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

A good saw cut yes I agree. The question is how?

[insert: georgio]

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Happens to all natural rock stone formations, stones are regarded as a 'living' element (literal) as in 'organic'

You'll have to find the 'proof' to satisfy your requirements as 'proof' I'm not a specialist in that field.

As to how, well ... you're right that we'll never know, unless you found someone who there at the time, otherwise it's all speculative on our part, hardly evidence or even proof.

We can attempt to recreate the methods but that still won't be proof to you can it? Just another viable proposition.

Nobody knows anything exact by pursuing inexact clues.

The point is that the evidence is there.

If the ancients adhered to known easily explainable methods there would be absolutely no debate.

The moulding, vitrification, precision fitting, precision hole cutting (with vitrification internally!), and now wafer thin saw cuts all adds up to the same thing.

Corresponding logistics.

The Great Pyramid is another.

No more debate necessary.

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All these links are irrelevant to the piece under consideration.

Northing remotely related.

Sorry Haz.

As Im not posting for your benefit you there is no need to apologize. We all know that your mind is closed in this matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rock+fissure+smallcmt.jpg

Alien saw marks?

No a natural fissure in rock

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rock+fissure+smallcmt.jpg

Alien saw marks?

No a natural fissure in rock

Neither does it look like the Peruvian granite artefact.

Alien saw marks?

No it's an F-35

F-35.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you had more than an opinion about these "cuts", this might be a little more interesting. Right now, the only thing interesting here is the way you are doing your best to scream Alienzz to the stuff you clearly dont have an answer to.

In my world Unexplained is just that, and nothing more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you had more than an opinion about these "cuts", this might be a little more interesting. Right now, the only thing interesting here is the way you are doing your best to scream Alienzz to the stuff you clearly dont have an answer to.

In my world Unexplained is just that, and nothing more.

Good start Haz. I do appreciate that admission which is far more than most people are prepared to do here.

Screaming copper saws, and other such drivel.

I'm going to shoot the moon on this one though.

Advanced cutting = advanced civilisation = deeply ancient = visitors.

Other stone work points to the same thing.

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advanced cutting = advanced civilisation = deeply ancient = visitors.

why invoke visitors tho? why not just leave it at that, why create a false dichotomy?

sigh... what do you make of the gobekli tepe?

http://en.wikipedia...._and_importance

visitors?

Edited by mcrom901
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why invoke visitors tho? why not leave at that, why create a false dichotomy?

sigh... what do you make of the gobekli tepe?

http://en.wikipedia...._and_importance

visitors?

So far he has used nearly every logical fallacy there is in his argument. I've stopped trying to point them out because zoser just keeps plugging away, oblivious to his errors. Someone made a reference to Don Quixote a while back....still fitting now as it was then.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why invoke visitors tho? why not just leave it at that, why create a false dichotomy?

sigh... what do you make of the gobekli tepe?

http://en.wikipedia...._and_importance

visitors?

Philosophy is nothing but a place to hide.

Here it is:

SC5_zpsa1c58331.jpg

High tech cutting.

No stone age people, no fairies and no Inca.

Ancient advanced civilisation.

So far he has used nearly every logical fallacy there is in his argument. I've stopped trying to point them out because zoser just keeps plugging away, oblivious to his errors. Someone made a reference to Don Quixote a while back....still fitting now as it was then.

See above.

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Stone Age is a broad prehistoric period during which stone was widely used to make implements with a sharp edge, a point, or a percussion surface. The period lasted roughly 3.4 million years, and ended between 4500 BC and 2000 BC with the advent of metalworking

:innocent:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Philosophy is nothing but a place to hide.

that reaction sounds more like hiding to me on your part... is it so hard to face your own logical fallacies?

High tech cutting.

no... it's just a stone with cut marks... i see no lasers in that pic

No stone age people, no fairies and no Inca.

what if our ancient ancestors were more advanced than we give them credit for? is it the labeling of 'stone age people' which you think qualifies aliens?

