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.

 

New Sphinx in Pakistan?

page: 3
61
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 20 2017 @ 12:23 PM
link   
It's unclear with this little information. We need a lot more info in order to determine if this is natural or if it's man-made.

For what it's worth, I'm leaning towards natural until further clues point otherwise.




posted on Dec, 20 2017 @ 12:43 PM
link   
Looked it up on Google Earth for s&g's ... it's blurry as hell (as expected) so you can't really tell much. Although the shadow reflects the "sphinx shape" pretty well.

Some of the pictures make me think there's something to it and others not so much. Would like to visit this place in person to see it though.



posted on Dec, 20 2017 @ 04:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Toolman18
Some of what Hancock states I'm willing to acknowledge but this is pure BS.

It's fricking sandstone that has layers and erodes with water into columns.

There is absolutely no features whatsover that can clearly be seen as "carved". If there were I would give it a second thought.

Look what we have here in Scotland, an island created by giants with very clear pillars :

www.southernhebrides.com...

Don't believe me? here's the end of the path (Ireland) between Scotland and Ireland

discovernorthernireland.com...



posted on Dec, 20 2017 @ 04:58 PM
link   
It's looks the same as the naturally weathered landscape around it.


Hancock seems to derive his income based on pareidolia.



posted on Dec, 20 2017 @ 05:16 PM
link   
Yeah, Mother Nature is a helluva sculptor:



posted on Dec, 20 2017 @ 07:35 PM
link   
This claimed sphinx most resembles the Egyptian one pareidolia wise that appears to be very weathered. This Pakistan claimed one if not pareidolia as the sphinx would, of course, be weathered, though would likely have so in a different pattern. Considering if it started out the same as the Egyptian one, such as the causes of erosion being different. The back looks much shorter for example.



posted on Dec, 20 2017 @ 07:54 PM
link   
Yeah Natural.

The comparison to a half dozen other cultures cinched it.



posted on Dec, 20 2017 @ 08:44 PM
link   
a reply to: yorkshirelad

The formations you have presented to us were not created by erosion tho.
I am a bit skeptical myself, but the symmetry in some of the photos and the similarities to other carvings do intrigue me.
I have been looking for other angles of the formations. Not much comes up, just the same angle which makes me think you can only see the 'statue' from a certain point of view.



posted on Dec, 20 2017 @ 09:46 PM
link   
It's a hoodoo (name for a geologic formation).

However - how about someone with a bit more time than I have finding the location on Google Earth and then we can take a look at satellite pictures and perhaps a drive by of it? That's going to tell us a lot more.



posted on Dec, 21 2017 @ 01:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Byrd
It's a hoodoo (name for a geologic formation).

However - how about someone with a bit more time than I have finding the location on Google Earth and then we can take a look at satellite pictures and perhaps a drive by of it? That's going to tell us a lot more.



My thoughts also, Byrd. I would like to have seen some different angles of the formation, i think that might help discern its likeliness.

I also saw it is a graham hancock site, i am not as well read as a lot of the more knowledgeable members here, but i am sure i should we weary of Mr. Hancock, no?

If it is to be genuine then i would assume it must be very very old, even in terms of what ancient cultures would consider old, for this type of degredation due to natural causes. As others have posted, nature is pretty great at creating some gnarly shapes all on its own!

Also that camel pic on the first page, something about the edges looks very photoshopped.

Thanks for the time you put in regardless OP



posted on Dec, 21 2017 @ 05:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: billytron

originally posted by: Byrd
It's a hoodoo (name for a geologic formation).

However - how about someone with a bit more time than I have finding the location on Google Earth and then we can take a look at satellite pictures and perhaps a drive by of it? That's going to tell us a lot more.



My thoughts also, Byrd. I would like to have seen some different angles of the formation, i think that might help discern its likeliness.

I also saw it is a graham hancock site, i am not as well read as a lot of the more knowledgeable members here, but i am sure i should we weary of Mr. Hancock, no?

YES.


originally posted by: billytronIf it is to be genuine then i would assume it must be very very old, even in terms of what ancient cultures would consider old, for this type of degredation due to natural causes. As others have posted, nature is pretty great at creating some gnarly shapes all on its own!


There are people here (and elsewhere, obviously,) that will tell you an ancient civilization carved it that way to make it look like a natural formation so it wouldn't draw barbarian hordes.

