It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Atlantis/Pyramids/Realted Curiosities

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 09:34 AM
This is something in witch i have been involved for some time now, but i would like to collect some ideas and opinions from others. It's the old puzzle: Atlantis/the Pyramids (Egypt and the Americas), Stonehenge. All the matematical coinsidences and puzzles. I know for a fact that we did not build the pyramids nor the old temples for if we attatch to the "evolution theory" it just does not make sence how our technology and knowledge could go backwards. Having this technology witch it has not been matched with ours you should make some kind of foward evolution.

I would like to collect "intelligent" opinions for all of you.

[edit on 6-1-2005 by Jans2004]

posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 10:49 AM
My theory, and this comes from limited knowledge, is that the plan for the Great pyramids were laid out around 10,500BC to reflect the sky at that particular date of the equinox. I believe that the Sphinx was built around that time as using computer programs you can see that it's gaze is directed exactly at the rising of the constellation of Leo at that time. The three pyramids exactly line up with the three stars on Orions belt at that date. Now Orion was of particular importance to the Egyptians as they seen it as a reincarnation of Osiris.
The egyptians in the first dynasty at around 2300BC completed the Great pyramids, exactly where they were begun in 10,500BC. We know this because the two star shafts in the kings chamber are aligned with two stars, one is one of the stars on Orion's belt and the other is Draco, the two star shafts in the Queens chamber point to the stars Ursa Minor and Sirius at around 2300BC.
The Egyptians believed that their afterlife and history was played out in the Duat, a kind of dual world, one in the heavens and one on the earth. They believed that Egypt, and in particular, the Giza plateau and Heliopolos(?) were the earth part of the Duat. Therefore they tried to represent the skies on the ground. But this was done at specific dates at 10,500BC and 2300BC as can be seen by the position of the stars on those dates.
Also the Sphinx shows a type of weathering on its body which could only have beed done by heavy and constant rainfall. The last time that Egypt experienced this climate was after the last Ice Age between 11,000 and 8000BC. Weathering in other features and huge wadi's and river beds have been discovered in Egypt which also points to that type of climate at that particular time. Why the Sphinx is facing due east and the long corridor is offset of east by 22.5 degrees can be explained by the movement of the earth through Precession, the earths wobble about it's axis. At 10,500Bc the Sphinx would have directly faced the rising constellation of Leo on the spring equinox, through which the sun would rise at the exact same point. In 2300BC the Sun would have been offset (due to precession) by exactly 22.5 degrees off the gaze of the sphinx. That is what the processional corridor to the right of the Sphinx lines up with at 2300BC. If the Egyptians were so accurate in all other buildings like the star shafts in the Great Pyramid, why offset the Sphinx's gaze by 22.5 degrees of the rising sun? Would they not have built it to face the rising sun on the equinox at 2300BC?

I think that the early Egyptians were following a design laid out by an earlier civilisation, displaced by the great flood after the last Ice age and relocated to Egypt, bringing their knowledge of the world and stars with them.

posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 11:07 AM

I know for a fact that we did not build the pyramids nor the old temples for if we attatch to the "evolution theory" it just does not make sence how our technology and knowledge could go backwards.

Having an opinion that it "just does not make sence how our technology and knowledge could go backwards" is not enough to make it a fact. Do you have any real data to provide that can show for "Fact" that we did not build the pyramids and temples?

posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 11:11 AM
A pyramid is the easiest way to make a tall structure. That is why it is featured in so many cultures around the world.

Try this. You're at the beach. You want to make the highest sand structure around, (but you can't use arches or buttresses yet, came later). What do you think it will end up? Yep, a pyramid (or a big cone), but when using quarried stone, straight sides are easier.

There is evidence of Atlantis (as the historical account goes, not the flying cars, death ray using Atlantis). Search on the Altiplano in Bolivia, as the site fits the city point for point with Plato. Likewise, the continent of South America matches the dimensions, and shape suggested by Plato. The confusion seems to be with separating the continent with the city, which shared the same name.

There is also evidence of trade between ancient South America (/Atlantis) and that South American crops were found wrapped inside ancient Egyptian mummies (like cocoa, tobacco, etc.) and that pre-Columbian sculptures have been found of African animals and people, as well as of caucasians.

The evidence is also good that the Sphinx predates the building of the Great Pyramid, and that it was likely a full lion at one point, and then recarved into the pharoh's likeness. The Sphinx builders then, are perhaps a great mystery, but it still isn't something beyond the technology of the time. The ancient Egyptians were indeed quite clever, but to suggest that their accomplishments were not theirs alone, is kind of a disservice to them...

posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 01:16 PM
Isn't there another forum for this stuff on ATS???????


posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 01:26 PM
Yep, didn't even look at that, hehe...needs to go there....
It'll be moved soon I hope...

posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 01:33 PM
Gaz will you slow down, you're making me look bad.

Moving to Ancient Civilizations.

posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 02:48 PM
Nah, I just happen to hang mostly in forums that aren't mine due to subject, hehe...

Anything UFOs, Atlantis related, and I'm pretty much on it in a heartbeat...

posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 06:50 PM
When speaking about great ancient mysterious structures/constructions you can't forget about things like the monolithic heads on Easter Island, the stone balls of Costa Rica, etc... It seems the peoples of the ancient world knew much more than we think they did. Stones weighing many, many (30 or so) tons were extracted from the earth (a feat even by today's standards) by peoples we today consider to have barely opened their eyes to the world of technology. The physical size of these constructs is not nearly as amazing as the precision in form (prefect shape) and astronomical and geographical allignments thereof.

The scientific knowledge of these ancient peoples stems further than the construction of enormous temples and wonders occasionally into the realm of the incredibly small. Take the Dropa stones for instance. These 12,000 year-old circular discs (far, far older even than the pyramids of Egypt) approx. 9 inches in diameter are engraved with TINY (almost microscopic) heiroglyphs (writing) arranged in a spiral pattern similar to the groove on a 20th century record (vynal records... you know, the things before the cassette tape and the CD). Dropa Stones. Explain how a people from an age five times longer ago than when Jesus walked the earth was capable of carving heiroglyphs only a fraction of a milimeter tall into stone with such detail.

There are many works of the ancient world that give evidence pointing to one of two things.

1.) The history of the human race goes back MUCH further than our current recods (even ancient ones) suggest.That people far more ancient even than the Myans, Egyptians, Annasazi, etc... had technology either equal or greater to that which we posess today (at least in scientific knowledge, not necessarily computers, cars, etc... but more in the department of measuring, math, chemestry, physics, etc...).

2.) Ancient man was assisted by an outside intelligence. Wether the source of this knowledge was alein to our world, or from a "higher being" is yet another question if this theory were to be found true.

Other sites/topics that might interest you:
10 most mysterious artifcacts

Figurines of dinosaurs from ancient times before the discovery of any dino skeletons

I can give you more later if you wish, but that should keep you reading for a while. Quite interesting stuff.


posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 04:33 PM
If you want a real intelligent opinion: Atlantis isn't real, the Egyptians built the pyramids (in Egypt of coarse), and Stonehenge was constructed by druids. My bad, that is not an opinion but rather fact.

posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 04:38 PM

My bad, that is not an opinion but rather fact.

Not too long ago, it was a "fact" that Troy never existed too...until of course they dug it up...

posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 08:28 PM

Originally posted by Frosty
If you want a real intelligent opinion: Atlantis isn't real, the Egyptians built the pyramids (in Egypt of coarse), and Stonehenge was constructed by druids. My bad, that is not an opinion but rather fact.

Read up on your history bud, the druids didn't build Stonehenge, they just used it years after it was built because it suited their purposes... you'd know that just from watching the Discovery Channel... and you can get more info online and in books. It was actually built in pieces by many different peoples who added different structures (more rocks and rings of rocks) to it to suit their needs and it took several hundred years before it was completed. Nice try though.

