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.

 

Did the ANCIENT BUILDERS Know How to SOFTEN SOLID STONE?

page: 9
51
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 28 2014 @ 10:06 PM
link   


A giant ancient temple made from a single mountain. We're seriously missing something huge when it comes to modifying stone

edit on 28-10-2014 by 6Taco6Smell6 because: Video




posted on Oct, 28 2014 @ 10:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: 6Taco6Smell6


A giant ancient temple made from a single mountain. We're seriously missing something huge when it comes to modifying stone


'Something', something like craftsmen motivated by religion to use iron tools on soft sandstone to create over 500 years fabulous pieces of art?
edit on 28/10/14 by Hanslune because: deleted video



posted on Oct, 28 2014 @ 10:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Hanslune

Did you watch the video?



posted on Oct, 28 2014 @ 10:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: 6Taco6Smell6
a reply to: Hanslune

Did you watch the video?


Yes have you read any of the history of the temple and when and who made it?



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 04:09 AM
link   
a reply to: JamesTB

Or how about the stone has weathered !



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 08:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Barcs

Every Hypothesis starts with evidence actually...

Perhaps you aren't familiar with the scientific method and simply the definitions of words, but a Scientific Hypothesis is an educated guess based on knowledge of a subject and observations associated with said subject.

I can't just go to a review board and say "Hey, Galaxy is held together with silly string" because I have no evidence to support that.

Once you test a Scientific Hypothesis through the scientific method (e.g. additional observations, predictions etc), you can then progress it to a Scientific Theory.


Yes, obviously you are correct. I was trying to defend science from the guy that suggested all mainstream scientists were @#)($@#U)$(, but what I suggested was that ancient advanced culture "hypothesis" (as much as I love the idea and associated concepts) barely qualifies as a hypothesis, because it isn't based on what we know, it's based on what we don't know. A hypothesis is indeed an educated guess to explain something based on what we already know, but lacks objective evidence for the hypothesis itself. If not, it would be a theory rather than a hypothesis, so technically there is little to no evidence in the beginning for that specific concept.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 09:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Barcs

I would agree with your assessment.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Barcs

Example:

It was the hypothesis of Professor Ian Todd (Brandeis University) and others that there was a bronze age city in what is now Cyprus that traded with Egypt. Survey's were done and the site of Kalavassos was found (at a site identified earlier by a Cypriot scientist). A theory was then published that this site was said city and papers and books published recording the evidence.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 11:53 AM
link   
The thing with softening stone is also knowing a specific chemistry. Silicate bonds in particular, as most stone is composed of silica to some degree or other. Any old acid or alkali isn't going to do it very effectively. HF acid is one substance good at breaking silicate bonds, but there are a handful of substances that could also do the job.

Of course alchemy of ancient times isn't quite up to the par of chemistry we have now, but with lots of time the useful substances for lapidary and stonework processes may have been found via trial and error.

This might be an interesting read to get the idea of the chemistry of silicates:
www.quartzpage.de...

That page also shows that silicates readily dissolve in natron or potash if it's liquid. (Substances fairly common to ancient civs.) If you can smelt copper, you can also get the temperatures needed to liquify those substances. Sounds rather dangerous to handle, but might not be something to completely rule out.

Still if stones were prepped or treated in some way, I think it'd be to weaken the material making it "chalky" or crumbly in some way and slagging off the weakened material with the more traditional methods of hammering and chiseling.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 12:05 PM
link   
a reply to: pauljs75

AFAIK any such treatment would weaken the rock as you noted, also I know of no one using in practice now.

However, this is an easy one to prove or disprove, the believers in such just need to go find said 'x' and demonstrate its use, and also show that it was available to all the various civs/cultures over thousands of years, simples. They also have to show when its use stopped and those same cultures/civs lost the ability to do 'x' and how they regained their artistic capacity, not so simples.

Given the limited resources available on one such site like Rapa Nui that might be challenging. (RN had no metal and they used pounders exclusively).
edit on 29/10/14 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 12:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: Jarocal

Define " x technology". Do yyou mean antigravity machines and lasers or more mundane technologies like levers and fulcrums? I have no difficulty believing what would be considered simple technologies like flint knapping have been lost over titime and only recently been rediscovered. That just leads me to believe there are others out there For us to puzzle out again. That dies nnot mean I think the ancient cultures had a technology which magically floated large stone blocks from the quarry to the building site.


Anything (and much has been suggested in the thread alone) other than the conventional hammer stone, chisels and abrasive saws and drills.



Yeah, I got nothing then because hammers, chisel, and abrasive saws/bits are still the industry standard though improved tool materials and mechanization has made my lot in life less strenuous than that of the forebears in my profession.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 06:34 PM
link   
a reply to: skalla


Actually I'm thinking yes to that. We really don't know what was really going on 2000 years ago. And if you go farther back essentially all the historians have are monument inscriptions and tomb paintings. However we do know that there were ancient religions long before Moses or even Abraham. If I had to guess I would have to say that possibly some of those ancient religions actually had contact with some kind of entity that passed itself off as a God.

Also if you look at the story of Jesus Christ in the Bible it appears that he was possessed by a higher being of some kind when he was baptized. And it left him as he was being crucified. I'm guessing that quite simply there used to be a system of symbioses where powerful entities joined with compatible humans. And they both benefited from the arrangement. And it's being blocked currently by the curse I mentioned. The show Stargate SG-1 may have gotten rather close to what was happening back then. Minus the worm in the back of course.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 06:38 PM
link   
a reply to: ntech

I'll just re-state:




Isn't a hammerstone, skill and effort more likely? Remember we have found the hammerstones, chisels, and in many cases pictures and/or accounts of it being done in this manner.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 08:20 PM
link   
a reply to: ntech

Scifi is nice but not reality. I see no evidence for 'god like powers' in what we see from archaeology of the ancient civilizations bashing out limestone with sotne pounders, eating bread with stone grit in it that wears down your teeth and people dying of gangrene and tooth abscesses. Warfare with bronze maces and flint arrow heads? Great art thou and thru dedication by craftsmen.



posted on Oct, 30 2014 @ 02:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: eriktheawful
Try to recreate the same thing, using the same materials, and utilizing the methods proposed by historians an archaeologists.

Only problem with that is that many monuments and constructions took centuries to make, and thousands of labourers!



posted on Oct, 30 2014 @ 09:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ridhya

originally posted by: eriktheawful
Try to recreate the same thing, using the same materials, and utilizing the methods proposed by historians an archaeologists.

Only problem with that is that many monuments and constructions took centuries to make, and thousands of labourers!


...and the workers who crafted the stone had tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of years experience working stone. People back then knew stone it was a basic component of survival; they needed it for tools and the qualities of stone were passed down from father to son. In New Guinea it was a ritual (up to modern days) that a boy took a journey to a far mountain, found the right stone, worked it for several months until he produced a well made mace. He was then considered a man.



posted on Nov, 1 2014 @ 12:44 PM
link   
These are quite interesting photos, taken in Angkor Wat -

Scraped or Sawed?






posted on Nov, 1 2014 @ 05:35 PM
link   
a reply to: JamesTB

Which temple and what is this a close up of?



new topics

top topics



 
51
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join