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: 24
35
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 4 2014 @ 08:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Mr Mask

no actually I support the poured in a form theory. Here's the deal with that- they need to have an exact result. It would be one thing to pour a top layer in a form over top of a cured section and have them form a contiguous mass, but something completely different if they were poured separately and then stacked. If the current experiments show something radically different it could prove the alien theory. If they wind up with a solid mass instead of separate blocks of poured limestone then it shows they were poured separately and why in the world would they do that? talk about difficult. and I don't think these people were stupid like you said. they were very smart because they were taught by the actual gods they talk about. They didn't have blind faith for a religion or as a culture they had smoking guns sitting right there and they knew THEY didn't build them. They sure did like writing all over the walls though.




posted on May, 5 2014 @ 03:55 AM
link   

edit on 5-5-2014 by OzTiger because: spelling

edit on 5-5-2014 by OzTiger because: (no reason given)


These could not possibly have been 'cast' as they would have had to have used 2,500,000 moulds as they are all different.
edit on 5-5-2014 by OzTiger because: addition



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 05:33 AM
link   
a reply to: OzTiger

IF they were pre-cast in forms individually and then stacked it would actually be more proof of alien intervention.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 06:46 AM
link   
a reply to: bottleslingguy


Cuz mere humans can't pour and stack concrete blocks.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 06:52 AM
link   
a reply to: OzTiger

No...simply no.

No...

MM



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 06:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: bottleslingguy
a reply to: OzTiger

IF they were pre-cast in forms individually and then stacked it would actually be more proof of alien intervention.


Its clear you think everything points to aliens...

Even direct scientific evidence that shows the contrary.

It seems you don't even need evidence to follow your fantasy.

MM



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 07:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: bottleslingguy
a reply to: Mr Mask

and I don't think these people were stupid like you said. they were very smart because they were taught by the actual gods they talk about. They didn't have blind faith for a religion or as a culture they had smoking guns sitting right there and they knew THEY didn't build them. They sure did like writing all over the walls though.


I have time and time again said ancient people were intelligent and very advanced people in the areas of stone work and science. It is you who keeps calling them stupid and saying they need help from aliens to move stones.

It is you who is uneducated on these subjects and putting hoaxes in the holes of your knowledge.

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



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 07:19 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 07:21 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 12:59 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:19 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 06:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Harte
Throughout my replies, I have made it clear that I have indeed investigated ancient history,
something you seem to gloss over.

If I am indeed the holder to the lost Giza blueprints, however would I understand that what it is I am viewing
without vast knowledge of the Giza plateau, it's monuments and the Egyptian history we are told surrounding them?
(something that has also eluded you)

You have openly insulted more than once showing traits of character interesting in a academic teacher.

However your position, I am of forgiveness and wish you the best.

So unfortunate you wish not to step outside of the box and atleast investigate this claim, if not help..
Be well.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 06:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Mr Mask

I am in agreement with your post and I thank you for your resolve.

My attendance to this thread is that I will be faced with the same issue upon
release of said blueprints - Ancient Aliens did it!
For awhile now, I have supressed these 'prints' due to this issue and also because I do not
feel worthy of such a discovery.

My intention is not to insult anyone (although that seems the norm in mainstream society)
merely gather information, supply a little, wondering if certain questions will pique others interest.

Be well all.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 10:56 PM
link   
It looks like the site is back to normal.
The posts I had deleted were in relation to both the Giza Pyramids and (just to get back on track with the original thread subject) Pumu Punku.
Whereas I understand that placing the Pyramids in the 'dead centre' (forgive the pun) of the Nile Delta and aligning them with 'magnetic north' was quite feasible, the fact that they are also in the exact centre of the worlds land mass beggars the question as to how they knew this (did they know?) or would that be just a con-incidence.

Getting back to Pumu Punku I have found no research on what appears to be an explosion prior to the completion which shattered and scattered the construction all over the site. I read where it was suggested that an earthquake followed by a huge flood could have caused this but I couldn't see this destroying the place in the manner in which it was. Has any conclusion been made as to the destruction of Pumu Punku?



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 05:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Mr Mask

you misread what I wrote, I said I didn't think they were stupid but also never said you said they were stupid so get off that train. I know this is getting off topic but sure there are things humans built like the things made out of small blocks that one person can carry, like ants. I might even go as far as think Stonehenge was built by people (but I have a problem with some of those cairn thingies) because there aren't a lot of forensic details. The difficulty in making the cuts in the PP stones over and over like that has nothing to do with how smart, innovative or motivated you are. That's the ONLY evidence you guys have come up with in the rubber hits the road department. You speak of all these "studies" and "experiments using logic" and all this nonsense mainstream b.s. like it's the holy grail of reality when in fact you guys have no clues what you are talking about. If all the ancient people had was bamboo technology (and that's not saying the Professor was stupid just that he didn't have high technology) then there is no way slow speed hand tools is going to be able to produce over and over the precision we find. Maybe your buddy with the concrete blocks and boards can figure it out. Spinning a poured concrete block with smooth sides (precast in a form) on a little stone on top of a concrete slab is not going to make cuts in stone with precision. Get my drift? Peoples' parlor tricks with levers and rolling ramps is one thing (did he show how they made turns) but high precision angles and cuts repeatedly over and over and over takes consistency and tolerances that can't be changed once you start cutting the millions and millions and millions of strokes it would take to make numerous blocks. Maybe they poured the PP stones in a form? I would believe that before I believed they actually cut them like that by hand.

and as an aside to the poured concrete idea: if it was done like they show in that video with the French guy there should be form bracing holes all over the upper surfaces of the blocks or at least some physical evidence of the forms. There should also be no seams whereas (and this is an important detail you can't ignore) using the surrounding blocks as part of the form will fuse the two sides leaving no seam. This would more or less make the pyramid a solid mass like the Hoover Dam.

Look at the experiment video (the one where the people dress up like AEs) they use two form sides with braces placed in holes in the floor while the inside corner acts as the two other sides of the form. After they remove the wooden forms you can see how the seam between the blocks is not there. It looks like there is a seam because of the different compositions between the packed aggregate of the original foundation. In the video the guy says "Zee joint iss alzo perrrfekt" which is a load of crap. It is a rough, fused seam. It is not a joint. That is a HUGE detail you guys don't care about because some mainstream egghead says you don't have to pay attention to that part. This is where you guys have no clue what you are talking about. Certain specific details is what makes or breaks this stuff and the more you act like you don't have to care about these things the more silly you become.

Now what I am saying is that ok IF the GP limestone blocks turn out to be poured aggregate in forms but NOT done the way the French people did in their experiment, then it trends toward alien because making the blocks INDIVIDUALLY in forms apart from each other and still fitting together as we see them doing, then THAT is a feat I'd like to see replicated. You still have the problem of where to assemble them out of the way of everything else. Then you still have to wait until they cure before you can move them into place which really blows out our 8 second turn around time. (Harte doesn't want to touch that one with a ten foot pole lol). The bottom line is if they were constructed like in the video the pyramids will be a solid mass. Are they a solid mass? How do you account for the joints between the blocks at the GP? I'll guarantee you make jokes or ignore it like it doesn't matter.



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 06:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: OzTiger

Getting back to Pumu Punku I have found no research on what appears to be an explosion prior to the completion which shattered and scattered the construction all over the site. I read where it was suggested that an earthquake followed by a huge flood could have caused this but I couldn't see this destroying the place in the manner in which it was. Has any conclusion been made as to the destruction of Pumu Punku?


There was no earthquake or explosion that put Pumapunku is disarray. That is more hogwash spread by the AA conmen.

The site is in disarray due to hundreds of years of lotting and salvaging of the stones for nearby villages, homes and buildings. There are detailed historic accounts of the looting. That is why the place has been reduced to the mess it is today.

The only people offering an explosion or massive quake (or alien war) are the very people lying about the age, materials and construction of Pumapunku. It is not presented in any scientific data on the site.

MM



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 10:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Mr Mask

originally posted by: OzTiger

Getting back to Pumu Punku I have found no research on what appears to be an explosion prior to the completion which shattered and scattered the construction all over the site. I read where it was suggested that an earthquake followed by a huge flood could have caused this but I couldn't see this destroying the place in the manner in which it was. Has any conclusion been made as to the destruction of Pumu Punku?


There was no earthquake or explosion that put Pumapunku is disarray. That is more hogwash spread by the AA conmen.

The site is in disarray due to hundreds of years of lotting and salvaging of the stones for nearby villages, homes and buildings. There are detailed historic accounts of the looting. That is why the place has been reduced to the mess it is today.

The only people offering an explosion or massive quake (or alien war) are the very people lying about the age, materials and construction of Pumapunku. It is not presented in any scientific data on the site.

MM



Well, like I said, I don't believe in the earthquake theory but wondered if there was any research done on as to why it was in such disarray. I can understand that looting would certainly contribute to the state of the site and I also believe in the 500AD date of construction rather than 15,000BC. Many of those stones are intriguing though and I don't think anyone has come close to an explanation as to their use in the construction but we continue to learn.
Thanks for the info.



posted on May, 7 2014 @ 11:07 PM
link   

edit on 7-5-2014 by OzTiger because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 8 2014 @ 01:38 AM
link   
a reply to: OzTiger




posted on May, 9 2014 @ 01:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Mr Mask

Where'd everybody go? Mask, if anything YOU are the con man. Explain how they made the GP blocks in forms without making one solid mass. How do the blocks have joints if the surrounding blocks were used as part of the form? Why not make a new topic on that? Oh that's right it's been done already and no one has an answer..... well at least a credible answer.




top topics



 
35
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join