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.

 

Ancient Australia (Pyramid envy?)

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 05:18 AM
link   
Apart from Pyramids in the Pacific, and certain Egyptian-ish references, does anyone know about actual, indigenous ancient relics, sites or artifacts.

Australia is suppossed to be a very old continent, with an indigenous population from 40,000 odd years ago. I find it hard to believe that there is nothingleft, bar cave paintings.

Surely, some of these cultures would have built, or erected...something...and if not...why is that?

Any ideas?




posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 05:42 AM
link   
The Australian continent did not facilitate technological advancement, and thus the Aboriginal people did not acquire the ability to build pyramids. Indeed the Aboriginal people did not acquire the ability to build the wheel.



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 05:57 AM
link   
yeah, its interesting. What are the drivers or facilitation of tech advancement?

I'd guess that Australia is, in parts as fertile as any place, has minerals galore....perhaps it is a population density thing. I dont profess enough to undertand all those social and cultural drivers.

I do wonder if it is a Pacific thing...



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 06:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zenspider
Apart from Pyramids in the Pacific, and certain Egyptian-ish references, does anyone know about actual, indigenous ancient relics, sites or artifacts.


Check this link out for Australian pyramids. They also found Egyptian artifacts and carvings in Australia, I think it's covered on that website.



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 11:00 PM
link   
I subscribe to a Bi-monthly Australian magazine called Archaelogical Diggings.
In the issue vol 9 no 5 oct/nov 2002 this issue was explored and clear photographs of the site are present.
In this issue Gregory P Gilbert, BA, BE, MA, Meng Sc, Archaelogical Expedition Director, Qift Regional Expedition, Egypt, and a PhD candidate at Macquarie University, NSW. Gives an interview stating that these heiroglyphs are a poor modern forgery by someone who cant read or write hieroglyphs. In the interview he gives many reasons for his belief that they are forgeries 1 reason he cited is that they cannot be translated because they don’t form words or phrases and that the Names of the king come in a box rather than a cartouche. He said that the value of the Hieroglyphs is more relevant when looking how Ancient Egypt culture is playing a part in the modern World. He also said that it is a good exercise for high school students studying this field to gather evidence to refute the claims.
An unedited commemt containing more technical aspects, is available. Email your request to diggings@accay.com.au

Hope this helps



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 11:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Volksgeist
The Australian continent did not facilitate technological advancement, and thus the Aboriginal people did not acquire the ability to build pyramids. Indeed the Aboriginal people did not acquire the ability to build the wheel.


Instead they built an incredibly complex set of societal rules that prevented in-breeding and guaranteed the survival of the people despite one of the most limited genepools on earth.

They also have the best tracking skills on earth, not even American Indians can rival them, and elements of their traditional healing are acknowledged as being more effective than Chinese medicine.

Sophistication does not come from the ability to put one rock on top of another.

Besides, who needs pyramids, we've got Uluru.



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 11:30 PM
link   
It is a narrow mind that looks at technological advancements in such a basic way. When you live in the garden of Eden and have a vast variety of food in every direction of the compass, you dont need to build a shopping complex.
200 years ago they had not discovered pottery but this did not mean that they were not advanced. Its environment more than anything that dictates the the neccesity of so called tech advancements carrying water in animal skin or in a jar.... whats the difference... mission acomplished



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 03:48 AM
link   
Yeah, started thinking it all through. No real threat from winter, few predators, not enough population to require eventual fortification, no need for roads.....its one of the great tragedies that this people are treated so harshly in Australia - a country that strangely enough subscribes to a "fair go".

Still its hard not to imagine a pretty nice reality - I do believe the aboriginals mastered "burn off" of the bush. I may be wrong here.

I also believe that concepts of "war" were largely theatrical, perhaps with far less devestation to humanity than the norm.

Perhaps, at the most basic, the the classic technology/religion thing, played out.

It would be fascinating to have an accessible history. The dreamtime is extremely interesting, but compared to written anglo/european history its a different art.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join