Oh, and if you want an intelligent opinion, you shouldn't state that things are fact unless it's been PROVEN. If there is still evidence to the contrary that hasn't been disproven, then it's not necessarily fact. Sounds like you need to open your mind a little. I'm not saying these things are real either, I'm just saying there's a lot of evidence that suggests it. (actually that's EXACTLY what I said).

posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 01:59 PM
In my never ending quest to stop repeating myself and stay out of circular arguments I'll just post my opinion

In the history of science apparent similarity seems to be a hotly contested subject on which to base theories. In some cases, as with pyramids of different cultures it has been rejected as an oddity and nothing more. However, in the field of evolution it has been used as fact to support a rather unproven theory (please don't drag this into an evolution discussion). It seems the factuality of apparent similarity is in the eye of the beholder. It is in my opinion that apparent similarity should be regarded, at the very least, as a viable basis for theorizing until the theory or similarity itself is disproven.

As for the question of why many different civilizations built pyramids I believe it could be as Gazrok suggested, the most simplified design for a structre of that size and mass. It is not a far leap of the imagination to see that the universal language of mathematics would lead to the pyramid when faced with the query of "How should we build somthing so big?" I believe the question is not so much "Why a pyramid?" as it is "How?" The further you delve into the mystery of ancient megaliths the louder the question of "How?" screams in your mind. That's not to say that the answer lies in the paranormal, but maybe just the unaccepted. Personally I am amazed when I read of the metal clamps used to keep stones in place, or the perfection of the angles and levels, the consistancy of the measurements. The complexity of these structures alone is a source of endless wonderment.

Having said that I'd like to point out that the construction of said megaliths remains a mystery and is relegated to the land of theories. How could a culture, seemingly so unevolved scientificaly, build somthing of such size and mass? Even today, building a structer of that magnitude using only the tools we believe available at the time is near impropable. Perhaps the key lies in a form of chronocentric bigotry (ok, i admit it, as far as I know I made up that word, it's like racism but with time substituted for race. "ethnocentric"), we believe ourselves so far advanced, and so far removed from "savage" ancient history that only we are capable of such feats.

Perhaps we are not as far advanced as we would like to believe, given the law of exponential rate of technological evolution (which I propose requires the ability to share knowledge to support it as law, for example the internet, or in ancient times trade and the interacting of different cultures) it is quite possible to theorize that these cultures could have developed these skills, tools and methods on their own. All that would really be needed is toolmaking, metalurgy, language, mathematics and time, with the possible addition of astronomy given that the stellar alignments of megaliths is a fact. I'm going to go out on a limb and introduce the variable of extraterrestrial life (personally I believe in it but it is, as of yet, unproven). Imagine if you will, that life of some form exists, or at the least originated from one of the older star systems we know of. Given the theorized age of some of the planets in our solar system (billions of years older than the Earth), and the aforementioned law of technological growth, it's easy to believe that any culture from said planet would be advanced far beyond our ability to comprehend and could possibly see us much as we see stone age man. I digress, I simply wished to suggest that we are no where near the pinnacle of technological achievement we believe ouselves to be.

It is my personal opinion that these ancient megaliths are not the answer, yet a clue to a bigger mystery. I also feel, that barring extraterrestrial intervention as a viable conclussion, and given archealogical anomolies like the Piri Reis map, that the existence of advanced (advanced as in egyptian, not spaceships and death rays) human civilization goes back farther than we have yet to accept. More over, these ancient cultures had abundant connection with eachother, or at the very least had contact with a "middle man" such as merchants. Knowledge is power, and I believe that to be true through all of history, technology would and still is a valuable source of income. The still surprising reach of dark age trade routes and the extent to which objects of certain cultures can make their way to other peoples is a perfect example of what happens when the known world is interconnected.

However, this theory is by no means conclusive, it fails to tackle the issue of what happened to it all. What reason was there that the communication was broken, that knowledge was forgotten and eventually denied as heretical and unorthodox by the pharisees and saggisees (sp?) of the scientific community? Nor does it take on the question of where do we, as a species, come from. Perhaps I just believe as many do, that the mysteries of our existence are endless, and the knowledge we have is just the perverbial tip of the iceberg. I know you asked for "intelligent" opinions and didn't mean for people to take that to say "wordy" and "poorly organized" but I can't help myself.

new topics

top topics


log in