zoser Posted March 12, 2013 #8826 Share Posted March 12, 2013 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.. Ducking and weaving how? I am submitting evidence of ancient high technology. Straight cuts, holes, precision fitting, vitrification and moulding. It's all in the stones. I have stuck to the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted March 12, 2013 #8827 Share Posted March 12, 2013 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? Very easy. Primitive man couldn't do it. It was all done by unknown high technology although the evidence is now pointing to sound as the method. The ancients spoke of visitors. They portrayed this in their art and their folkore. I've said it before but we don't need spaceships in the sand. If you think otherwise then please explain 0.1 inch depth cuts in granite per revolution. If you say ancient high tech visitors didn't do it than you have to say who did. Simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DingoLingo Posted March 12, 2013 #8828 Share Posted March 12, 2013 Ducking and weaving how? I am submitting evidence of ancient high technology. Straight cuts, holes, precision fitting, vitrification and moulding. It's all in the stones. I have stuck to the subject. no.. what you have submitted is pictures saying it was done by this.. without showing how.. its like this.. you want to get a gov grant to polish granite using hi tech gear.. you can just go.. here is the stone.. see this is what it looks like with our ancient alien tech.. nope.. you have to actually prove that the gear works.. show the equipment.. show data.. practical demonstrations.. that kind of thing.. and you are failing each and every time to do that.. that is a duck and weave.. when we ask for proof you cant give it.. when you ask us for it.. we can.. see where I am getting at here ? Very easy. Primitive man couldn't do it. It was all done by unknown high technology although the evidence is now pointing to sound as the method. The ancients spoke of visitors. They portrayed this in their art and their folkore. I've said it before but we don't need spaceships in the sand. If you think otherwise then please explain 0.1 inch depth cuts in granite per revolution. If you say ancient high tech visitors didn't do it than you have to say who did. Simple. the ancients did it.. using the same tools they always used.. simple.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted March 12, 2013 #8829 Share Posted March 12, 2013 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 .. Queensland. Very nice. Sub tropical climate? The tools are not with us but the evidence of what did it is. See previous post. http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=237842&st=8805#entry4695850 We now have vitrification, moulding, precision saw cuts, precision hole cuts with inexplicable feed rates, and precision fitting even fusion of blocks. Looks pretty convincing to me. If not high tech visitors then who? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted March 12, 2013 #8830 Share Posted March 12, 2013 (edited) Very easy. Primitive man couldn't do it. It was all done by unknown high technology although the evidence is now pointing to sound as the method. The ancients spoke of visitors. They portrayed this in their art and their folkore. I've said it before but we don't need spaceships in the sand. If you think otherwise then please explain 0.1 inch depth cuts in granite per revolution. If you say ancient high tech visitors didn't do it than you have to say who did. Simple. No, i'm afraid that's the "you prove it's not" argument, which isn't a legitimate argument I'm afraid. It's up to people who insist that it must have been something to prove that it was that something, not for others to prove that it wasn't. I'm really sorry about this. :-) Edited March 12, 2013 by Lord Vetinari Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted March 12, 2013 #8831 Share Posted March 12, 2013 no.. what you have submitted is pictures saying it was done by this.. without showing how.. its like this.. you want to get a gov grant to polish granite using hi tech gear.. you can just go.. here is the stone.. see this is what it looks like with our ancient alien tech.. nope.. you have to actually prove that the gear works.. show the equipment.. show data.. practical demonstrations.. that kind of thing.. and you are failing each and every time to do that.. that is a duck and weave.. when we ask for proof you cant give it.. when you ask us for it.. we can.. see where I am getting at here ? the ancients did it.. using the same tools they always used.. simple.. The evidence says that they couldn't have without high technology. The explanation for the feed rate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DingoLingo Posted March 12, 2013 #8832 Share Posted March 12, 2013 Queensland. Very nice. Sub tropical climate? The tools are not with us but the evidence of what did it is. See previous post. http://www.unexplain...05#entry4695850 We now have vitrification, moulding, precision saw cuts, precision hole cuts with inexplicable feed rates, and precision fitting even fusion of blocks. Looks pretty convincing to me. If not high tech visitors then who? love it over in queensland Ok lets see what we have.. The tools are with us and the evidence of what did it is. We now have vitrification precision saw cuts, precision hole cuts with inexplicable feed rates, and precision fitting even fusion of blocks. Looks pretty convincing to me. If not our ancient ancestors then who? yup.. that is all evidence that ancient man did it with now help from a advanced race at all.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DingoLingo Posted March 12, 2013 #8833 Share Posted March 12, 2013 The evidence says that they couldn't have without high technology. The explanation for the feed rate? what evidence? your putting modern day drilling methods into ancient drilling tech.. it wont mix.. yes we can drill 50 meters into hard granite in about 25 mins using modern day tech.. the ancients did it a lot slower.. but you will still have the same effect.. what your saying does not wash at all.. the evidence you put up to say advanced high tech.. is really evidence of it being done with low tech.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted March 12, 2013 #8834 Share Posted March 12, 2013 love it over in queensland Ok lets see what we have.. The tools are with us and the evidence of what did it is. We now have vitrification precision saw cuts, precision hole cuts with inexplicable feed rates, and precision fitting even fusion of blocks. Looks pretty convincing to me. If not our ancient ancestors then who? yup.. that is all evidence that ancient man did it with now help from a advanced race at all.. Proof by trace evidence. There is no other argument. Did the ancients have high speed rotary cutters? No. Then the other alternative has to be high weight bearing down on the tool. It would need to be in the order of say 0.5 tonne - 1 tonne, with the obvious result that a copper tube would collapse instantly it hit the granite. It wouldn't even do 1 rev. No material hard enough to stand the load. I cannot see how this one can be argued otherwise. Hypothesis proved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted March 12, 2013 #8835 Share Posted March 12, 2013 what evidence? your putting modern day drilling methods into ancient drilling tech.. it wont mix.. yes we can drill 50 meters into hard granite in about 25 mins using modern day tech.. the ancients did it a lot slower.. but you will still have the same effect.. what your saying does not wash at all.. the evidence you put up to say advanced high tech.. is really evidence of it being done with low tech.. Your missing the trace evidence. Think about it. 0.1 inch of depth per revolution. That's 2.5mm in granite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DingoLingo Posted March 12, 2013 #8836 Share Posted March 12, 2013 Proof by trace evidence. There is no other argument. Did the ancients have high speed rotary cutters? No. Then the other alternative has to be high weight bearing down on the tool. It would need to be in the order of say 0.5 tonne - 1 tonne, with the obvious result that a copper tube would collapse instantly it hit the granite. It wouldn't even do 1 rev. No material hard enough to stand the load. I cannot see how this one can be argued otherwise. Hypothesis proved. actually its not proved at all .. you see what I mean.. you cannot prove that it was not done by low tech using modern day thoughts.. we can speculate it was done by the ancients due to the tools that have been found.. drawings etc showing them doing it.. though we might not have the theory 100% because after all.. this was 1000's of years ago.. and the skills have been lost as tools evolved and new ways of doing things easier were brought in.. you see.. you cannot disprove it was not done by low tech.. you can speculate like we can.. but you cannot prove it wasnt.. our theories are probably more closer to the truth.. because we can actual provide the tools etc.. again.. see what I am getting at here.. the burden of proof? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted March 12, 2013 #8837 Share Posted March 12, 2013 Dingo I'm happy to continue. I have to leave for a while now. Keep thinking about the hole cutting. See previous pics. Be back soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DingoLingo Posted March 12, 2013 #8838 Share Posted March 12, 2013 Your missing the trace evidence. Think about it. 0.1 inch of depth per revolution. That's 2.5mm in granite. and once again.. your using modern day thoughts on a ancient process.. that is just not going to work.. Dingo I'm happy to continue. I have to leave for a while now. Keep thinking about the hole cutting. See previous pics. Be back soon. I'll probably be in bed by then tell you what.. you keep thinking about providing proof.. and I will wait in hope.. but I wont hold my breath.. my girlfriend would rather me move to queensland alive and not as a corpse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taniwha Posted March 12, 2013 #8839 Share Posted March 12, 2013 And that explains precision drilling, cutting and positioning how? LOL you are joking right... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myles Posted March 12, 2013 #8840 Share Posted March 12, 2013 Do you have any explanations? Please feel free to offer some. Walnuts. You have yet to provide any evidence otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S2F Posted March 12, 2013 #8841 Share Posted March 12, 2013 (edited) See above post on drilling please. Random unsubstantiated claims will not do. Apples and oranges zoser. You are comparing two different methods. The 'grooves' would have been made by the abrasive component and would not necessarily be indicative of the feed rate as they were (relatively) free to move around during the drilling process (part of the very definition of abrasion). If you think there is some parallel in modern day coring tools and techniques you are sorely mistaken, therefore any comparison other than superficial is a non starter. Edited March 12, 2013 by Slave2Fate 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted March 12, 2013 #8842 Share Posted March 12, 2013 From which period? Early, Middle or Late? There is 3000 years difference you see. Thats a good question zoser. So answer me, which periods are your anomalies from? I believe your sticking point is holes as usual, possibly saw marks too. So show the pics whilst naming what period they were from. If you will, that it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taniwha Posted March 12, 2013 #8843 Share Posted March 12, 2013 the ancients did it.. using the same tools they always used.. simple.. Like you say, there is no evidence pointing to alien tech. Travertine vessel from Egypt (below) split down the centre reveals the drill core fragments in part, and a modern Glyphic (bottom) explaining this ancient relic from 4th Dynasty. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted March 12, 2013 #8844 Share Posted March 12, 2013 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. Nothing unusual there. heck even today we are fond of saying 'they dont make things like they used to', its a fact too. No civilization stands still. what ended the Egyptian kingdom zoser? Think it through 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted March 12, 2013 #8845 Share Posted March 12, 2013 LOL you are joking right... The trace evidence speaks louder than a piece of artwork that may or not be anything to do with the original builders. Sorry but that is no proof. Unless you can explain the evidence which refers to the core depth per revoluton, any artwork or theory is just pie in the sky. You still have not referenced the period of the art work by the way. Late, middle or early. No evidence. Sorry but the trace evidence is much stronger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted March 12, 2013 #8846 Share Posted March 12, 2013 See above post on drilling please. Random unsubstantiated claims will not do. unsubstantiated claims wont do eh? GOOD! That means you can shut up now then does it? thats all you ever do is make wild claims 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted March 12, 2013 #8847 Share Posted March 12, 2013 Like you say, there is no evidence pointing to alien tech. Travertine vessel from Egypt (below) split down the centre reveals the drill core fragments in part, and a modern Glyphic (bottom) explaining this ancient relic from 4th Dynasty. Show me the evidence of core depth per revolution on this sample please? Again you are trying to explain steak with sausages. That sample is nothing to do with the samples I have posted earlier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myles Posted March 12, 2013 #8848 Share Posted March 12, 2013 LOL you are joking right... Zoser the poser will not take these pics into consideration. Only the AA pics are true evidence. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted March 12, 2013 #8849 Share Posted March 12, 2013 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. You DO NOT have any evidence. Only fairy minded theories we however, have the core drills which are EVIDENCE OF HOLLOW TUBE DRILLS. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHaYap Posted March 12, 2013 #8850 Share Posted March 12, 2013 The trace evidence speaks louder than a piece of artwork that may or not be anything to do with the original builders. Sorry but that is no proof. Unless you can explain the evidence which refers to the core depth per revoluton, any artwork or theory is just pie in the sky. You still have not referenced the period of the art work by the way. Late, middle or early. No evidence. Sorry but the trace evidence is much stronger. again ... I reiterate :- okay now your game ... your rules YOurs is not generalised guesswork ... here If the space technology can 'easily' make these stones, that would make thousands of temples and strong home living structures every month .... where are there ? Press a button you melt the stones ... use a gadget the stones stack into a temple, wave a contraption you get 'impossible' designs cut into stones what ? a week to finish PP ? Where are the rest .... ? Should be dotting the landscape every where you care to look .... what the tools have a warranty on how many stone structures it can be used on ? ~snip look in the looking glass zoser ..... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts