Newly Discovered Megalithic Ruins in Russia! Stones double the size of Baalbek!

It is sad that some people eagerly jump to conclusions before any evidence has been collected.

Not very scientific.

reply to post by SpaceGoatFarts

The first human tools are 3.4 millions years old, from H. Australoptihecus

I think I was sitting behind one of these last night at the Star's Hockey game vs the Blues. I doubt he was that old, but he was certainly a human tool.

tsingtao
reply to post by SpaceGoatFarts

 

good one, but still doesn't explain the blocks if they are made.

personally, i don't think so.

There is nothing solid either way, to indicate natural or otherwise that closes the subject without question.

We only have the pictures to go by, and no geologist will make a certain judgement call from pictures. We can have our opinions, but that is it.

Personally, as a geologist, I "believe" they are natural based on one or 2 pictures but would I bet my last dollar on it? nah...but I would like to examine the area and the stones. Is this part of an outcropping of granite? Is the area predominated by sedimentary structures or igneous? There is much you can tell from the geology of the area that will provide strong hints before you even examine the stone formation itself.

dreamfox1
reply to post by Phage

 

Its a yes and no but seeing the pics more below from the original op link i say hell no not like that

Looks just like an ordinary rock formation to me.

This is interesting, but I don't really see anything that would indicate that it is positively man-made, although some of the rocks do look neat, it's obvious that these people are only giving a select lot of pictures that they took themselves in hope of portraying exactly what they want these pictures to portray, that their 'good angled' and very selected pictures would make them appear to be more than what they are.. It's sort of like what happens on a regular basis, on social media sites for example, when a particular type of female takes hundreds of pictures of herself to get 'the angles', and ends up with a picture that does not show her gigantic nose, third nipple, and god awful harlet makeup- thanks to the many wonders of odds, angles, and brightness.

The picture of the megalithic inclined-plane is irrelevant to this, since it's in Lebanon and besides being made of rock has nothing to do with this site.. I'm not a skeptic at all when it comes to sites and relics that completely defy and take a massive dump on the cookie cutter, typical mainstream version of human history, in fact I'm quite the enthusiast in this area..

However, in this case, I see a lovely rock formation that has formed on it's own, with the help of nature and quite a bit of time.. I don't see any evidence of this being human made. It's quite a site to look at, don't get me wrong, but they are really going above and beyond to attempt to make this site out to be something that it's not.

Any tools or garbage dump associated with Megalith so as to confirm dates and whatnots even if it's natural or man made perhaps a combination of both??..I asked because you can't date rocks.

I am not an expert, but I a do have a Bachelors in Geology, so my 2p.

Its looks like columnar jointing:




That has collapsed into a pile.

Granite is known for its right angled fractures, this could easily look unnatural to an Archeologist who may not have any training in Geology.

A mountainous area also makes this more likely.

However I am leaning towards this being some sort of scam rather than a plain mistake. The lack of further pictures of the area cements this is my mind, I would wager if you pointed the camera up you would see something like this: