It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

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

Help ATS via PayPal:

Some of The Nazca Lines explained.

page: 3
5
share:

posted on Apr, 6 2016 @ 06:41 AM

So I have no understanding of what golden ratio is. I looked it up and honestly it's bringing up math and I can no maths on that level. Can someone give me the for dummy's version of this?

posted on Apr, 6 2016 @ 06:56 AM

originally posted by: YachiruKusajishi

So I have no understanding of what golden ratio is. I looked it up and honestly it's bringing up math and I can no maths on that level. Can someone give me the for dummy's version of this?

The golden ratio, or phi (Φ), is just an irrational number (like π). It can be derived from the formula: 1a2 – 1b1 – 1c = 0. Close approximations of it can be found in the ratios of all sorts of things in nature, which is why new age whackjobs attribute all manner of crazy (and meaningless) significance. It has absolutely nothing to do with this thread.

posted on Apr, 6 2016 @ 07:00 AM
That makes sense. One of the pages referenced it being used by Dan a Brown in The Da Vinci Code. Now I need to go re-read it because I don't remember that.

So, kind of like seeing the supernatural in the natural because it's what they want or expect to see?

posted on Apr, 6 2016 @ 07:46 AM

Don't get me wrong, the proliferation of phi (or close approximations thereof) throughout the natural world is certainly interesting and worth looking into. Some view it as evidence of a creator, others see it as simply the inevitable result of the natural laws of the universe. To each their own. It is not, however, present in the image presented by the OP.

posted on Apr, 6 2016 @ 08:08 AM

I understand it better now. Thank you. Math has always been a struggle for me. I greatly appreciate the for dummies education!

posted on Apr, 6 2016 @ 09:29 AM

originally posted by: ProfessorPatternfish
Do you see the gold 'thing' hanging off the arm.

Golden ratio.

If you read the description underneath the photo on Wikipedia you will see that the yellow line is to show a reconstruction of a feature (cape or pouch hanging off the arm). It is not now and was never yellow or gold in color.

It also does NOT show a 1:1:2:3:5 (etc) proportion.

posted on Apr, 6 2016 @ 01:38 PM
OP Banned
for the third time

posted on Apr, 6 2016 @ 05:40 PM

originally posted by: ProfessorPatternfish

IMHO cymatics is one of the key technologies we have been held back from and resonance is the keystone to unlocking a new type of understanding of the universe .

I couldn't agree with you more.

Not only is cymatics not a technology, it's not even new.

Harte

posted on Apr, 6 2016 @ 05:44 PM

originally posted by: Marduk
OP Banned
for the third time

You can commiserate, eh?

Harte

posted on Apr, 6 2016 @ 06:55 PM

No, the secret to not getting banned three times in a row, is to not immediately rejoin and start posting about exactly the same thing..
I do not commiserate with idiots

posted on Apr, 6 2016 @ 07:42 PM

originally posted by: Marduk

No, the secret to not getting banned three times in a row, is to not immediately rejoin and start posting about exactly the same thing..
I do not commiserate with idiots

So, not even the least bit of empathy?
Don't blame you.

Harte

posted on Apr, 29 2016 @ 01:07 PM

originally posted by: ProfessorPatternfish

originally posted by: Phage

My daughter used to draw flowers when she was little. She's more into anime now.

Here's some nice flowers, by Degas.
indianapublicmedia.org...

Sighs.

Maybe this thread isn't for you Phage?

You are just making snide remarks now.

I wont lower myself to the level.

I think Phage's remarks are simply meant to ask "what is so special about the Nazca representation of flowers that makes it necessarily any differnt than other artistic representation of flowers"

Why does the Nazca flower necessarily need to have some great symbolic meaning?

new topics

5