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.

 

The Mysterious White Cross of Cuzco

page: 2
14
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse
Why not a cross. After all they built pyramids down there just like some of them in Egypt and other countries in that area. Now what are the chances of two separate cultures having pyramids with none found up by the land bridge where they were supposed to chase mastodons over to America.

The people two thousand years ago had ships that could have gone across the Ocean. They were smart, there are records of using currents to form trade routes, some people were curious as to where these currents might lead them.


Ok, but who provided the time machine... theres about 3000 years between Egyptian pyramids and the ones in the Americas




posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Trueman

originally posted by: Marduk

originally posted by: Trueman
a reply to: Marduk


How do you know Pizarro's cross was made of white marble?



I don't think it was Marble, because the entire region is rich in white Alabaster, which was used since colonial times by native craftsmen to manufacture religious icons
www.go2peru.com...



Those examples are from Ayacucho, which is about half way to Cuzco. Too far from Tumbes. I don't think he order a cross from Ayacucho's craftmen. Amazon Rainforest wasn't Amazon Prime. Hehehe....

The cross Pizarro used had to be something more simple and easier to carry, cheap stuff like wood maybe. Remember this guys were hungry of anything with value.


No, I don't think the cross was marble from the title of this thread. But I think its possible that the Incas started copying the cross using their own alabaster stone supplies after seeing what happened at Tumbes because of the power of the cross
All the way down the coast.



posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Marduk

originally posted by: rickymouse
Why not a cross. After all they built pyramids down there just like some of them in Egypt and other countries in that area. Now what are the chances of two separate cultures having pyramids with none found up by the land bridge where they were supposed to chase mastodons over to America.

The people two thousand years ago had ships that could have gone across the Ocean. They were smart, there are records of using currents to form trade routes, some people were curious as to where these currents might lead them.


Ok, but who provided the time machine... theres about 3000 years between Egyptian pyramids and the ones in the Americas


Oh man....., you shouldn't ask that







posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Marduk

originally posted by: Trueman

originally posted by: Marduk

originally posted by: Trueman
a reply to: Marduk


How do you know Pizarro's cross was made of white marble?



I don't think it was Marble, because the entire region is rich in white Alabaster, which was used since colonial times by native craftsmen to manufacture religious icons
www.go2peru.com...



Those examples are from Ayacucho, which is about half way to Cuzco. Too far from Tumbes. I don't think he order a cross from Ayacucho's craftmen. Amazon Rainforest wasn't Amazon Prime. Hehehe....

The cross Pizarro used had to be something more simple and easier to carry, cheap stuff like wood maybe. Remember this guys were hungry of anything with value.


No, I don't think the cross was marble from the title of this thread. But I think its possible that the Incas started copying the cross using their own alabaster stone supplies after seeing what happened at Tumbes because of the power of the cross
All the way down the coast.


That is a very elaborated theory and probably never heard before. There must be supporting evidence but I don't know where to find it.



posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:49 AM
link   
He says it was "hanging on a thread".

This means it was a tiny cross. Not something huge.

I'm going with the equilateral symbol, myself and with it being about the size of a modern wristwatch..



posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 11:56 AM
link   
"The cross was square, as wide as long (symmetrical); three quarters of vara long (1 vara = 33 inches/84 cm.), and three fingers wide and nearly as much coarse; was integral, all of a piece, very well dressed, with their corners very well taken, every couple, carved square, stone very polished and shiny".

3/4 of a vara should be about 24 inches.


edit on 19-12-2015 by Trueman because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-12-2015 by Trueman because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 06:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Marduk

Some of the pyramids in South America are way older than the ones in Egypt I think, but then again you can't carbon date a rock and the organic matter in the chambers could have been introduced a lot later. The Egyptian pyramids could have just been refaced by the Pharaohs too. There is a lot of wrong evidence as to who built these things, but people have taken credit for their construction even though they only repaired them or added to them.

If the ones in South America are much older, then you can see the direction that the people went.

I have looked at a lot of evidence and have concluded that the evidence may not actually show what people say it does. The writing on the wall does not mean it was there since the house was built.


edit on 19-12-2015 by rickymouse because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 08:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse
a reply to: Marduk

Some of the pyramids in South America are way older than the ones in Egypt I think, but then again you can't carbon date a rock and the organic matter in the chambers could have been introduced a lot later. The Egyptian pyramids could have just been refaced by the Pharaohs too. There is a lot of wrong evidence as to who built these things, but people have taken credit for their construction even though they only repaired them or added to them.

If the ones in South America are much older, then you can see the direction that the people went.

I have looked at a lot of evidence and have concluded that the evidence may not actually show what people say it does. The writing on the wall does not mean it was there since the house was built.



Well said Ricky. I believe you're talking about Norte Chico, north of Lima, Peru. 5000 years old.



posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 06:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse
a reply to: Marduk

Some of the pyramids in South America are way older than the ones in Egypt I think, but then again you can't carbon date a rock and the organic matter in the chambers could have been introduced a lot later.


No, some of the towns are older than the Egyptian pyramids, but the "pyramids" aren't pyramids, they are temples. They are made of mud brick, so are nothing at all like the pyramids of Giza. By the same claim, you have to date the Egyptian pyramids to 3100bce, which is when the civilisation was founded. The only urban centre in the Supe valley (Norte Chico culture) which dates to before 3000bce is Aspero, with dates from 3700bce. Again, this is not the date that the temples were constructed. Just the earliest date for habitation which has been found.
This is the main pyramid from Caral

You obviously weren't aware that it looked like this were you

You are also apparently unaware of the development of the true pyramid in Egypt which took hundreds of years.
The Giza pyramids were carbon dated using carbon in the mortar taken from between the blocks of the pyramid. From top to bottom, all the dates show a construction between 2700 and 2500BCE. If you're going make claims about radiocarbon dating, its probably a good idea to know what you're talking about first.
Educate yourself






The Egyptian pyramids could have just been refaced by the Pharaohs too. There is a lot of wrong evidence as to who built these things, but people have taken credit for their construction even though they only repaired them or added to them.


But what, you are unable to list any of that "wrong evidence" because you aren't actually aware of it.


The carbon dates were taken from mortar samples from all over the pyramid and the surrounding buildings. They all agree the same construction time, so either, they were built then by the Egyptians, or they were completely taken to pieces and then reassembled by the Ancient Egyptians. So you are claiming that the Egyptians did twice as much work on the pyramids than anyone else, yet are still claiming they didn't know how to build them. Dry that out and you can fertilise your lawn with it. Either way the Egyptians were clearly up to the task, so you claiming a lost race did it is a claim made from ignorance which doesn't solve anything. Also, I'm wondering, why doesn't any of the genetics from South America or Egypt show any interference from a lost race of civilisers, they travelled the world educating the savages, but they didn't have sexual intercourse with any of them ? We aren't talking humans then are we.



They also of course neglected to teach them the basics of health care, mathematics, writing and all the other sciences which archaeology has shown they arrived at themselves taking hundreds and thousands of years




If the ones in South America are much older, then you can see the direction that the people went.


There is a ziggurat in Iran, which dates to 3000bce. Which is older both than anything in Egypt or America and the culture that built it dates to 6000 BCE So the direction the people went was from Iran then was it ?

You got all this wrong because you aren't aware of the facts, probably about time you put down Graham Hancock and picked up a real history book



originally posted by: Trueman

Well said Ricky. I believe you're talking about Norte Chico, north of Lima, Peru. 5000 years old.

Norte Chico is the name of the culture, not the name of any of its centres.
Try these
Aspero
en.wikipedia.org...
Caral
en.wikipedia.org...


edit on 26-12-2015 by Marduk because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 08:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Marduk

So you are saying that in order to be a pyramid, it needs to be constructed the exact same way the pyramids in Egypt are made? Gee, my neighbors house is not a house because it is not built like mine. The other neighbors house is one story so it is not a house. The other neighbors house is a bilevel so I guess that is not a house either.

There are stone structures built in South America, not everything is mudstone. You can't date stone, but you can backwards date brick by analyzing the organics in it. But varying conditions can make this dating inaccurate, including what the binder of the original brick was from. I know a person who owns a company that does carbon dating for a living. He was explaining how important it is to know things before trying to evaluate the date. If something is not evaluated right, then you are making it a guess, not a scientific evaluation. This is often done because a reference is not in the area or supplied to the dating company or the reference is not from the same area, an ancient import.

When his company goes to get evidence they do a lot of research to validate the process, but they can still be way off if the supporting evidence is not right. If you find a body in a tomb, that does not mean the tomb was built the same time as the body, it could have been built thousands of years prior and just re-purposed.

The original people of South America are not all same, they came over in multiple times. I actually have been doing research on the genetics of the South American people and many groups are not actually that far distanced as you say, but way earlier than the Spanish coming over. Same with the Indians of North America, their origin is all over the place, from the Giza to Norway.

Half the history in books should be tossed out, it is being proven wrong all the time. Half the carbon dating technology is based on references that were incorrect as to the time things were supposed to be built from references in history which were incorrect. This could throw off dating by a couple of thousand of years in the case of a three thousand year old structure. I can go on and on with loopholes that exist in the technology. But it is more correct than just looking at something and saying it looks like it is three thousand years old. But then again, that is what references for the dating were based off of, someone's guess from long ago.



posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 09:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse
a reply to: Marduk

So you are saying that in order to be a pyramid, it needs to be constructed the exact same way the pyramids in Egypt are made? Gee, my neighbors house is not a house because it is not built like mine. The other neighbors house is one story so it is not a house. The other neighbors house is a bilevel so I guess that is not a house either..

You are using the word pyramid, to try to force a fit between buildings on two different continents.
Pyramid definition :- a monumental structure with a square or triangular base and sloping sides that meet in a point at the top
This does not describe the temples found in the Supe Valley.


So a better analogy would be, your neighbours house is not a house, its a public library


There are stone structures built in South America, not everything is mudstone. You can't date stone, but you can backwards date brick by analyzing the organics in it. But varying conditions can make this dating inaccurate, including what the binder of the original brick was from. I know a person who owns a company that does carbon dating for a living. He was explaining how important it is to know things before trying to evaluate the date. If something is not evaluated right, then you are making it a guess, not a scientific evaluation. This is often done because a reference is not in the area or supplied to the dating company or the reference is not from the same area, an ancient import.a monumental structure with a square or triangular base and sloping sides that meet in a point at the top,


You are either wildly misinformed, or you have got your claims from Pseudohistorians, Modern carbon dating is extremely accurate, dates are given with a plus or minus of around 100 years. What is your neighbours companies name, I would like to look up their website and see what they actually say without the filter of your brain.




When his company goes to get evidence they do a lot of research to validate the process, but they can still be way off if the supporting evidence is not right. If you find a body in a tomb, that does not mean the tomb was built the same time as the body, it could have been built thousands of years prior and just re-purposed.,

Once again, the tomb you are talking about is the Great pyramid of Giza, I gave you a link to an article that discussed how it was carbon dated, you obviously didn't read it...


Same with the Indians of North America, their origin is all over the place, from the Giza to Norway.,

That's awesome, please show me your evidence that the Native Americans migrated to their current home from Norway. Actually I'm way ahead of you. You do not understand genetics at all, Haplogroup X (mtDNA) is not all one big group, it is a collection of sub groups which originated in North Africa. It consists of :-

X X1 X1a X1a1 X1b X2 X2a X2a1 X2a1a X2a1b X2a2 X2b X2b1 X2b2 X2b3 X2b4 X2c X2c1 X2d X2e X2e1 X2e1a X2e1a1 X2e1a1a X2e2 X2e2a X2f X2g X2h

All of which represent different groups of humans, of course you won't have learned this from a pseudo history book, because they don't want you to know, so their usual claim of Native American haplogroup X (actually X2e) is the same as X in all the other examples is not only false and misleading, its actually laughable. The X of the Sami people of Norway is actually X2b5, that and the Native American group were last joined between 20,000 and 50,000 years ago in Central Europe. So its clear, that no one migrated from Norway to the new world to anyone who understands genetics. I am not including you in that. What actually happened is that after originating in North Africa, X groups then migrated to all the places they are now found. This is how the distribution is explained in Academia, obviously its not the way that you understand it, because again, your sources aren't credible
You will find a good article describing the geographic distribution of the various X groups Here


Half the history in books should be tossed out, it is being proven wrong all the time.

You have not exhibited any knowledge that would make that true, so far all I've seen from you is wilful ignorance and misunderstanding of the facts. History updates itself with new information from credible sources, with the exception of the unproven OCT, not a single pseudo historian has ever contributed anything credible that has been verified. That's not because academics are hiding the truth from the world, its because the information from pseudo historians isn't credible and they are not actually qualified to have an opinion, on the whole being a bunch of journalists, I am constantly amazed that people like you (i.e. people who took the 2012 doomsday scenario spread by journalism seriously) who constantly harp on about the news lying to everyone, are happy to swallow anything crapped out by a journalist just because he's written a book.



Half the carbon dating technology is based on references that were incorrect as to the time things were supposed to be built from references in history which were incorrect. This could throw off dating by a couple of thousand of years in the case of a three thousand year old structure.

lol really, you should probably update your knowledge of radiocarbon dating from credible sources, you seem to be talking about the errors that were involved in the 1950s. No, nuclear weapons and flooding no longer throw out Radiocarbon dating, they haven't done for about 40 years. Its at this point that you should be googling Dendrochronology and seeing what relevance it has to carbon dating. Then try telling me that it doesn't prove anything...


I can go on and on with loopholes that exist in the technology. But it is more correct than just looking at something and saying it looks like it is three thousand years old. But then again, that is what references for the dating were based off of, someone's guess from long ago.

So you are now claiming that radiocarbon dating is based on someones opinion. Please, do yourself a favour, update your knowledge of the subjects you are talking about, your whole rant here is laughable and easily shown to be wrong

If you can't be bothered to read a scientific journal, then please at least read the wiki radiocarbon section on calibration
Calibration
If you come back at me with more ignorance, I will have to post it for you.


Do you also think it would be possible to start backing up your opinion with some credible links, the fact that you don't speaks volumes
edit on 26-12-2015 by Marduk because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-12-2015 by Marduk because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-12-2015 by Marduk because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2015 @ 05:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Marduk


I know what's Norte Chico. I lived in Peru and y mother is Peruvian. I said that as a quick reference, but good point anyway.

You know...., actually "Norte Chico" is a term originally used to describe Huaral, Huacho and other places by the north of Lima or crossing Pasamayo. If you keep going north then you'll enter the real north of Peru, Chimbote, Trujillo, just mention a couple of nice places.



posted on Dec, 28 2015 @ 06:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Marduk



No, some of the towns are older than the Egyptian pyramids, but the "pyramids" aren't pyramids, they are temples


The link that YOU
provided disagree with you LOL :


Main pyramid[edit]

The main pyramid complex (Spanish: Pirámide Mayor) is 150 meters long, 110 meters wide and 28 meters high. The date of its construction is unknown.



posted on Dec, 28 2015 @ 06:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: [post=20197970]
The main pyramid complex (Spanish: Pirámide Mayor) is 150 meters long, 110 meters wide and 28 meters high. The date of its construction is unknown.


No.



posted on Dec, 28 2015 @ 07:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Marduk

originally posted by: [post=20197970]
The main pyramid complex (Spanish: Pirámide Mayor) is 150 meters long, 110 meters wide and 28 meters high. The date of its construction is unknown.


No.

No what Duk ?


That's from the link you posted brother.



posted on Dec, 29 2015 @ 03:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Trueman


That's from the link you posted brother.


I posted you the dictionary definition of what a pyramid was, did you miss it....
Caral does not have pyramids, they are temples, incorrectly called pyramids by people who don't know what a pyramid is.
dp you know what a pyramid is..

edit on 29-12-2015 by Marduk because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 11:14 AM
link   
The isosceles cross is the symbol of Zeus. The known symbol to you as a thunder, is a newage crap, the thunder is actually a weapon, not his symbol.

look the perimeter of the drawings, filled with cross. The cross is everywhere in my country, because Zeus is our Father.

here is another



and here is also another (you can find all these in my country...



Is not only Christians who use the cross, but also those who respect and love our Father. Olympian faith and not the faked 12 gods of Olympus. It is hided from people, because they wouldnt understand, why and how the cross is the symbol of Zeus, since jews and asiatics who hate Zeus soooo much, they represent Father as the devil to you... propagandists and blasphemers, because their gods are convicts, criminals.

Why you think they hate the cross SOOOOO much. Also number 13 is the number of Father, but hold on, I think number 13 is the most hateful number as well. Friday 13, asiatics dont use the number 13, etc.
edit on 16-1-2016 by Ploutonas because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1   >>

log in

join