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.

 

Two of Nine Mummies in Vatican Collection Are Fakes

page: 1
8

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 2 2015 @ 10:13 PM
link   
A project was started in 2007 to analyze the Vatican's collection of nine mummies and eighteen body parts using modern techniques. Now archaeologists from the project have revealed that two small mummies, each about two feet in length, do not in fact contain the remains of small children or animals as was once thought. Worse still, the mummies are 19th century forgeries!

From Huffington Post:




But when Vatican researchers analyzed the mummies using 3D CT scans, X-rays, DNA tests, and infrared and ultraviolet light, they found that the mummies actually contained a hodgepodge of adult human bones from the Middle Ages, along with a single nail dating back to the 19th Century, Catholic News Service reported.

The tests also revealed that the yellowish resin painted on the cartonnage (plastered layers of papyrus or linen that make up the mummy's case) dates back to mid-19th century Europe, The Telegraph reported.

The bandages are the only part of the mummies that actually date back to ancient Egypt.


Not terribly surprising given the prevalence of archaeological forgeries in the 19th century. Interesting that the wrappings were found to be ancient. I wonder if a mummy was deconstructed and pieced out and the wrappings were reused to create convincing forgeries?
edit on 2015-2-2 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 2 2015 @ 10:21 PM
link   
My conspiracy alarm is going off something fierce.

What if they were in fact mummified remains of aliens that helped us advance the way we did. I'm talking about how fast we have been evolving technologically.

So i guess we can carbon date the wrappings to get an age of the papyrus used, if that hasn't been done yet.

Clearly hiding something...but what?



posted on Feb, 2 2015 @ 11:28 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

You can bet the Vatican won't let them near their sacred religious relics.



posted on Feb, 2 2015 @ 11:28 PM
link   
a reply to: shaneslaughta

Your joking, right?



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 07:15 AM
link   
The market was huge back then (probably still is) for religious reliquaries and holy relics, and the demand for such was met by every imaginable huckster and shyster around. I can imagine that is the truth were ever known, most of the bone fragments held by churches in Europe are middle-age fakes, bought be duped or witless religious officials, or worse by those complicit in the business. At least here the Vatican is making public the negative outcome of their study.



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 07:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

No. As i firmly believe we are not alone and i do not believe that all these ancient civilizations had such great astronomical calendars, and built all these great things without outside intervention.

Just think about it, a slave army building the great pyramid in twenty years. dragging stone from a quarry hundreds of miles away.

Standard response in 3 2 1

Ill do it for you. Rope pulls and levers on log rollers. NO WAY!


(post by Harte removed for a manners violation)

posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 03:05 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 


Furthermore the limestone quarries were for the fascad of the pyramid. There was different stone used for different parts and different monuments.


edit on 2/3/2015 by shaneslaughta because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 03:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: shaneslaughta
 




off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift




 




Furthermore the limestone quarries were for the fascad of the pyramid. There was different stone used for different parts and different monuments.



95% of every pyramid at giza is limestone - facade and core.
In the Great Pyramid, a small amount of granite was used to line some corridors and rooms, along with several quite large pieces making up the ceilings of the King's Chamber and Queens"s Chamber (so-called.) ALL of the rest is limestone and mortar. ALL of it.
EVERY single bit of it.

Harte



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 03:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Harte

First, i am almost 100% sure they did not use any mortar what so ever in the construction. They made the pieces so unbelievably precise that they just stay together with friction and the weight of the pieces above it. Second the pyramids are almost completely solid aside from a few corridors and chambers.

Limestone is much too soft to be structural elements inside. That is why they used granite and other types of stone.

I'm not going to keep this point of mine going because its taking away from the point of the thread.

If you care to make a thread on the construction of the pyramids i would be glad to have a conversation about the endless possibilities of how we were able to do it and the construction methods.

Thanks for an adult response.



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 03:49 PM
link   
Woah hold on here a minute. Facts need to be checked here.




95% of every pyramid at giza is limestone - facade and core. In the Great Pyramid, a small amount of granite was used to line some corridors and rooms, along with several quite large pieces making up the ceilings of the King's Chamber and Queens"s Chamber (so-called.) ALL of the rest is limestone and mortar. ALL of it. EVERY single bit of it.


The granite, though being in small amounts is very large and very high up in the pyramid. It may not be the most commonly used material but never the less it is still used in huge amounts. You are down playing this.

Mortar, only seems to have been found on the outside of the pyramid from my knowledge and any dating attempts at it seem to come back with surprisingly unusual recordings such as the mortar on the higher levels being older than those below. This doesn't make sense since you cannot build a pyramid from top to bottom. It is more likely this was applied at a much later date possibly as a form of repair.

On the mummies note, I am skeptical of this too they could be a fake as the studies suggest, however if you are open minded and due to the gravity of this knowledge and suppression of it, the study could be a fake.
The only way any of us are really to know is to go through the process ourselves which unfortunately I cannot do. Any way it appears, it seems to me its a relatively trivial matter, there are plenty more out there from all over the world.



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 04:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
The market was huge back then (probably still is) for religious reliquaries and holy relics, and the demand for such was met by every imaginable huckster and shyster around. I can imagine that is the truth were ever known, most of the bone fragments held by churches in Europe are middle-age fakes, bought be duped or witless religious officials, or worse by those complicit in the business. At least here the Vatican is making public the negative outcome of their study.


This.


In addition, Egyptian artifacts became all the rage after Napoleon's expeditions in the 19th century and then again after the Carter discovery in the 20th. Each time saw a massive increase in forgeries and faked artifacts to meet demand for such things by collectors.



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 04:21 PM
link   


In addition, Egyptian artifacts became all the rage after Napoleon's expeditions in the 19th century and then again after the Carter discovery in the 20th. Each time saw a massive increase in forgeries and faked artifacts to meet demand for such things by collectors.


This is plausible and I do not disagree entirely, but then by definition how do we decipher what is real and a forgery? Everything could be a forgery, or it could all be very real. In time I guess we will find out.
The problem is, again, that regardless of whether things are said to be forgeries or not, unless you yourself have the expertise in the matter and are able to witness the testing results. Anything could be hearsay.
Pay a scientist enough to "prove" something is fake and he will do it against his own morals, people do wicked things for money and fame just like the "fraudsters". I know I am proposing a radical idea here, but what can we the common folk really know for sure?
We could all learn to decipher and test these things ok sure, but if I did that and then tested it and I found something to be genuine, how would people then believe me?
I would get labeled as a trickster or swindler regardless.



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 04:41 PM
link   
HA! Seems only fair that the Vatican is duped for a chance instead of the peasant people prostrating in front of it.

As for mummified aliens (lmao, go figure) My only response is to grab a seat, because




posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 07:47 PM
link   
a reply to: shaneslaughta

i seem to remember a statement that technology advancements double every ten years because nearly all of the discoveries

lead to further discoveries and so on .

so no, it is mankind at work here not aliens .



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 07:54 PM
link   
a reply to: shaneslaughta
the builders were not slaves , that idea was proved wrong a long time ago .



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 09:51 PM
link   
You are all being rude to the op just to argue my beliefs. I'm not going to keep feeding the trolls.

I said it before make a new thread about it and ill me more than happy to oblige.



new topics

top topics



 
8

log in

join