Ancient advanced civilisation.

what is so alien about that?

eta...

re the comment above i.e. "it's just a stone with cut marks" /// i haven't looked into it.. so, i'm not sure whether it's something natural or 'man-made' :alien:

Edited by mcrom901

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Natural adhesives and metal won't go very far, the binding strength required to make it work just isn't possible.

Have you ever tried to get pitch, tar or old glue off from something? it's next to impossible without solvents.

Better to stick with free inserted/addition of fluid abrasive material to help the blade along. Copper and bronze just isn't the metal suitable for this. If copper is just what was available then :

wiki

You realize you're pulling a zoser here and arguing against something that's already been demonstrated?

I read it took three days of three shifts per twenty four hours day which sounds about right, that's about the limit to the size of it, not so sure about the type of rock though, they probably work at a different pace and care considering the value of their crafted material.

I am curious about the 'carborundum mixed with oil' , synthesized compound or chemical formulas and what kind of oil ?

Jadeite, mohs 6.5-7. That puts it in quartz range.

These are shoestring operations. If they're using a hand saw instead of a power saw, they're probably just using the cheapest basic abrasive available and whatever oil they've got handy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Stone Age is a broad prehistoric period during which stone was widely used to make implements with a sharp edge, a point, or a percussion surface. The period lasted roughly 3.4 million years, and ended between 4500 BC and 2000 BC with the advent of metalworking

:innocent:

Nice quote but do you appreciate the relevance of it?

The artefact in question could well have been produced in that time frame.

We have no evidence against that hypothesis..

On the other hand there is far more evidence against the hypothesis that the artefact was created in classical or more recent times.

For a start the construction method would most likely have been recorded and passed on to the chroniclers, and also there would be trace evidence of the tools.

Nothing of the kind exists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While we are revisiting this question on cutting, here is another anomaly than Foerster found in Peru.

zoser5-1_zps477f120f.jpg

zoser6_zpsb543629d.jpg

Again a saw is an impossibility because of it's location on the bedrock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good start Haz. I do appreciate that admission which is far more than most people are prepared to do here.

Screaming copper saws, and other such drivel.

I'm going to shoot the moon on this one though.

Advanced cutting = advanced civilisation = deeply ancient = visitors.

Other stone work points to the same thing.

You still have not posted a shred of evidence of alien involvement.

When did you plan to post about that? We have been waiting for hundreds of pages.

Experiments involving bronze tools have been done. Check.

Experiments involving pounding rock with rock have been done. Check.

Drilling with 'primitive tools' have been done. Check.

Experiments with chemical molding have been done. Check.

Now finally show us and experiment involving your 'alien technology'.

You can't because you have not the faintest clue, like your guru, the tour guide who is wandering around like Alice in Wonderland..

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While we are revisiting this question on cutting, here is another anomaly than Foerster found in Peru.

zoser5-1_zps477f120f.jpg

zoser6_zpsb543629d.jpg

Again a saw is an impossibility because of it's location on the bedrock.

You need to show us the location of that rock, relative to its environment.

And the first photo shows the hole for a wedge.

Coincidence??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's right it was sound.

It's here:

http://www.bibliotec...suniverso07.htm

what have I said about your sources? Time and again. Be a good chap and let me know WHO wrote that article please? I take it you do know? Now, what is a by product of laser cutting? And where is it found? What does it look like? And how does it affect different materials?

Surely you can answer me seeing as you know what laser cuts look like? And I WILL be expecting your answer else I shall simply repeat myself as you do, till I get one

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what have I said about your sources? Time and again. Be a good chap and let me know WHO wrote that article please? I take it you do know? Now, what is a by product of laser cutting? And where is it found? What does it look like? And how does it affect different materials?

Surely you can answer me seeing as you know what laser cuts look like? And I WILL be expecting your answer else I shall simply repeat myself as you do, till I get one

He doesn't know any real sources, and he doesn't care, as long as it confirms his fantasies.

This is not about research, this is about nothing but belief and gullibility, and plain ignorance.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He doesn't know any real sources, and he doesn't care, as long as it confirms his fantasies.

This is not about research, this is about nothing but belief and gullibility, and plain ignorance.

What are the options?

It's either intense heat or intense sound as the only forces capable of doing such a thing.

Use of heat would leave traces.

Here's what Chris has to say about sonic drilling:

The application of ultrasonic machining is the only method that completely satisfies logic from a technical viewpoint, and it explains all noted phenomena. Ultrasonic machining is the oscillatory motion of a tool that chips away material, like a jackhammer chipping away at a piece of concrete pavement, except much faster and not as measurable in its reciprocation. The ultrasonic tool-bit, vibrating at 19,000 to 25,000 cycles per second (Hertz) has found unique application in the precision machining of odd shaped holes in hard, brittle material such as hardened steels, carbides, ceramics and semiconductors. An abrasive slurry or paste is used to accelerate the cutting action................

The theory of ultrasonic machining resolves all the unanswered questions where other theories have fallen short. Methods may be proposed that might cover a singular aspect of the machine marks and not progress to the method described here. It is when we search for a single method that provides an answer for all the data that we move away from primitive and even conventional machining and are forced to consider methods that are somewhat anomalous for that period in history.

A precision mechanical engineer agrees.

Have a read.

http://www.theglobal...les/cdunn-5.php

So we have the principle.

That's enough. It would nice to see the tools and watch them do it. Alas that isn't really feasible.

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed.

It's not about getting excited. It's about how the cut was not made.

Saws do not produce variable thickness like this.

Completely rules out any sawing technique. Not that they were able to do it by sawing anyway,

They had no material that could do this to granite, nor has any been found.

This is exactly what it appears to be.

A cut using unknown technology; most likely sound. The force or energy emitted by the tool diminishes with depth according to natural principles explaining why the cut is wider at the top than the bottom.

A saw just would not do that. The teeth of a copper saw would wear to nothing very rapidly and it would become blunt causing anything but a tapering thickness.

I still assert the hypothesis is proven.

Neither do lasers or any other kind of directed energy device produce cuts like that. The cut would be the same width as the beam all the way through. Vibratory cutters would have both the same problem and the opposite. Used by itself, the cut would again be only as wide as the cutter. With the addition of abrasive, we would probably see a widening of the cut producing a taper, as we see in the AE cores. This would be a gradual continuous taper though along the entire depth of the cut. In neither case would you expect a sudden transition to a thinner cut extending several inches, unless they inexplicably switched to a thinner blade.

Btw, who put those arrows on there, you? I notice they appear to be still frames from the video. If so, then I'm not entirely convinced they are what you say they are. At no time do we see a dead-on close-up of the bottom of the cut. All the close-ups shown are at an angle and the cut transitions right at that point from deep to shallow due to the contour of the stone, effecting how much it stands out. We do not therefor have proof that the cut, if that's what it is,

actually does change in width.

Let's say it does though. What hasn't been mentioned yet, though third eye touched on it, is a combination of cut and natural crack. Obviously if it's a cut, it couldn't've been pre-cracked because all they'd had to've done was split it off. We can say however that it's at least 500 years old. That's plenty of time for a crack to develop at the bottom of any cut. Much younger constructions have deteriorated or entirely failed in this way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me add this:

Because we don't know yet how the ancients did it, doesn't necessarily mean 'aliens' did it.

Why?

Because we have not a jota of knowledge of what 'aliens' were and are capable of.

We invented concrete, and then we found out the Romans invented it many centuries before us.

But that was not alien technology, that was proof of how smart our ancestors were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me add this:

Because we don't know yet how the ancients did it, doesn't necessarily mean 'aliens' did it.

Why?

Because we have not a jota of knowledge of what 'aliens' were and are capable of.

I sympathise with the frustration. It takes some appreciating I agree.

Yet the artefacts are there.

We know what was achieved in classical times and it wasn't wafer thin granite cutting.

It had to happen in very ancient times for all record to be lost. Bearing in mind this happened all over the ancient world. Some record would exist if it were only classical times.

It's plainly obvious.

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.