Harte



posted on Dec, 21 2017 @ 06:31 AM
link   
It could be just natural rock formation, though it does have a lot of regular spacing and I would love to think it was another Sphinx. I really hope that it can be properly investigated to find if it is man made. I do wonder, however, what people would have made of it if it was titled 'found on mars'. Would it have attracted anything much other than 'it's just a rock' as an explanation?

Interesting whether it is natural or not.



posted on Dec, 21 2017 @ 08:54 AM
link   
Nice thread. I like indulging in Pareidolia in cases like this. Makes the mind wander a little bit.

BUT definitely would need someone to actually look at this site before believing anything concrete. Case in point those Bosnian Pyramids look great from the one angle that captures your imagination.



posted on Dec, 21 2017 @ 12:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: atlantiswatusi
Nice thread. I like indulging in Pareidolia in cases like this. Makes the mind wander a little bit.

BUT definitely would need someone to actually look at this site before believing anything concrete. Case in point those Bosnian Pyramids look great from the one angle that captures your imagination.


I believe this is exactly the case - it looks like that from one angle.

Now...for the record, the civilization that everyone seems to have copied the idea of Sphinx from is the Egyptians. They had human-headed lion figures since the Old Kingdom (no one else has them until later.) The fact that there aren't any human headed lion figures around and in Pakistan in the era of 3,000 BC or so indicates that either the area wasn't explored (quite likely) or that it wasn't seen to them as a sphinx ... and they didn't know what a sphinx was.

Secondly, in the time since 3,000 BC, the shape of that rock has changed greatly.

Now... that said, the ancients often did see hoodoo shapes as an omen that a deity was there. One of the most famous ones is in Nubia, where the Egyptians thought that a hoodoo looked like Amun. They built a temple nearby and made it an important site.

And fourthly, if there had been a monument like that in Pakistan, as others have indicated there would be a lot of archaeological material around... and they'd have found it when constructing the road. So there'd be digs all over the place.



posted on Dec, 21 2017 @ 12:46 PM
link   
I know its pictures of people seeing what they want to see, but I have to admit I like seeing things that spark the imagination when I am relaxed and enjoying a nice scotch.



posted on Dec, 21 2017 @ 12:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Skyfloating
It could be worth going there and scraping off some of the dirt, just to have a look. There must be numerous undiscovered places, buried by age.


Scrape off some dirt... nah. It's so eroded that if it was a temple, it is unrecognizable.

Therefore, I say we use well-placed dynamite and see what's inside.

I'm sure the crew that planted the thermite inside WTC Building 7 could be of service here.




posted on Dec, 21 2017 @ 01:55 PM
link   



It looks quite different from another angle. It's on Google Earth listed as "Great Sphinx", but it's so small that it's not really helpful. That it's natural seems very apparent.



posted on Dec, 21 2017 @ 07:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Blaine91555

Thank's for that Blaine, I actually tried to find it on Google earth but am kak handed at such searches, that closes the case for me and I fully accept your verdict on the site.
The step's are merely eroded stratification, the site is just eroded material, cool work by nature though.

edit on 21-12-2017 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2017 @ 08:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: brandonforsyth11
When you look at the pictures at face value, it does look like an ancient structure.
If you look closely at the Sphinx and it’s back you notice that it in fact from a 2D perspective
Looks like a point. Rather than a flat and curved back. So most likely is a natural formation.

But at the same time it could just be heavily weathered you notice that there are covers of where it is
Almost like water has settled or even receiving direct winds against the stone causing it to corrode faster.

Interesting find!!!

Toolman needs to settle down, it was merely an interesting topic OP wanted to come to discuss,
As however to your camel... it is actually an ancient stone camel carved, that has also corroded overtime check
Your facts...


I see the ancient structure which looks as if they carved it into the face, so it would make sense that they carved the sphinx the same way, out of the existing rock. I find that to be a good speculation as to why the sphinx has aged as it has.



posted on Dec, 21 2017 @ 08:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Blaine91555




It looks quite different from another angle. It's on Google Earth listed as "Great Sphinx", but it's so small that it's not really helpful. That it's natural seems very apparent.


Google earth cannot get that kind of depth to make any kind of claim with it. Google earth when zoomed in is only 2 dimensional, with only overlays of flaccid 3d imagery.



new topics

top topics



 
61
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join