nickel bronze alloy. These I-shaped cramps were also used on a section of canal found at the base of the Akapana pyramid at Tiwanaku. These cramps were used to hold the blocks comprising the walls and bottom of stone-lined canals that drain sunken courts. I-cramps of unknown composition were used to hold together the massive slabs that formed Pumapunku's four large platforms. In the south canal of the Pumapunku, the I-shaped cramps were cast in place. In sharp contrast, the cramps used at the Akapana canal were fashioned by the cold hammering of copper-arsenic-nickel bronze ingots.[9][12] The unique copper-arsenic-nickel bronze alloy is also found in metal artifacts within the region between Tiwanaku and San Pedro de Atacama during the late Middle Horizon around 600–900.[13]

http://en.wikipedia....ku#Architecture

so these aliens then, could not or did not make any better metal than was already in existence around the world. Kinda funny how its modern mans achievements that gave us stronger metals and even composites.... so its JUST ANOTHER strike against the AA theory IMO

Now if the metal they used/found etc was a bizarre alloy of great scientific interest, I might think it was an other worldly recipe too. But no, nothing convincing there. NO evidence of high tech anything. As usual

.

Edited by seeder

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.