It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Aliens made Pumapunku? (CampKill)

page: 22
35
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 04:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: draknoir2

originally posted by: bottleslingguy
a reply to: conundrummer
do you have any idea how much water that would take? there's a depiction of someone pouring water out of an urn to wet the sand the entire distance from the quarry to the top of the pyramid and they did a one millionth scale experiment? that's your proof? it's highly unlikely and just more of the mainstream crap you guys wolf down hook line and sinker.




That is just an IMAGE of water! And its in a river!!! Are you telling me that primitive cultures could actually get WATER from an IMAGE???

Never mind the image was obviously done in Photoshop...primitive cultures didn't HAVE Photoshop bro!!! Aliens did!

Man...you use too much linear thinking.

MM


edit on 2-5-2014 by Mr Mask because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 2 2014 @ 04:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: bottleslingguy
a reply to: conundrummer
do you have any idea how much water that would take? there's a depiction of someone pouring water out of an urn to wet the sand the entire distance from the quarry to the top of the pyramid and they did a one millionth scale experiment? that's your proof? it's highly unlikely and just more of the mainstream crap you guys wolf down hook line and sinker.

-FIRST OF ALL, I don't know why you're accusing me of "wofing it down hook, line and sinker" when all I did was post a link with NO COMMENTARY. Way to show your bias and put words in other peoples' mouth.

-Did I say anything about proof?

-Why do you even care about proof? You believe in ET construction without any proof of ETs, so clearly proof isn't necessary for you to believe something.

-the ET hypothesis is at least as "highly unlikely" as anything that's been proposed, so stop falling back on that.

-"do you have any idea how much water that would take"? Well, Egyptians were a whole civilization that managed to thrive and support hundreds of thousands IN A DESERT, all because they understood how to move water. Try to have that many people surviving in a desert without a good understanding of water logistics.

-the wet sand theory relies on hieroglyphics of how the pyramids were built. Can you show us any ancient glyphs where the pyramids are built by aliens with gravity disruptors?



posted on May, 2 2014 @ 05:03 PM
link   
a reply to: draknoir2

so they scooped it out of the Nile in urns? like a fire brigade?



posted on May, 2 2014 @ 05:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: bottleslingguy
a reply to: draknoir2

so they scooped it out of the Nile in urns? like a fire brigade?

You don't see any middle ground between a fire brigade of urns and alien acoustic levitation devices?



posted on May, 2 2014 @ 05:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: bottleslingguy
a reply to: draknoir2

so they scooped it out of the Nile in urns? like a fire brigade?


Here we go again. I am going to try and educate you on something with direct evidence, knowing darn well you will ignore it, look away and THEN say aliens are more likely. But here you go. And image straight from ancient Egypt showing you that they left complex instructions and images showing how it was done.

Notice the small army of people pulling the giant statue with a man pouring water in front of it with yes, an Urn (over 2000 years prior to Pumapunku's construction, with no Aliens in sight).



Here is the study for you published in the journal "Physics Review Letters" by the University of Amsterdam. Enjoy the PDF. It is very interesting and should answer your questions. That is if you actually seek real answers. But I am assuming you will ignore this as well.

journals.aps.org...

I find it odd that you can be bombarded by scientific research, peer reviewed evidence and solid proof of things, and you still run to accept the AA hogwash that is supported by no legitimate source on the face of this earth.

Odd...

MM

edit on 2-5-2014 by Mr Mask because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 2 2014 @ 05:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mr Mask

originally posted by: bottleslingguy
a reply to: draknoir2

so they scooped it out of the Nile in urns? like a fire brigade?


But here you go. And image straight from ancient Egypt showing you that they left complex instructions and images showing how it was done.

Notice the small army of people pulling the giant statue with a man pouring water in front of it with yes, an Urn (over 2000 years prior to Pumapunku's construction, with no Aliens in sight).



Here is the study for you published in the journal "Physics Review Letters" by the University of Amsterdam. Enjoy the PDF. It is very interesting and should answer your questions. That is if you actually seek real answers. But I am assuming you will ignore this as well.

journals.aps.org...



MM


The drawing actually shows the Egyptians dragged large stones -
It doesn't show how the pyramids were built, or how megalithic stones were
carried up a steep mountain side from 10 kilometers away..?

The largest stone at P.P. is 131 metric tons.
7.81 meters long - 5.17 meters wide - averages 1.07 meters thick.

131 Metric tons...another 13...hmmm.

...and still no Alien intervention... all 'Prior-Man' !



posted on May, 2 2014 @ 06:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: HumAnnunaki


The drawing actually shows the Egyptians dragged large stones -
It doesn't show how the pyramids were built, or how megalithic stones were
carried up a steep mountain side from 10 kilometers away..?


