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

Hey Kludge, if you're really bored you can check a hundred pages back in this thread and learn about the piezoelectric effect of granite which used the natural vibration of the Earth to create resonance within it to generate electricity which was conducted out of the pyramids not through highly conductive copper wire but through, uh, something else that left no evidence. Yes the pyramids were nothing more than giant power stations! Why else would they have used granite?

I've read that theory before and got a giggle from it. There was also a version that said that all the evidence of an alien presence was gathered up by [name your favorite conspiracy group here] to hide their presence. However they missed the "Babylon Battery" which has also been claimed to be alien technology-based. Same with the Antikythera mechanism. They missed that too. How sloppy. How very, very sloppy. ;)

I have a nice chunk of leftover granite which my cat's food and water bowls sit on. I'd love to get the thing producing electricity but that darn Zoser can't tell me how to do it. In fact he warned me not to because it would generate radiation. Oh yes, he switches topics a lot and gets confused.

Actually, uranium is found in granite in really small quantities dependent on where it's found. It's enough to make a geiger counter tick but hardly enough to warrant any precautions. Of course, to the woo woo crowd, anything like that is enough to make them go "Woo! Woo!". But then, so is the small amount of quartz which is where that supposed piezoelectric energy comes from. Basic science stuff yet well past their understanding.

But you probably won't understand any of this because you're handicapped with your engineering degree which prevents you from seeing the amazing things that Zoser sees... on the Internet.

Yeah, such a shame I have that problem. It and other elements in my background have proven to be detrimental to my being able to fully grasp and appreciate the finer points of being a CTist and FTB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

zoser34-1_zps6b38c950.jpg

molecular alteration, logistics...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hear that happens if he bites you.

Thankfully I'm almost a half a world away. The odds are somewhat less of that happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankfully I'm almost a half a world away. The odds are somewhat less of that happening.

sonic levitation, logistics...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New to this forum. Has anyone tried to replicate the Pyramids on a smaller scale and attempt to use them as a super conducter-transmitter-whatever.....

Ever seen those things that are supposed to keep fruit fresh, sharpen your razor blade and all that?

Bunkum.

But the questions asked by the one obtuse poster in this thread does not even live up to bunkum, it's below that. This thread it like a slow motion train wreck, it is hard to turn away from the disaster that it is. I have never in my life seen a grown up pretend to be so dim. But at least the odd outright lie seems to keep the crowd amused, like qualification claims.

FY09BJZF5Y3YROQ.MEDIUM.jpg

Edited by psyche101
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, Zoser, this is what granite looks like in the wild. This was one of many granite landslides that we had come across during a hike in Eastern Oregon.

post-108987-0-16292500-1363061024_thumb.

It looks like your Ancient Astronauts had been there. See the edges of the stones indicated by the red arrows. Those were just a few of the thousands of nearly straight and nearly flat surfaces that occurred naturally in this granite.

Now how do you split granite with flimsy copper tools? "Why it's simply impossible," you say! Using the feather and wedge method, you would pound feathers into the crack indicated by the green arrow. As the feathers go into the crack, you can easily pound the wedge in between them and put the fracture under enough pressure to split even a huge stone like that one. People have been doing it for thousands of years.

Unfortunately not one cut is straight.

You are just doing what you have always done; offer what you think is evidence, when actually it is completely unrelated.

Then you hope that people will not check too thoroughly and see the disparity with the information so that you can go on believing what you have always believed.

Self deception really.

A good example was Dingo yesterday posting a picture of a wood saw. From what period we don't know. He posted it it hoping people would think it was capable of cutting granite.

Deception.

Do any of the cuts in your photograph resemble this cut?

SC3_zps53a9919c.jpg

SC8_zps52b961b9.jpg

In terms of the thickness of cut and the straightness?

No of course not.

Is anyone likely to find anything like that in nature?

No of course not.

So back to the question.

Where are the saws? They should be around. Wood saws exist. Yet nothing to explain how these cuts were done.

Sausages again I'm afraid.

By all means don't believe the AA hypothesis; that is your right.

For God sake don't go around thinking for one minute that you have provided any evidence that refutes any of it because you haven't.

Moulding and all of the effects evident with soft stone, precision cuts, vitrification, precision joins.

All totally unexplained, and unreplicated.

Showing pictures of quarries and scenery is not going to do it. Better to send me flowers. It would be more relevant.

Edited by zoser
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zoser, what happens when you take a rock and scrape it against another rock of equal hardness?

Answer this question before you continue to ask foolish questions.

1) No mirror finish resembling vitrification.

2) No perfectly smooth finish like we see on the flat surfaces and joins. Protzen couldn't do it. Hopkins asserts it cannot be done.

Prove them wrong.

You still haven't explained the sinking effect by the way.

I'm waiting. If you are that clever you could do it. Please support your claims or I am taking it that you have nothing to offer (only scenery).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For God sake don't go around thinking for one minute that you have provided any evidence that refutes any of it because you haven't.

I think the basic problem is that absolutely no evidence whatsoever has ever been put forward that proves that any of this was done by Aliens; all of it, I'm afraid, depends entirely on the "what else could it have been?" argument; "Stone Age people couldn't possibly have made a Wall with that incredible precision", or "there are marks on these rocks; these must have been made by softening the rock, what else could it have been? And who could have done that? It must have been Aliens, what else could it have been?". That's not the same as proving that it was Aliens. Do you se the difference?

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the basic problem is that absolutely no evidence whatsoever has ever been put forward that proves that any of this was done by Aliens; all of it, I'm afraid, depends entirely on the "what else could it have been?" argument; "Stone Age people couldn't possibly have made a Wall with that incredible precision", or "there are marks on these rocks; these must have been made by softening the rock, what else could it have been? And who could have done that? It must have been Aliens, what else could it have been?". That's not the same as proving that it was Aliens. Do you se the difference?

I'm afraid that if zoser could see the difference this thread wouldn't have gone on for as long as it has. There are none so blind as those who will not see...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm afraid that if zoser could see the difference this thread wouldn't have gone on for as long as it has. There are none so blind as those who will not see...

Do you have any explanations? Please feel free to offer some.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have any explanations? Please feel free to offer some.

Many explanations for all of the alleged Phenomena have been offered, for 580 pages, but these are all brushed aside with the insistence that "it couldn't possibly have been, and it must have been".

Edited by Lord Vetinari
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stone-masonry in Ancient Egypt as expressed in their own words...

steinbearbeitung.gif

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stone-masonry in Ancient Egypt as expressed in their own words...

From which period? Early, Middle or Late? There is 3000 years difference you see.

Were they describing what they actually did or what they think happened?

In other words was the artist as ignorant as we are today.

Sorry to make things complicated but these things need to be considered.

Sausages not steak.

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The following Glyphic is from 2200 BC Tomb of Ankmahor in Saqquara

steinbearbeitung-statue.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another unresolved problem.

A feed rate of 0.1 inch depth per revolution has been observed in granite samples.

Drill3_zps3d7a2abf.jpg

Drill_hole-CD_07_zps9680a1b5.jpg

On this sample the feed rate depth is lower at 1mm depth per revolution (1/25th inch) but still requiring a high rotation in the order of hundreds of rpm or higher.

Drill4_zpse4e10030.jpg

The tip of the thickness of this cut measures 1mm:

Drill1_zpse52885dc.jpg

This cut is 8 inches in diameter:

Drill5_zpsf010f9aa.jpg

Here is what author Donald Chittick has to say:

It is easy to understand why Petrie was surprised by the rate at which the tubular drill penetrated hard rock. Modern diamond drills working in granite have a feed rate of about 0.0002 inch per revolution, while the Egyptian tube drills penetrated 0.1 inch per revolution. Since 0.1 divided by 0.0002 equals 500, this shows that the Egyptian drills penetrated 500 times as fast per revolution as modern drills.

The spiral grooves in the Egyptian artifacts are continuous and symmetrical, giving nearly positive proof that machine power was used.

There are additional features to the holes cut by the Egyptian tubular drills and the cores which came out from them. There was a taper on both the hole made by the drill, and the core which came from inside the tubular drill. In addition, the drill cut faster through harder materials in the granite. It cut faster through quartz than through the softer materials like feldspar. These and other characteristics pose a problem for any explanation of how the holes were cut. Even the usual modern rock drills do not cut through harder materials faster than through softer materials. Several modern theories have been put forward to explain the information observed on the artifacts.

None of them is without problems. It is possible to explain the facts of both the rapid cutting rate, and also the fact that the tubular drills cut through the harder materials in granite at a faster rate than they did the softer materials. However, that explanation involves technologies which have only been discovered and applied in recent times.

Ultrasonic drilling has been discovered and can explain why a feed-rate through harder materials is more rapid than through softer materials. An abrasive material can be used to accelerate the action. An object vibrating at 19 - 25 thousand vibrations per second generates ultrasonic sound. It is termed ultrasonic because it is above the frequency range to which the human ear can respond.

A tool vibrating in the ultrasonic range can vibrate in harmony with the natural frequency of a hard material, causing the hard material to vibrate. As ultrasonic energy is applied, the hard material being cut vibrates at greater and greater amplitude until it shatters. It is much like pushing a child in a swing. Every push makes the swing move at a greater and greater amplitude. That is the same principle for ultrasonic drilling which is applied in modern technology to precision machining of ultra-hard and brittle materials.

http://cdn.answersin...2-080_chap9.pdf

No tools ever found in a museum that would be capable of such a cut.

Draw your own conclusions.

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From which period? Early, Middle or Late? There is 3000 years difference you see.

Were they describing what they actually did or what they think happened?

In other words was the artist as ignorant as we are today.

Sorry to make things complicated but these things need to be considered.

Sausages not steak.

What you're saying is that any evidence there might be for the way that the Ancients did things is not good enough, since they were only describing what they think happened, since it may have been a long time before their time. Now, we are, at this present time, several thousand years further on from that, and there is no evidence at all that ETs may have been responsible for any of this. So how on earth can anyone say with absolute certainty that it must have been Aliens that did it? It makes no sense at all.

Edited by Lord Vetinari
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The following Glyphic is from 2200 BC Tomb of Ankmahor in Saqquara

steinbearbeitung-statue.jpg

And that explains precision drilling, cutting and positioning how?

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What you're saying is that any evidence there might be for the way that the Ancients did things is not good enough, since they were only describing what they think happened, since it may have been a long time before their time. Now, we are, at this present time, several thousand years further on from that, and there is no evidence at all that ETs may have been responsible for any of this. So how on earth can anyone say with absolute certainty that it must have been Aliens that did it? It makes no sense at all.

The quality of building work in Egypt declined as the civilisation progressed. There was a general loss of accuracy in the achitecture that was present in earlier times.

Draw you own conclusions.

How can a later kingdom possibly know what was done 2000 years earlier if they themselves were not capable of replicating it.

Think it through.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And that explains precision drilling, cutting and positioning how?

But if there was what you call, by your definition, precision drilling, cutting and positioning (and you haven't proved any of that), that doesn't prove that it was ETs that did it. None of it is proof that ETs did any of it. I'm going to keep saying this until you take some notice, since you keep saying "sausages" all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if there was what you call, by your definition, precision drilling, cutting and positioning (and you haven't proved any of that), that doesn't prove that it was ETs that did it. None of it is proof that ETs did any of it. I'm going to keep saying this until you take some notice, since you keep saying "sausages" all the time.

See above post on drilling please.

Random unsubstantiated claims will not do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

problem here zoser.. your still not offering any proof to the claims you make.. what your showing is the finished product.. nothing to how it was made.. how it was done.. the tools used..

so.. again.. you need to show proof before you can call it fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to be honest.. I think all AA'ers should go into politics ..

they are very good at avoiding direct questions.. giving factual examples etc..

reading the stuff you post on here zoser and how you duck and weave.. reminds me of watching parliament question time..

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

problem here zoser.. your still not offering any proof to the claims you make.. what your showing is the finished product.. nothing to how it was made.. how it was done.. the tools used..

so.. again.. you need to show proof before you can call it fact.

Morning Dingo.

(or evening in Aus).

The problem is that no primitive system of drilling is going to drill those holes and leave behind that evidence.

Just like I have been saying.

The evidence fits ultra sonics.

I have the evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See above post on drilling please.

Random unsubstantiated claims will not do.

I don't think you really understand. Random unsubstantiated claims will not do, you say. Don't you understand that insisting that ETs must have done it is a Random unsubstantiated claim? Do you understand that, or do you have difficulty understanding that? You do realise that there's nothing to substantiate the claim that ETs must have done it?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Morning Dingo.

(or evening in Aus).

The problem is that no primitive system of drilling is going to drill those holes and leave behind that evidence.

Just like I have been saying.

The evidence fits ultra sonics.

I have the evidence.

no you dont have the evidence zoser.. the evidence would be a example of the tool used.. no matter how you try to twist it.. use warped logic.. its not evidence..

we have posted tools you say are not good enough.. it is up to you to prove that they are not.. basically the same that you ask us to do.. it also applies to you as well..

and evening mate.. sorry been busy packing today.. moving to queensland in a month ..

1 person likes 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.