Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Uncharted X Pre-Dynastic Egyptian Vase - Mathematical Analysis


Frank_Hoenedge

Recommended Posts

A video uploaded to YouTube 4 weeks ago by UnchartedX - 

 

It discusses a pre-dynastic vase and the precision required to manufacture it.

 

The YouTube video was was produced by 

Thomas Violante

Todd Beaulieu

Alberta Esposito

David Sicilia

James Dickie

Chris Finefrock

SteveVille

Joey White

Jack Demcak

Joseph Martinez

Associate Executive Producers for this Episode: 

Brian Hoots

Strasbaugh Instruments

Douglas Young

Ahmed Adly

Emily Peyton

 

The actual vase itself has been mathematically compared by an unknown party and the conclusions initially drawn by the assessor are detailed Here

 

For fans of sacred geometry the analysis touches on very familiar subjects and offers a positively charged first base in discussion of the object.

 

Lets have a discussion about the initial analysis. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You forgot to include the word "Atlantis" in your title. 

[Quoting myself from the same thread happening elsewhere]

It's interesting that this exact style of pottery is first found in Naqada II made of clay:

14f1ca37ddfbe7ca3cdbed8cf88c2613--the-co

Known to have elements, like the lug handles, imported from the Levant, part of a larger context of cultural exchange of the period. But it is only in Naqada II/Naqada III that they begin to be made of stone-otherwise fundamentally identical to their earlier clay counterparts.

If this stoneware did not belong to the period it is ascribed, how is it the evolution of its design and transition from clay to stone can clearly been seen chronologically in the archeological record? With elements known to have been imported from the Levant where the stone versions are not found? In other words, if these do belong to some antediluvian LC, why does Naqada II just make clay copies and Naqada II/ III-Dynasty 3 use the "real" stone ones made apparently at least 8,000yrs before their time?

We would also note that the end of the skilled stoneware industry that ran from Late Naqada II/Naqada III to the beginning of the 3rd Dynasty rapidly comes to precipitous decline at the same exact time as the sudden appearance of stone architecture and pyramid building under Djoser. Kind of like they now had better things to do....

I have brought this up many times before, but for all of the stone working thought to have been made by someone other than the Egyptians thousands if not tens of thousands of years before, how is it possible that every single item without exception is period specific in chronological order to the Egyptians? The architecture, the statuary, the stoneware- from one end of the Nile to the other from the Predynastic right to the end of Dynastic Egypt. And not just that but by and large these items are not just chronologically specific but specific to the individual pharaohs as well.

How is it possible the Egyptians imprinted themselves in chronological order of their own history right on top of the chronological order of the history of the lost civilization without exception for over 3,000yrs? Which to make matters worse, other than the stonework claimed by the Egyptians in chronological order there is zero trace of the lost civilization other than this very stone work.

Regarding the claims that only "advanced machining" could produce the stoneware it is easy to see this is clearly not the case by simply looking at any examples of the period, which ironically there are many shown in museum cases in this video itself.

4155440bb0f02e269dcab3453c215062.jpg

ypLWO3eqS9WiPg=&risl=&pid=ImgRaw&r=0

a6c0b9cad353333b188bc8a4bde63f4b.jpg

fe09a8b9205044ed2d5428f995293981.png

4f140b254c58466fa9615130b981d63a--egypti

382833bc07b3213793378f61bc34e37d.jpg

1243286c.jpg

Misshapen lips, lug handles, and bodies. Off-plane vertical faces of lug handles and off-centered bodies. While some examples are better or worse than others, if "advanced machines" were used none would show such clear and consistent imperfections as they all do in some form or another which are all consistent with work being done by hand. The argument is that "primitive" people could not make such things of stone at all so how can it be explained the LC with their advanced tools could make tens of thousands of examples in reality so poorly clearly indicative of not being machined?

Here are a few examples of ancient Roman igneous rock stoneware:

be808b522742e1b0f5eb3c2d86155a7d--palati

preview

LARGE

Minoan stone vessels c.2500-1500BC:

1389.jpg?v=1485680494

1390.jpg?v=1485680494

640px-Minoan_stone_vases,_Mochlos_cemete

So if the early Dynastic Egyptians do it then it must be a lost civilization with advanced machining, but if the Minoans, Romans, Greeks, et al do it then that is understandable?

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Regarding the precision and metrology, which to the fringe represents advanced machining, if so, despite the tens of thousands of stone vessels found, how is it no two are alike? The very antithesis of modern manufacturing with machines. These vessels were mass produced- 40,000 dating to the early Dynastic Period were found under Djoser's step pyramid alone. Many vessel "blanks" have been found at the quarries. If using precision tooling these need to be set to specific parameters to produce the desired result. You would make your blanks to fit these parameters which would produce many identical copies regardless of what type of stone you used. This did not happen. Instead, they altered the parameters every single time and for the most part screwed them all up in one way or another as can bee seen by the many imperfections. Except for the one that just to happened find its way to a fringe YouTuber by way of Chris Dunn's son and some dude who did the testing in their free time by way of some unknown collector who purchased it from some unknown private party.  And also betraying this advanced technology, including the vessel in question, is the clear crude finishing by hand under the lip and around the lug handles-a feature found on every one of this style. Where's the Dremel? 

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

So its pretty simple. Apparent "extreme precision" = "tens of thousands to millions of years old advanced lost civilization". There is literally nothing more nuanced to your beliefs than that. Ok. Here is a well know example of "extreme precision":

ram14.jpg

ram15-1.jpg

More.

Quite simple-according to you all [the fringe], because now all of a sudden only the "precision" matters and not the kind of stone or the weight, this statue (and several others noted by Dunn for anyone who has actually read his books [fringe often site Dunn but have never actually read his books] ) was made tens of thousands to millions of years ago and is a depiction of an actual member of the ALC, correct? So all of these statues are not the Egyptians but the ALC tens of thousands to millions of years old?

I assume this statue is also "extreme precision" and it weighed almost 1000 tons to boot so you are saying this is not Ramses II but rather some unknown ALC person tens of thousands to millions of years old?

ramses3.jpg?resize=568,426

Or is Ramses II this old? So if the ALC are actually the Ancient Egyptians then this means the AE are tens of thousands to millions of years old?

 

Edited by Thanos5150
  • Thanks 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I think a combination of a hot climate and the Schumann resonance in stable (months/years) cadence left designs like this accurate through non-verbalised tacit understanding.

I am interested in other opinions too and I’m sure that the delusion of phage analysis is appropriate here as the rhythm and interpretation of the same in humans is proof of an intelligent design arising from electromagnetic interactions from the quantum supercomputer underfoot.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Thanos5150 said:

You forgot to include the word "Atlantis" in your title. 

[Quoting myself from the same thread happening elsewhere]

It's interesting that this exact style of pottery is first found in Naqada II made of clay:

14f1ca37ddfbe7ca3cdbed8cf88c2613--the-co

Known to have elements, like the lug handles, imported from the Levant, part of a larger context of cultural exchange of the period. But it is only in Naqada II/Naqada III that they begin to be made of stone-otherwise fundamentally identical to their earlier clay counterparts.

If this stoneware did not belong to the period it is ascribed, how is it the evolution of its design and transition from clay to stone can clearly been seen chronologically in the archeological record? With elements known to have been imported from the Levant where the stone versions are not found? In other words, if these do belong to some antediluvian LC, why does Naqada II just make clay copies and Naqada II/ III-Dynasty 3 use the "real" stone ones made apparently at least 8,000yrs before their time?

We would also note that the end of the skilled stoneware industry that ran from Late Naqada II/Naqada III to the beginning of the 3rd Dynasty rapidly comes to precipitous decline at the same exact time as the sudden appearance of stone architecture and pyramid building under Djoser. Kind of like they now had better things to do....

I have brought this up many times before, but for all of the stone working thought to have been made by someone other than the Egyptians thousands if not tens of thousands of years before, how is it possible that every single item without exception is period specific in chronological order to the Egyptians? The architecture, the statuary, the stoneware- from one end of the Nile to the other from the Predynastic right to the end of Dynastic Egypt. And not just that but by and large these items are not just chronologically specific but specific to the individual pharaohs as well.

How is it possible the Egyptians imprinted themselves in chronological order of their own history right on top of the chronological order of the history of the lost civilization without exception for over 3,000yrs? Which to make matters worse, other than the stonework claimed by the Egyptians in chronological order there is zero trace of the lost civilization other than this very stone work.

Regarding the claims that only "advanced machining" could produce the stoneware it is easy to see this is clearly not the case by simply looking at any examples of the period, which ironically there are many shown in museum cases in this video itself.

4155440bb0f02e269dcab3453c215062.jpg

ypLWO3eqS9WiPg=&risl=&pid=ImgRaw&r=0

a6c0b9cad353333b188bc8a4bde63f4b.jpg

fe09a8b9205044ed2d5428f995293981.png

4f140b254c58466fa9615130b981d63a--egypti

382833bc07b3213793378f61bc34e37d.jpg

1243286c.jpg

Misshapen lips, lug handles, and bodies. Off-plane vertical faces of lug handles and off-centered bodies. While some examples are better or worse than others, if "advanced machines" were used none would show such clear and consistent imperfections as they all do in some form or another which are all consistent with work being done by hand. The argument is that "primitive" people could not make such things of stone at all so how can it be explained the LC with their advanced tools could make tens of thousands of examples in reality so poorly clearly indicative of not being machined?

Here are a few examples of ancient Roman igneous rock stoneware:

be808b522742e1b0f5eb3c2d86155a7d--palati

preview

LARGE

Minoan stone vessels c.2500-1500BC:

1389.jpg?v=1485680494

1390.jpg?v=1485680494

640px-Minoan_stone_vases,_Mochlos_cemete

So if the early Dynastic Egyptians do it then it must be a lost civilization with advanced machining, but if the Minoans, Romans, Greeks, et al do it then that is understandable?

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Regarding the precision and metrology, which to the fringe represents advanced machining, if so, despite the tens of thousands of stone vessels found, how is it no two are alike? The very antithesis of modern manufacturing with machines. These vessels were mass produced- 40,000 dating to the early Dynastic Period were found under Djoser's step pyramid alone. Many vessel "blanks" have been found at the quarries. If using precision tooling these need to be set to specific parameters to produce the desired result. You would make your blanks to fit these parameters which would produce many identical copies regardless of what type of stone you used. This did not happen. Instead, they altered the parameters every single time and for the most part screwed them all up in one way or another as can bee seen by the many imperfections. Except for the one that just to happened find its way to a fringe YouTuber by way of Chris Dunn's son and some dude who did the testing in their free time by way of some unknown collector who purchased it from some unknown private party.  And also betraying this advanced technology, including the vessel in question, is the clear crude finishing by hand under the lip and around the lug handles-a feature found on every one of this style. Where's the Dremel? 

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

So its pretty simple. Apparent "extreme precision" = "tens of thousands to millions of years old advanced lost civilization". There is literally nothing more nuanced to your beliefs than that. Ok. Here is a well know example of "extreme precision":

ram14.jpg

ram15-1.jpg

More.

Quite simple-according to you all [the fringe], because now all of a sudden only the "precision" matters and not the kind of stone or the weight, this statue (and several others noted by Dunn for anyone who has actually read his books [fringe often site Dunn but have never actually read his books] ) was made tens of thousands to millions of years ago and is a depiction of an actual member of the ALC, correct? So all of these statues are not the Egyptians but the ALC tens of thousands to millions of years old?

I assume this statue is also "extreme precision" and it weighed almost 1000 tons to boot so you are saying this is not Ramses II but rather some unknown ALC person tens of thousands to millions of years old?

ramses3.jpg?resize=568,426

Or is Ramses II this old? So if the ALC are actually the Ancient Egyptians then this means the AE are tens of thousands to millions of years old?

 

Time, patience, a good eye and artesian pride is what created such precision.

Not advanced technology or machinery. 

Trust a carver of wood stone and bone. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
Posted (edited)

How is it that we know the pottery vases of the Naqada II/Naqada III preceed the stone vases, as opposed to the idea that the pottery honored and replicated the inherited stone treasures of a past lineage?   Is it just from the circumstantial evidence of where and what dated strata we found them?   If so, it kind of begs the question of the concept of inheritance and multi generational protection of precious pieces.    Since the now known precision of these pieces is possible to a degree well beyond what the eye can even perceive, it seems this idea of inheritance needs to be on the table with equal footing, if we're to have any confidence in the limitations of the period of the Naqada.  

Edited by Open Mind OG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/28/2023 at 8:12 AM, Thanos5150 said:

You forgot to include the word "Atlantis" in your title. 

[Quoting myself from the same thread happening elsewhere]

It's interesting that this exact style of pottery is first found in Naqada II made of clay:

14f1ca37ddfbe7ca3cdbed8cf88c2613--the-co

Known to have elements, like the lug handles, imported from the Levant, part of a larger context of cultural exchange of the period. But it is only in Naqada II/Naqada III that they begin to be made of stone-otherwise fundamentally identical to their earlier clay counterparts.

If this stoneware did not belong to the period it is ascribed, how is it the evolution of its design and transition from clay to stone can clearly been seen chronologically in the archeological record? With elements known to have been imported from the Levant where the stone versions are not found? In other words, if these do belong to some antediluvian LC, why does Naqada II just make clay copies and Naqada II/ III-Dynasty 3 use the "real" stone ones made apparently at least 8,000yrs before their time?

We would also note that the end of the skilled stoneware industry that ran from Late Naqada II/Naqada III to the beginning of the 3rd Dynasty rapidly comes to precipitous decline at the same exact time as the sudden appearance of stone architecture and pyramid building under Djoser. Kind of like they now had better things to do....

I have brought this up many times before, but for all of the stone working thought to have been made by someone other than the Egyptians thousands if not tens of thousands of years before, how is it possible that every single item without exception is period specific in chronological order to the Egyptians? The architecture, the statuary, the stoneware- from one end of the Nile to the other from the Predynastic right to the end of Dynastic Egypt. And not just that but by and large these items are not just chronologically specific but specific to the individual pharaohs as well.

How is it possible the Egyptians imprinted themselves in chronological order of their own history right on top of the chronological order of the history of the lost civilization without exception for over 3,000yrs? Which to make matters worse, other than the stonework claimed by the Egyptians in chronological order there is zero trace of the lost civilization other than this very stone work.

Regarding the claims that only "advanced machining" could produce the stoneware it is easy to see this is clearly not the case by simply looking at any examples of the period, which ironically there are many shown in museum cases in this video itself.

4155440bb0f02e269dcab3453c215062.jpg

ypLWO3eqS9WiPg=&risl=&pid=ImgRaw&r=0

a6c0b9cad353333b188bc8a4bde63f4b.jpg

fe09a8b9205044ed2d5428f995293981.png

4f140b254c58466fa9615130b981d63a--egypti

382833bc07b3213793378f61bc34e37d.jpg

1243286c.jpg

Misshapen lips, lug handles, and bodies. Off-plane vertical faces of lug handles and off-centered bodies. While some examples are better or worse than others, if "advanced machines" were used none would show such clear and consistent imperfections as they all do in some form or another which are all consistent with work being done by hand. The argument is that "primitive" people could not make such things of stone at all so how can it be explained the LC with their advanced tools could make tens of thousands of examples in reality so poorly clearly indicative of not being machined?

Here are a few examples of ancient Roman igneous rock stoneware:

be808b522742e1b0f5eb3c2d86155a7d--palati

preview

LARGE

Minoan stone vessels c.2500-1500BC:

1389.jpg?v=1485680494

1390.jpg?v=1485680494

640px-Minoan_stone_vases,_Mochlos_cemete

So if the early Dynastic Egyptians do it then it must be a lost civilization with advanced machining, but if the Minoans, Romans, Greeks, et al do it then that is understandable?

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Regarding the precision and metrology, which to the fringe represents advanced machining, if so, despite the tens of thousands of stone vessels found, how is it no two are alike? The very antithesis of modern manufacturing with machines. These vessels were mass produced- 40,000 dating to the early Dynastic Period were found under Djoser's step pyramid alone. Many vessel "blanks" have been found at the quarries. If using precision tooling these need to be set to specific parameters to produce the desired result. You would make your blanks to fit these parameters which would produce many identical copies regardless of what type of stone you used. This did not happen. Instead, they altered the parameters every single time and for the most part screwed them all up in one way or another as can bee seen by the many imperfections. Except for the one that just to happened find its way to a fringe YouTuber by way of Chris Dunn's son and some dude who did the testing in their free time by way of some unknown collector who purchased it from some unknown private party.  And also betraying this advanced technology, including the vessel in question, is the clear crude finishing by hand under the lip and around the lug handles-a feature found on every one of this style. Where's the Dremel? 

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

So its pretty simple. Apparent "extreme precision" = "tens of thousands to millions of years old advanced lost civilization". There is literally nothing more nuanced to your beliefs than that. Ok. Here is a well know example of "extreme precision":

ram14.jpg

ram15-1.jpg

More.

Quite simple-according to you all [the fringe], because now all of a sudden only the "precision" matters and not the kind of stone or the weight, this statue (and several others noted by Dunn for anyone who has actually read his books [fringe often site Dunn but have never actually read his books] ) was made tens of thousands to millions of years ago and is a depiction of an actual member of the ALC, correct? So all of these statues are not the Egyptians but the ALC tens of thousands to millions of years old?

I assume this statue is also "extreme precision" and it weighed almost 1000 tons to boot so you are saying this is not Ramses II but rather some unknown ALC person tens of thousands to millions of years old?

ramses3.jpg?resize=568,426

Or is Ramses II this old? So if the ALC are actually the Ancient Egyptians then this means the AE are tens of thousands to millions of years old?

Restoring Ramses II photo:

6129976606_8338e21b4d_b.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't realize this statue demonstrates precision tolerances of a human hair.  Where is that part on the statue?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The existence of imprecise objects doesn't negate the existence of precise objects.

We today are surrounded by both imprecise and precise objects.

The vase in question has been measured and determined to be precise to within dimensions not visible to the human eye.

In fact it took 21st century precision metrology to fully recognise its precision.

So the question is, what instrumentation was used to manufacture the precision vase?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Jon Ellison said:

The existence of imprecise objects doesn't negate the existence of precise objects.

We today are surrounded by both imprecise and precise objects.

The vase in question has been measured and determined to be precise to within dimensions not visible to the human eye.

In fact it took 21st century precision metrology to fully recognise its precision.

So the question is, what instrumentation was used to manufacture the precision vase?

Lathes or turntables.

You can find that kind of precision in many ancient vessels that are turned on lathes -- like this Olmec bowl: https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/316302

 

 

  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Kenemet said:

You can find that kind of precision

I remember back when you could describe something with "that kind of precision", but the new standard has to be 3D scans, or its a meaningless statement now.   But that bowl does look nice though.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Kenemet said:

Lathes or turntables.

You can find that kind of precision in many ancient vessels that are turned on lathes -- like this Olmec bowl: https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/316302

 

 

How do you know the level of precision? Do you have scan data?

Edited by Jon Ellison
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Open Mind OG said:

I remember back when you could describe something with "that kind of precision", but the new standard has to be 3D scans, or its a meaningless statement now.   But that bowl does look nice though.   

This has to do with the roundness of the shape.  If you notice, the handles aren't precisely placed.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Jon Ellison said:

How do you know the level of precision? Do you have scan data?

The action of the lathe produces this.

Have you ever used one?  My husband does wood turning (bowls, cups, etc) and gets that kind of precision all the time.  It's not due to the tools; it's due to the object being put on a turning surface and holding your cutting tool absolutely still.  There's a video somewhere of an artist doing this same kind of turning using a wheel, a crank, and a bunch of rocks.

Even a fairly unskilled person can do this.  The lathe itself will knock off any "high" point on the surface.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

This has to do with the roundness of the shape.  If you notice, the handles aren't precisely placed.

to be honest, I'm mostly fascinated by how well they did in the curvature between the handles where there couldn't have been any advantage from a lathe.   I think I recall 9 thou deviation.  that's a matching curvature within a quarter of a mm.    If you picture work by hand and you can get that deviation just from heavy breathing while you work.   I'm not sure how one can overlook that idea and focus on something else.   If those handles were parts of a full ridge after some turning, their matching shape and integrity is expected to suck compared to the rest, but I'd mostly expect the curvature between them to be hilariously off when under the microscope of a structured light scanner.   The devil is in the details.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This urn has no provenance.
It could have been made last year.
No game changed.

Harte

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Harte said:

This urn has no provenance.
It could have been made last year.
No game changed.

Harte

If it were made last year how would it be made and why the precision? If the intention was to manufacture a forgery then such precision would give it away as such.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, WVK said:

If it were made last year how would it be made and why the precision? If the intention was to manufacture a forgery then such precision would give it away as such.

Not to people who take this “precision” as evidence for a lost advanced civilization.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, WVK said:

If it were made last year how would it be made and why the precision? If the intention was to manufacture a forgery then such precision would give it away as such.

This is one of the issues.

Even if it were made last year no one has yet come up with a viable production strategy capable of reproducing it using modern tooling and methods.

So at this time there's no precision copy in granite.

If anyone can and has made an accurate, precision copy then please contact Uncharted X.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/8/2024 at 5:40 PM, Open Mind OG said:

to be honest, I'm mostly fascinated by how well they did in the curvature between the handles where there couldn't have been any advantage from a lathe.   I think I recall 9 thou deviation.  that's a matching curvature within a quarter of a mm.    If you picture work by hand and you can get that deviation just from heavy breathing while you work.   I'm not sure how one can overlook that idea and focus on something else.   If those handles were parts of a full ridge after some turning, their matching shape and integrity is expected to suck compared to the rest, but I'd mostly expect the curvature between them to be hilariously off when under the microscope of a structured light scanner.   The devil is in the details.

If it didn't have handles it could have been made on a modern precision machine lathe with a good modern needle bearing shaft and vernier tool control..

However the handles remove that possibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/8/2024 at 12:40 PM, Open Mind OG said:

to be honest, I'm mostly fascinated by how well they did in the curvature between the handles where there couldn't have been any advantage from a lathe.   I think I recall 9 thou deviation.  that's a matching curvature within a quarter of a mm.    If you picture work by hand and you can get that deviation just from heavy breathing while you work.   I'm not sure how one can overlook that idea and focus on something else.   If those handles were parts of a full ridge after some turning, their matching shape and integrity is expected to suck compared to the rest, but I'd mostly expect the curvature between them to be hilariously off when under the microscope of a structured light scanner.   The devil is in the details.

Here again, AE lathes were reciprical. That is, back and forth.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jon Ellison said:

If it didn't have handles it could have been made on a modern precision machine lathe with a good modern needle bearing shaft and vernier tool control..

However the handles remove that possibility.

Youtuber vs. Youtuber.

Harte

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Harte said:

This urn has no provenance.
It could have been made last year.
No game changed.

An excellent point.    Would you support the release of stone vases from museums that have proper provenance, for scanning?   It seems it would clear up alot of this confusion if they'd release pieces and submit them to proper light structured scanning from an independent professional service.   I'd love to see that, and from your statement, it seems you'd be on board with that idea as well.   In fact everyone has a dog in the fight that could be completely sorted out if we just get to scanning of a bunch of the best looking pieces, just to finally clear all this up.   Its a totally non destructive process so I can't imagine why anyone would be hesitant. 

Edited by Open Mind OG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Harte said:

Youtuber vs. Youtuber.

Harte

What is he using to measure the vase?  You're kidding right?

He's claiming five one hundredth of a mm with a pair of hand callipers and a plastic ruler?

It has to be a joke.

vase hand caliper 1.JPG

vase hand caliper 2.JPG

Edited by Jon Ellison
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, Jon Ellison said:

What is he using to measure the vase?  You're kidding right?

He's claiming five one hundredth of a mm with a pair of hand callipers and a plastic ruler?

It has to be a joke.

vase hand caliper 1.JPG

vase hand caliper 2.JPG

Hand callipers.

Jeez I've seen everything now. It never ceases to amaze me the amount of BS that debunkers are prepared to spout. Surely they must realise that there are people out there who really do know how to measure things.

They can't be that dumb. It can only be a deliberate attempt to deceive those that have no clue of what they're looking at. Or just clickbait.

vase hand calliper.JPG

Edited by Jon Ellison
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Jon Ellison said:

This is one of the issues.

Even if it were made last year no one has yet come up with a viable production strategy capable of reproducing it using modern tooling and methods.

So at this time there's no precision copy in granite.

If anyone can and has made an accurate, precision copy then please contact Uncharted X.

WVK… this is Exhibit A.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.