You didn't read the journal entry did you?

MM


edit on 2-5-2014 by Mr Mask because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 2 2014 @ 06:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mr Mask

originally posted by: HumAnnunaki


The drawing actually shows the Egyptians dragged large stones -
It doesn't show how the pyramids were built, or how megalithic stones were
carried up a steep mountain side from 10 kilometers away..?


You didn't read the journal entry did you?

MM


If your talking about the paper on the sled, yes I did.
It's a fallacy to those whom understand building procedures.
With over 30 years residential and commercial construction
and living on a beach for the last 20 years - I rebuke their findings.
Ridiculous to think stones 2 tons or more were quarried from almost 500 miles away by spreading water all the way.
Best wait for rain season.

Now lets try hauling a 131 metric ton stone up a mountain side..oh yeah, le's spread water to make it easier!

Academics lies and history is continually rewritten!

We DID NOT make these monuments, we don't even understand their mathematics..however - you are correct in stating
that absolutley NO Alien intervention was used.



posted on May, 2 2014 @ 06:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: HumAnnunaki

originally posted by: Mr Mask

originally posted by: HumAnnunaki


The drawing actually shows the Egyptians dragged large stones -
It doesn't show how the pyramids were built, or how megalithic stones were
carried up a steep mountain side from 10 kilometers away..?


You didn't read the journal entry did you?

MM


If your talking about the paper on the sled, yes I did.
It's a fallacy to those whom understand building procedures.
With over 30 years residential and commercial construction
and living on a beach for the last 20 years - I rebuke their findings.
Ridiculous to think stones 2 tons or more were quarried from almost 500 miles away by spreading water all the way.
Best wait for rain season.

Now lets try hauling a 131 metric ton stone up a mountain side..oh yeah, le's spread water to make it easier!

Academics lies and history is continually rewritten!

We DID NOT make these monuments, we don't even understand their mathematics..however - you are correct in stating
that absolutley NO Alien intervention was used.


The SR71 was designed in a year... without CAD and supercomputer-generated simulations by a bunch of Dilberts with sliderules, T-squares and pocket protectors. Grab any number of modern aerospace engineers and accomplish the same feat. And that's just the atrophy of 60 years, not thousands.

While I have no reason to doubt your familiarity with current methods of construction I do doubt their applicability to the construction of megalithic monuments with the limited technology available in antiquity. When ingenuity and muscle is all you have, you find a way to use it. With our exponential reliance in technology we as a culture are becoming stupider. We've probably forgotten as much as we think we've learned. This is why we now require Aliens to fill that gap in our understanding.



posted on May, 2 2014 @ 07:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian

originally posted by: draknoir2

originally posted by: bottleslingguy
a reply to: conundrummer
do you have any idea how much water that would take? there's a depiction of someone pouring water out of an urn to wet the sand the entire distance from the quarry to the top of the pyramid and they did a one millionth scale experiment? that's your proof? it's highly unlikely and just more of the mainstream crap you guys wolf down hook line and sinker.



Some people are just in De-Ni

I hate my phone! Some people are just in De-Nile!



posted on May, 2 2014 @ 07:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: bottleslingguy
a reply to: draknoir2

so they scooped it out of the Nile in urns? like a fire brigade?
I don't know about that but I heard you can some pretty rad nonlinear effects with using levitation devices on water.



posted on May, 2 2014 @ 08:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
I hate my phone! Some people are just in De-Nile!


Nice



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 01:00 AM
link   
a reply to: draknoir2

Just to note: when the Inca arose and built their empire they used their former enemies for troops and specialists. The Tiwanaku tribes were used as stone masons, and built most of the greatest Incan structures - why? Because they were the greatest stone masons known in their world. Latest Spanish-Incan commentators also noted this.



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 05:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: bottleslingguy
a reply to: draknoir2

so they scooped it out of the Nile in urns? like a fire brigade?

Canals.


Canal Linking Ancient Egypt Quarry to Nile Found

Steven Stanek in Cairo, Egypt
for National Geographic News

October 24, 2007

Experts have discovered a canal at an Aswan rock quarry that they believe was used to help float some of ancient Egypt's largest stone monuments to the Nile River.

It has long been suspected that ancient workers moved the massive artifacts directly to their final destinations over waterways.

