zoser Posted January 3, 2013 #1 Share Posted January 3, 2013 (edited) What a cop-out! So you can only name 2, and both just happen to have appeared on the AA series, and BOTH are anti aliens as I pointed out way back. You see you fall for it all the time, the questions were trick questions, I KNEW you couldn't name any because your research only goes so far as watching a vid. And no 'specialist' worth his salt, and no archeologist wanting to keep his professional career, will ever mention aliens! And that's not to say they will think it, but never say it...they don't even think it to start with!! Youre just swayed by videos. Chris Dunn and Roger Hopkins isn't naming any??? I swear you are having trouble with your eyes young seeder. Just watch an episode of AA. PhD's everywhere; engineers particularly. No cop out. Information supplied and ignored. Nothing changes there then. You're swayed by fantasy by the way. Edited January 3, 2013 by zoser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
synchronomy Posted January 3, 2013 #2 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Chris Dunn and Roger Hopkins isn't naming any??? I swear you are having trouble with your eyes young seeder. Just watch an episode of AA. PhD's everywhere; engineers particularly. No cop out. Information supplied and ignored. Nothing changes there then. You're swayed by fantasy by the way. Go visit Georgio Tsoukalos facebook page. The guy is no intellect. He's a stuffed shirt. Waste of skin IMHO. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abramelin Posted January 3, 2013 #3 Share Posted January 3, 2013 (edited) The protuberances are way too small to get a rope around them! It would need half a dozen ropes to move those stones at Ollyantaytambo. I'll post some pictures later if I get time. The much smaller blocks have those on them too and some of them stick out less than an inch. Their purpose definitely wasn't ropes. Also they are not squared off enough for ropes to hold! You haven't seen them from up close. You can put your arm around them. . Edited January 3, 2013 by Abramelin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted January 3, 2013 #4 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Chris Dunn and Roger Hopkins isn't naming any??? I swear you are having trouble with your eyes young seeder. Just watch an episode of AA. PhD's everywhere; engineers particularly. No cop out. Information supplied and ignored. Nothing changes there then. You're swayed by fantasy by the way. Young? You have no idea. Now I assumed as you hadn't posted all day you had in fact had to go back to school..bummer eh? And it was I, yes me...who first pointed out to you the 'facts' about Dunn and Hopkins...remember when you were seriously owned? How soon you forget, maybe I will re-post that original post as a subtle reminder everyone else no doubt hasn't forgot 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted January 3, 2013 #5 Share Posted January 3, 2013 quote: "Mr. Dunn has anticipated a valid objection to his reasoning, and it's the exact thing that I'm going to accuse him of. It's called anomaly hunting, and I'm fairly certain that he's doing it. But he thinks there's something more than that going on here, and he tries to explain himself. I can respect that. And I should be fair here and point out something that the History Channel didn't mention: Mr. Dunn is not an ancient aliens theorist. He believes that the ancient Egyptians had more sophisticated tools than we give them credit for, but from looking through his website it seems like he believes that they came up with this technology of their own accord, rather than through alien intervention. http://www.dumbassgu...og.php?bid=67 Knowing you, you wont bother reading the link for Mr Dunns 'section' and "I can back it up with expert witnesses. Can you?" Witnesses? So someone has seen aliens for real? repost to help zosers memory along 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted January 3, 2013 #6 Share Posted January 3, 2013 expert witnesses? Youre kidding arent you? Even Roger Hopkins got it wrong and no I dont need to watch videos thankyou... Im the type to read... Roger Hopkins.... again a quote: " We turned around and there staring straight ahead is, “The Alien,” a 10 foot tall 3 feet wide granite rock shaped like an extraterrestrial alien from another galaxy. “Do you believe that ancient alien astronauts built the pyramids?” I asked. “That’s a bunch of hooey,” he said. Hopkins doesn’t believe ancient alien astronauts built the pyramids. How did the pyramids get built? With rollers, he answered emphatically. At Aswan in Egypt, on the upper reaches of the Nile, ancient builders constructed a road out of rock that is 30 to 40 feet wide and seven miles long to move large rock masses, he said. “If aliens can travel the Universe, why would they build such lousy buildings,” he said, noting that the early pyramids were either too steep and collapsed or built at different angles and collapsed. “They could have done a better job than that.” Roger Hopkins – Master Stone Sculptor, Debunks Ancient Alien Astronaunt Theory for Pyramid Building! http://desertstarwee...stone-sculptor/ sigh...tell me what youd believe - and what evidence you have if it wasnt for youtube? And how on earth can you say there is proof? Or witnesses?. How is it feasible, possible...that a select few 'know' about the aliens and - have proof....yet the rest of the world doesnt know? repost to help zoser remember 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myles Posted January 3, 2013 #7 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Archaeologists never consult specialists. How about Chris Dunn and Roger Hopkins for a start. Comments from these experts have been posted here recently. "Arcaeologists never consult specialists" - That is a lie. Provide proof? We know you won't. Chris and Roger are known to be Charlatans. Chris and Roger are not experts. 99.9% of specialists do not agree with what you are spewing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abramelin Posted January 3, 2013 #8 Share Posted January 3, 2013 (edited) Anyone have an idea about the herb or herbs we are looking for to explain the shine and accuracy of the Incan structures? Add something constructive, goddamnit. Yep, I know Zoser is stubborn as a mule (but so am I). And many others know too, but can we all agree on trying to find answers? Don't we all desire to know how the 'ancients' built their temples and fortifications and whatnot? Attacking Zoser will not get us closer to the answer. It will only get us closer to this thread being locked. , Edited January 3, 2013 by Abramelin 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nopeda Posted January 3, 2013 #9 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Oniomancer wrote: nopeda wrote:1. don't look like air vehicles. 2. have been carved over. 3. have been plastered over then carved over. 4. have been plastered over then carved over then some fell out. 5. have been plastered over then carved over then it all fell out. 1 is totally subjective as evidenced bythe amount of time it took for someone to notice the resemblance even allowing for the limited access to the site, and you yourself still haven't been able to tell us what air vehicles the others are supposed to look like. The fancied resemblance or lack thereof has no bearing on the other points. 2 Is a general factual statement. It is in fact contained in the remaining points and therefore does not contradict them. 3 is also a general factual statement since portions of the later glyphs appear to overlap portions of the earlier ones, which requires infill of same. 4 and 5 is is the only part where we have any confusion yet there is still no inherent contradiction, only a matter of imprecision. As stated elsewhere, both sets of glyphs each separately form an individual cohesive and coherent whole. This is another fact, as verified by the not insignificant presence of identical glyphs elsewhere in the complex. This is only possible if both sets of glyphs are visible in their entirety. This in turn is only possible if the plaster infill is completely missing from those parts where it formerly was. http://www.unexplain...90#entry4559893 1. If they didn't look like air vehicles we wouldn't be discussing why they do. I just take that for granted and move on, while other people can't get there at all and try fighting the fact. 2. For them to have just been carved over would be different than if they were plasterd over first. Again I just take that for granted... 3. You don't know if either 2 or 3 are factual, and being plastered over TOO is not the same as just being carved over. 4. They all are different possibilities. For example some plaster remaining, is not the same as no plaster remaining. You seem to sum up by saying 5 is true so you think all the plaster fell out. What makes you think it was ever there to begin with, and how do you think the plaster changed the original? Let's not forget that it doesn't LOOK LIKE they were plastered over. That's a significant aspect of the situation from my pov. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nopeda Posted January 3, 2013 #10 Share Posted January 3, 2013 nopeda, on 01 January 2013 - 02:46 PM, said:As long as I can remember I've been aware that it's stupid to think this is the only planet in the universe that has intelligent life on it, and that it's unlikely that any beings in the universe are good enough at space travel to have influence in more than one star system. But! I was naively stupid enough to think that humans would be able to detect the presence of xt vehicles in our atmosphere if they came around, so I disbelieved that they ever come around now and probably have never been here at all. More recently I figured out why that was stupid, and now consider the possibility that they have been here in the past and still come around now. Oh...you're here too? I was stupid to think we would be able to detect them with radar if they were coming around. Finally though I figured out that they'd probably be able to absorb, reflect, and emit electromagnetic radiation pretty much any ways they want to, meaning we wouldn't be able to detect them with radar except when they want us to, and we wouldn't know they're around at night except when they want us to, etc... If that is true, then the countless ufo sightings are possibly only a small percentage of the activity they STILL carry on in our skies. Or they might just bop in and do a little display here and there from time to time to keep our interst up and that's about it. Or....