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

Granite contains 1,8% CaO.

Calcium oxide converts to Ca(OH)2 in water, basic enough to react with oxalic acid.

The reaction of calcium oxide (CaO) with oxalic acid (HO2C-CO2H) :

CaO + H2O ---> Ca(OH)2

Ca(OH)2 + HO2C-CO2H ---> Ca(C2O4) + 2 H2O

CaCO3 won't be present in granite because of the way (heat, magma) granite is formed.

And it won't have to be present.

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And Zoser, you say the amount of chemicals needed would be enormous, but what is needed for vitrification? The Spaniards were there, and never reported about enormous and intense fires used to finish the stones.

Now that would be a spectacle to behold !!

Anyway, they may have made their acidic brew from common plants, or plants they got by trading with people in the Amazon jungle.

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And Zoser, you say the amount of chemicals needed would be enormous, but what is needed for vitrification? The Spaniards were there, and never reported about enormous and intense fires used to finish the stones.

More evidence in favour of the idea that the precision work was already done before they arrived.

Anyway, they may have made their acidic brew from common plants, or plants they got by trading with people in the Amazon jungle.

And we have failed to re-discover it and employ it to save millions of dollars on building work? Is this really a credible hypothesis?

Think how the renaissance cathedral builders would have appreciated this technology. They were pretty resourceful people too!

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I said they may have used the acidic brew to chemically alter the sides of the already cut stones. Not that the stones were completely shaped by these chemicals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well there is this bit. IDK where it falls to even run a diamond cutter through stone you need water to keep it cooled. Unles were suggesting it was done laser precision by hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More evidence in favour of the idea that the precision work was already done before they arrived.

And we have failed to re-discover it and employ it to save millions of dollars on building work? Is this really a credible hypothesis?

No, the Spaniards were there, and never reported anything that could hint at a process of vitrification.

On the other hand, it is quite possible the Incas used an acidic brew in permeable bags of some sort and then smeared the substance on the sides and edges of the stones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I said they may have used the acidic brew to chemically alter the sides of the already cut stones. Not that the stones were completely shaped by these chemicals.

Accepted. So how can this be furthered? I've run up against a bit of a brick (granite) wall. If resources were no problem what would be needed to get a more detailed idea of how this was done?

My instinct suggests that it was some high intensity thermal cutter. However even if one makes the giant leap of assuming some kind of high power laser was used then how would they have handled the device to achieve these perfectly flat surfaces? Trying to achieve a flat surface with a hand held laser would be impossible surely?

High temperature may well account for the perfect fitting of the blocks. Some kind of jig holding the powered device to allow true vertical and horizontal cuts with constant feed rate?

It boggles the mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the Spaniards were there, and never reported anything that could hint at a process of vitrification.

On the other hand, it is quite possible the Incas used an acidic brew in permeable bags of some sort and then smeared the substance on the sides and edges of the stones.

We'll have to disagree on that one. Magic brews? How about AA?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the Spaniards were there, and never reported anything that could hint at a process of vitrification.

So isn't that confirmation that the precision work was done before they arrived? We know that there is vitrification all over that area but only on the precision relics.

I'm not trying to catch you out Abe but if you think about it that is pretty good evidence to say that it was already done; else as you suggest the Spanish would have noted the process. Few people have actually noticed the vitrification and those that have have failed to appreciate the significance of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We'll have to disagree on that one. Magic brews? How about AA?

Not magic, acidic.

I can imagine they collected enough plants, and then boiled the collected juice into a more concentrated and potent liquid.

Applying it to a stone would not have been as notable as the process of vitrification must have been.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not magic, acidic.

I can imagine they collected enough plants, and then boiled the collected juice into a more concentrated and potent liquid.

Applying it to a stone would not have been as notable as the process of vitrification must have been.

I don't really understand? Vitrification still occurred though yes? And presumably because it wasn't noted by the Spanish they never witnessed it happen?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about AA?

mother-of-god-gif-i9.gif

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really understand? Vitrification still occurred though yes? And presumably because it wasn't noted by the Spanish they never witnessed it happen?

Is what some consider to be the result of heat/vitrification actually been proven to be the result of heat/vitrification?

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What polishing powder? Are you seriously trying to advocate that the ancients polished every bit of precision stonework that they cut? Even steps, ledges, and stonework not even directly noticeable? Really? Polishing to the point of actually wearing down the stone? That's what you are inferring. They polished the inside of a tunnel?

Your completely on the wrong track Mr O, and I worry about the others encouraging you in this desperate fantasy idea. Look at the analysis; it's burning by direct intense heat source or chemical. Polishing is just bananas.

The experts disagree with you Mr O.

Mr. Bielby postulated that what happens is that the top layer becomes glassy

Here is something much better than postulation:

The microscope photos above of the surface do not show the amorphous state of the layer. This can be shown explicitly by electron microscopic analysis. Further analysis needs to be carried out to confirm the state of the layer. The different chemical composition makes it very unlikely that these surfaces were created by polishing. The layer has the composition, sheen, hardness and glassy texture of a glaze.

The results strongly indicate that heat was used to produce the surface, which raises several questions. Even if a layer of a ceramic paste was applied, how was the whole heated to the requisite temperatures without cracking the limestone? It tends to shatter at these sorts of heats.

http://blog.world-my...stiges-of-peru/

I'm sorry Mr O but this analysis is a lot more scientific than postulation. I recommend with respect that you read through this link and try and update yourself in the more recent findings and analysis rather than stubbornly sticking to old ideas that are just no longer valid.

Do a search and look for vitrified rock samples in Peru and Bolivia and satisfy yourself that the phenomena is not just local to a wall or two, but it's everywhere that precision relics are to be found; i.e very widespread.

It would be really good to talk again when you have done this.

I'll wait until there's a proper investigation sampling more than just one spot that actually looks like it's burned, thank you.

And exactly what shaping method is being suggested as this being a result of, given that the only meltage is only a fraction of a millimeter?

I notice they're citing Watkins' thermal disaggragation theory, by which the rocks would've been heated until they fractured, much as in the the process of flaming granite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How come it's not on the cruder (Inca) walls? I saw a comparison clip earlier and the cruder walls don't have it.

Check out 4:00 here:

!

They may be cruder but they're also twice as rough as a result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is what some consider to be the result of heat/vitrification actually been proven to be the result of heat/vitrification?

.

I thought that was a given; proven by microscopic analysis?

The results strongly indicate that heat was used to produce the surface, which raises several questions. Even if a layer of a ceramic paste was applied, how was the whole heated to the requisite temperatures without cracking the limestone? It tends to shatter at these sorts of heats.

How else is that effect achieved across such a large scale of artefacts? It's either the result of intense burning, or melting by some unknown chemical. In both cases an esoteric explanation is needed.

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More intriguing information: Suggesting that the blocks were soft at the time of construction. See what you think:

2. Metal Clamps and T-grooves.

The use of Metal Clamps in T-Grooves happened in Tiahuanaco, Ollantaytambo, Koricancha and the site of Yuroc Rumi, Vilcabamba. Also in Egypt the use of clamps was found. The grooves appear to be limited to the most monumental structures, as the size of the blocks in which they were used is huge. At the site of Pumapunku, Tiahuanaco, a number of grooves still can be observed. Some say the metal of these clamps is from a very special alley, others say it is of a composition that is perfectly normal for the bronze technology of the Tiahuanaco culture.

The interpretation of the use:

Why would the builders use or need a small metal clamp to hold large stone blocks in place? This is the reason that some consider that the clamps were for ceremonial use, as the effect for construction use would be very limitted, namely the size of the blocks is too big compared with the size of the T-grooves and clamps. See:http://www.adventurespecialists.org/tgroove.html

But Alfredo Gamarra said that the perfect fitting blocks do so because they were moldable on the moment of construction. If Alfredo was right, one can imagine that especially bigger blocks were more difficult to treat, as the weight of the clay-like block would have given problems to keep them in place, and the clay could have had the tendency to deform. The clamps would have served for keeping the blocks together, so they would harden out in the right position. The observation that the groove has been polished is important here. The same can be observed on the borders of the stones of the perfect fitting walls. Some technology with heat was applied to give form and strength to the construction. This means the shine is not because of polishing, but would be vitrification. The same counts for the T-Grooves. From the picture of the stoneblock with the T-groove in Ollantaytambo, it can be observed that also a bigger part of the stone is vitrified, not only the part of the groove.

And from the book 'The lost tomb of Viracocha', by Maurice Cotterell:

"Many scholars believe the straps were melted locally, and then poured into the grooves in the stones, because microscopic marks embedded in the straps can be seen to imitate corollary marks found in the stone. But as figures 39 and 40 explain, if the straps had been poured in situ, then the surface of each strap would be expected to be slightly convex, due to influence of surface tension experienced in the casting process. Secondly, the straps themselves would have adopted a cast line caused by the crack between the stone blocks, but the stones do not feature such a mark. A closer look at one of the blocks shows a discoulored outer layer of stone. It is as though the surface of the stone has been somehow 'softened' and later hardened, permitting the introduction of the ready-formed copper strip. This would explain away the flat-topped nature of the straps and the absence of the inter-block cast line."

So what does this mean? The clamps would have been put into the stones being these in a soft state, and the clamps would have been hard already! There is vitrification near the clamps to be seen, see this picture of Ollantaytambo: Clamp Ollantaytambo

http://alteredge.myfreeforum.org/archive/vitrified-and-moulded-rocks__o_t__t_166.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another enigma that needs following up that may give a clue as to what happened to these stones:

Others have shown that many of these stones are magnetic, so something special happened with these rocks.

A vague statement that I wish the author had followed with a reference instead of me having to find one!

That's for tomorrow.

This quote came from the same source as above. Could it be that heating caused a re-alignment of the internal magnetic material causing it to become altered in some way? If rock is heated it also needs to be exposed to a strong field in order to retain these properties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" " One of the strangest mysteries of ancient Egypt is that of the great glass sheets that were only discovered in 1932. In December of that year, Patrick Clayton, a surveyor for the Egyptian Geological Survey, was driving among the dunes of the Great Sand Sea near the Saad Plateau in the virtually uninhabited area just north of the south-western corner of Egypt, when he heard his tyres crunch on something that wasn't sand. It turned out to be large pieces of marvelously clear, yellow-green glass.

In fact, this wasn't just any ordinary glass, but ultra-pure glass that was an astonishing 98 per cent silica. Clayton wasn't the first person to come across this field of glass, as various 'prehistoric' hunters and nomads had obviously also found the now-famous Libyan Desert Glass (LDG). The glass had been used in the past to make knives and sharp-edged tools as well as other objects. A carved scarab of LDG was even found in Tutankhamen's tomb, indicating that the glass was sometimes used for jewellery.

An article by Giles Wright in the British science magazine New Scientist (July 10, 1999), entitled "The Riddle of the Sands", says that LDG is the purest natural silica glass ever found. Over a thousand tonnes of it are strewn across hundreds of kilometres of bleak desert. Some of the chunks weigh 26 kilograms, but most LDG exists in smaller, angular pieces--looking like shards left when a giant green bottle was smashed by colossal forces.

According to the article, LDG, pure as it is, does contain tiny bubbles, white wisps and inky black swirls. The whitish inclusions consist of refractory minerals such as cristobalite. The ink-like swirls, though, are rich in iridium, which is diagnostic of an extraterrestrial impact such as a meteorite or comet, according to conventional wisdom. The general theory is that the glass was created by the searing, sand-melting impact of a cosmic projectile"

I guess the ancients may have decided to polish the desert too, or use their high tec weapons to do it, like they did with the buildings?

Could be evidence of ancient impacts or nuclear war!!!! The indians wrote about that!

EDIT, sorry didnt post source: http://www.ancient-w...k/vitrified.htm

Edited by seeder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Abramelin, on 17 December 2012 - 07:15 PM, said:

I have seen crows set a shrub on fire to chase out a young pigeon.

How do you want people to think they did that, do you have any idea?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nopeda, on 18 December 2012 - 12:47 PM, said:

The evidence is what people discuss most here. Whether xts exist anywhere in the universe or not, evidence that they have been here is certainly one of the things people discuss in this forum. The fact that you can't acknowledge any means you can't make any distinction between what is and what is not evidence :no:, but that does nothing to eliminate any of the evidence that people discuss here and in lots of other places all over the planet.

I know well what is and is not evidence

Maybe...maybe not. Let's find out. What do you think is evidence that xts have been here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe language isnt a requirement to animals/fish/insects, but its also well known that dolphins and wales have many many different vocalisations, elephants too - on the subsonic level, so is having language the only requirement you need to believe in what you believe?

Having spoken language sets humans apart from all other animals, and having written language does so even more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you want people to think they did that, do you have any idea?

Bic lighters?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote: "The hill is indeed roughly pyramid-shaped, at least the half that faces the town. The other half is a bit lumpy. In fact, if you look at it with Google Earth, it doesn't look like a pyramid at all. Geologists say it's a natural formation and that there are several like it in the region; Osmanagic says many of those hills are pyramids too"

http://www.gadling.c...a-probably-not/

Tried Google Earth?

No. I'm going by pics that came up in a Google Image search.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, yes, but I'm not sure if the ones whose brief lives almost inevitably end in providing a meal for something else would necessarily see things in the same way ...

The vast majority of wild animals never reach maturity. Even the majority of higher animals like elephants and lions. Thinking it's all a garden of Eden for wildlife is naive at "best".

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.