Ancient artwork shows Egyptians using boats or barges to move large monuments like obelisks and statues, and canals have also been discovered at the Giza pyramids and the Luxor Temple.

link


Specially constructed man-made canals and landing stages was used for transporting the materials and was finally delivered to the building site at Giza by sledge. Archaeologists have found evidence of such a canal at Giza

link

Harte



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 06:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: HumAnnunaki


Academics lies and history is continually rewritten!

We DID NOT make these monuments, we don't even understand their mathematics..however - you are correct in stating
that absolutley NO Alien intervention was used.


Ok so you do not agree with the recent findings published this year on solving how the blocks were moved. That is fine. As long as you are not saying aliens did it, I am ok with you not agreeing with scientific theories.

MM



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 06:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: HumAnnunaki
We DID NOT make these monuments, we don't even understand their mathematics..

If I am to assume that you aren't using the majestic plural here, then that is one of the most ignorant things ever posted on ATS.

While I'm sure that you "don't even understand their mathematics," I assure you that I (and a host of other people) do.

Egyptian mathematics is clearly laid out in several documents they left behind. Should you care to remedy your current ignominious situation, you could do worse than starting here.

Harte



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 06:29 AM
link   


These stones were put together by a civilization who existed much later than the one that built Puma Punku and it is obvious that they couldn't make head nor tail of them. Puma Punku is thought to have been built between 15,000 BC and 500AD - well, that narrows the field down a bit. I have read where the quarry from where these stones came from was 60 miles away whilst other sources state that it was just over 10 miles away. Some of the stones weigh over 100 tonnes whist others state that 'most' weigh between 200 - 450 tonnes with one weighing over 600 tonnes. Very confusing. Christopher Dunn says that these stones were not cut by either Laser or Circular Saw but by means unknown.(?) Regardless of the obvious technology the builders had I am sure they could have come up with a far simpler design, less time-consuming design for an interlocking wall than the 'H' block system that was used.
The point is that, like the pyramids, we haven't the faintest idea about WHO built Puma Punku, WHY it was built, HOW it was built or HOW it came to be blown up and by WHO and/or WHAT!
The Pyramid builders could now have used canals, according to latest discoveries, to transport the blocks from the quarries. Something that has been suspected for some times which adds to the mystery as to how they placed a block in the construction every 2-3 minutes night and day for 20 years. There is also the little matter of the facing stones (some of which remain but of which I have never found a close-up picture of despite searching for years) which I believe were approximately 8 feet x 3 feet x three quarters of an inch thick (I may need correcting there) which covered the entire pyramid. These being highly polished in their original state and were not only perfectly aligned but also into a slightly concave finish and glued together with a glue, that nobody has analyzed to this date but which is understood to contain ingredients that are unrecognizable to anything we have today and which is still holding the top facings together after some 4,000 years.
Speculation will continue as will debate which, when conducted in an adult manner, may reach some common ground or at least a compromise to agree to disagree without sledging each other.
This thread has opened up some minds with many theories (SIT DOWN GEORGIO!) and I hope further information from both sides of the debate continues to instigate further discussion in a level-headed manner.



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 09:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: OzTiger


These stones were put together by a civilization who existed much later than the one that built Puma Punku and it is obvious that they couldn't make head nor tail of them. Puma Punku is thought to have been built between 15,000 BC and 500AD -

Only to the uninformed.


originally posted by: OzTiger
This thread has opened up some minds with many theories (SIT DOWN GEORGIO!) and I hope further information from both sides of the debate continues to instigate further discussion in a level-headed manner.

In that spirit: link

Regarding your pic, when the site was first explored, it was utterly ruined.
Before (when first explored) and after (restoration) pics from the site:
Before
After

Before
After

Before
After

Harte



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 09:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: OzTiger

Puma Punku is thought to have been built between 15,000 BC and 500AD


Absolutely not. Pumapunku is dated at 536–600 CE. All scientific tests show this to be true.

The only single study that resulted in an older date was done in 1926 by a man named Arthur Posnansky who wrongly dated the site with unscientific reasoning that was badly flawed and not supported by science as a whole.

There is only one circle of people still using this flawed study and the date it suggests of putting Pumapunku at 17,000+ years old. And that is the conmen of the AA hoax. They have all been told and made aware of this time and time again yet they are STILL selling bunk lies on the date...And they know its a lie.

They also lie about the stone types at Pumapunku (while knowing they are wrong) and various other details that they also know are incorrect.

Yet they continue.

Pumapunku is dated no older than 536–600 CE by any single modern study that has used every standard test known to science to gauge the age of the site.

MM
edit on 3-5-2014 by Mr Mask because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 09:38 AM
link   
Double post.
edit on 3-5-2014 by Mr Mask because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
35
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join