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted January 3, 2013 #11 Share Posted January 3, 2013 (edited) repost to help zoser remember Restating of what Roger Hopkins actually said on video to a worldwide audience to help seeder remember rather than state some unknown source that any old wag could have said: When shown pictures of Puma Punku he replied: "If we today were to try and reproduce that we would have to use a CNC machine following a template and then it may not come out as good". QED. Your far to easy to refute seeder. That is what he actually said. Edited January 3, 2013 by zoser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted January 3, 2013 #12 Share Posted January 3, 2013 (edited) Anyone have an idea about the herb or herbs we are looking for to explain the shine and accuracy of the Incan structures? Add something constructive, goddamnit. Yep, I know Zoser is stubborn as a mule (but so am I). And many others know too, but can we all agree on trying to find answers? Don't we all desire to know how the 'ancients' built their temples and fortifications and whatnot? Attacking Zoser will not get us closer to the answer. It will only get us closer to this thread being locked. , Thanks for the support Abe. If I had ten seeders to take on I may have to think a little. One of his kind isn't really a problem. The reason is he doesn't have the references. He doesn't do enough research. Edited January 3, 2013 by zoser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nopeda Posted January 3, 2013 #13 Share Posted January 3, 2013 nopeda wrote:One person suggested they were somehow inspired by clouds or/and lighting. Even with all that my impression so far is still that they were carved to appear as they do which amusingly is something some people in this forum don't want to think about. Indeed, worthy of a chuckle. It would be far more amusing if there were any question about what those glyphs are, however. As it is, the funniest part about it is your use of emoticons concerning the subject. There is question about what the glyphs are. Just because you have faith in a possibility doesn't mean there aren't others, or even that your favorite one is correct. Were you unaware of that? Emoticons are always good fun ...well I guess not "always"... But what is? Absence of emoticons? Nah... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nopeda Posted January 3, 2013 #14 Share Posted January 3, 2013 I suppose showing the individual names represented will do as much good now as it has the first hundred times it has been posted but I've wasted my efforts on less I suppose... They look like what they look like, not the pictures you have drawn over them. What do you hope to gain by posting something they don't look like? Are you trying to say that at one time they DID look like that? Or what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abramelin Posted January 3, 2013 #15 Share Posted January 3, 2013 (edited) Thanks for the support Abe. If I had ten seeders to take on I may have to think a little. One of his kind isn't really a problem. The reason is he doesn't have the references. He doesn't do enough research. Well, Seeder does do his research, but he also loves to kick your butt. You do know I don't agree with your view on these things, but your point of view forced me to look deeper into things. And I want people to go search for answers, like I do. We all can make this succeed, if we only work together. Skeptics and believers alike, working together as a team. THAT'S how mysteries get solved. . Edited January 3, 2013 by Abramelin 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nopeda Posted January 3, 2013 #16 Share Posted January 3, 2013 even all that does not mean aliens did it. If those humans couldn't have done it what do you think did? Or can't you consider that possibility? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nopeda Posted January 3, 2013 #17 Share Posted January 3, 2013 back to the photo. here is Ed with that structure and a block and tackle attached to it. . . . Seeming as we have a picture of a block an tackle attached the the very structure in question, can I assume you are responsible for the calculations that say what we are witnessing above is impossible? Ed said he figured out how they built the pyramids but at the time they were built the people didn't have wheels or pulleys from what I've been led to believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nopeda Posted January 3, 2013 #18 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Zoser you get more ridiculous every day! You really do, your mind lives in doolally world matey! Heating a 30 tonne block up to make it like clay? OK and once its that hot hows it going to be handled? Lifted? Be too hot right? It'd fall out of shape too quick to even lay it. Not the kind of thing youd want to keep your hands on while positioning perfectly is it? You lift just a tonne of soft clay, and whatever you lift it with, rope hoists, rollers whatever, squashes it and leaves behind the marks! So where are they? Im amazed anyone takes you seriously enough to even make a reply sometimes, I mean they have to realise, youre intent on claiming aliens or their tech did it somehow... But there were no aliens. And stone doesnt have the same properties as clay, as per your example - so you must rule out 'soft as clay' in all future discussions! Not if aliens were involved. Just because you can't imagine how it could be done doesn't mean it can't be done. If the rocks were heated or whatever to make them malleable they were probably put in place first and then the whole wall or sections of it heated or whatever so they mooshed nicely together but didn't drip away. Let's pretend it's possible that ancient humans didn't have the equipment to do that since they may not have, but it still got done. If they didn't have the ability, how else could it have happened? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myles Posted January 3, 2013 #19 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Not if aliens were involved. Just because you can't imagine how it could be done doesn't mean it can't be done. If the rocks were heated or whatever to make them malleable they were probably put in place first and then the whole wall or sections of it heated or whatever so they mooshed nicely together but didn't drip away. Let's pretend it's possible that ancient humans didn't have the equipment to do that since they may not have, but it still got done. If they didn't have the ability, how else could it have happened? I cannot locate anywhere reputable that shows that these types of rock can be heated up and made moldable. Can you provide a link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted January 3, 2013 #20 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Evidence of burning. Could be handling marks? Who knows. Can't see how this was done chemically or by pounding. Reminds me of fossilised prints left in ancient mud. I think this was burned in. The site is Sacsayhuaman. Working though these video clips is revealing some unbelievable features. From Video: Inca Sachsayhuaman: Gate Of The Creator Viracocha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted January 3, 2013 #21 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Well, Seeder does do his research, but he also loves to kick your butt. You do know I don't agree with your view on these things, but your point of view forced me to look deeper into things. And I want people to go search for answers, like I do. We all can make this succeed, if we only work together. Skeptics and believers alike, working together as a team. THAT'S how mysteries get solved. . Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted January 3, 2013 #22 Share Posted January 3, 2013 (edited) Protuberances. This is why I think they were not for rope handles: They do not protrude enough are are not squared off. Some taper or cone shape (thinner at the block getting thicker away from it) would have suggested that they were for rope use. More pictures show that they were for some deliberate purpose but like everything else it remains unknown. Also very interesting to see on one of the Coricancha walls below. Foerster hears on this clip that they may have acted as some solar marker, Unfortunately the Spanish built a church directly behind so the wall now gets no sunlight. Who knows what they are. One thing is for certain that they made the construction of these blocks significantly more difficult with or without high technology. Just try and think how it could have been done. Incredible. Ancient Cusco: Enigmatic Solar Markers? Edited January 3, 2013 by zoser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
synchronomy Posted January 3, 2013 #23 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Protuberances. This is why I think they were not for rope handles: They do not protrude enough are are not squared off. Some taper or cone shape (thinner at the block getting thicker away from it) would have suggested that they were for rope use. More pictures show that they were for some deliberate purpose but like everything else it remains unknown. Was that rock discovered like that? I mean is that originally how it was found and it was put on that ramp of rocks by the ancients? ...or was the rock placed there in modern times on that ramp to demostrate how it was done? Also, how old is that rock? When was it carved? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted January 3, 2013 #24 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Unfortunately not a high resolution image but shows more 'handling marks'. Would could have caused these? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted January 3, 2013 #25 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Was that rock discovered like that? I mean is that originally how it was found and it was put on that ramp of rocks by the ancients? ...or was the rock placed there in modern times on that ramp to demostrate how it was done? Also, how old is that rock? When was it carved? Not typical at all. Suggesting that the Inca found these stones strewn around and tried to do something with them. They were either abandoned by the original (unknown) builders, or were the result of some catastrophe. Not typical of megalithic architecture in Peru to find perfectly finished blocks on rubble. Date unknown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts