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 Global Civilization

page: 10
37
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 22 2020 @ 03:45 AM
link   

So this island in the Azores has risen above sea level since the Pleistocene. I thought the place sank?

Yes Harte, evidence has already been presented to you in this thread that vertical movement exists/has existed ‘several’ times in its past.
Does this surprise you now? Not read anything thus far presented?
The evidence you present simply tallies with mine in proving vertical isostatic mechanisms exist at the Azores Plateau-
tick 1 for Plato, then? The Plateau CAN rise and lower ABOVE and BELOW sea level.
Tick 2- it’s where he said it was
Tick 3- volcanic evidence from the late Pleistocene shows a different shoreline and that the magma event occurred at SEA LEVEL (far lower than today) . The event is also postulated to have been a water/magma event, suggesting a sidewall collapse? We all know what that means for volcanic islands, don’t we?
Tick 4- timeframe.
That’s 4 hits so far, Plato. Good guessing!!
There is a paper I’ve read that shows the entire Azores plateau is rising. Seems like the mantle is anomalously thinner under the Azores allowing for vertical flex .
But some of us have already read this stuff, have an idea of mechanisms that exist there, and don't scoff at the possible accuracy of our ancestors descriptions.

Perhaps you could enlighten us all with your opinion on the evidence presented by “fromtheskydown” regarding THE TRAVELS OF PEDRO DE CIEZA DE LEON. A.D. 1532-50 ? You see Harte, we’re all sat on the carpet , like at school, cross-legged and sitting up straight , just how you like it, waiting for your knowing response as to how this guy who MET the Inca, could come up with so much rubbish... fire away, old chap .


It seems like Harte loves to rail against ‘pseudo science’ and the like , and yet in this Atlantis research presented ( and way more done than I by some serious minds) , all evidence is testable through peer reviewed papers.
You’ll all notice there are strategic silences from Harte at many points during any debate, all the time pressuring others for ‘proofs’ ‘evidence ‘ and moving the debate on under his narrative, while most of us are left to politely react to his points.
He often tells posters here there is no ‘academic wall’ to break down , it’s all about us being stupid and imagining it, and yet this is the very wall he erects continually.
NO-ONE on here has to view Harte as some object to overcome before acceptance of ideas, he has simply placed himself at the centre of this position, along with his snivelling rude mate Hanslune , acting like snipers high-fiving each other. Well sometimes , you're way off, eh boys?

We all have to endure Harte’s endless complaints of putting up with ‘pseudo science ‘ and ‘pseudo scientists’ and yet this guy acts as some form of non-appointed authority over us here?
Harte is just an amateur researcher , like the rest of us, and a ‘pseudo-Academic’ at best in my eyes.

We know he thinks we are all sh*theads, so I don’t need to treat him with any more respect than he treats us all.
But all look out for his conspicuous silences -all the while demanding the right answers from you.

ignorantia negare



a reply to: Harte




posted on Mar, 22 2020 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: reject
this guy is a notorious retard, baitin the gullibles for clicks



posted on Mar, 23 2020 @ 05:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: bluesfreak

So this island in the Azores has risen above sea level since the Pleistocene. I thought the place sank?

Yes Harte, evidence has already been presented to you in this thread that vertical movement exists/has existed ‘several’ times in its past.
Does this surprise you now? Not read anything thus far presented?
The evidence you present simply tallies with mine in proving vertical isostatic mechanisms exist at the Azores Plateau-
tick 1 for Plato, then? The Plateau CAN rise and lower ABOVE and BELOW sea level.

Except there's no evidence it has been above sea level within the last several million years, and plenty showing that the islands were actually lower, perhaps even covered by the sea, during the Pleistocene.

originally posted by: bluesfreakTick 2- it’s where he said it was
Tick 3- volcanic evidence from the late Pleistocene shows a different shoreline and that the magma event occurred at SEA LEVEL (far lower than today) . The event is also postulated to have been a water/magma event, suggesting a sidewall collapse? We all know what that means for volcanic islands, don’t we?

You'll need a lot more than one volcanic event because seamounts can rise and sink without the plateau even moving - and some those seamounts have been shown to have never been above sea level in the last 2 or 3 million years.
If all you have is the seamounts, then:
Tick - it's not what Plato described.

I've tried to provide the evidence that causes the mainstream not to invest in this idea. If I hadn't, you certainly wouldn't have.

Harte
edit on 3/23/2020 by Harte because: o



posted on Mar, 24 2020 @ 04:43 AM
link   

Except there's no evidence it has been above sea level within the last several million years, and plenty showing that the islands were actually lower, perhaps even covered by the sea, during the Pleistocene.


Except the paper I linked you to regarding a ‘late’ Pleistocene/Holocene shoreline EVENT with ‘hazard implications’ ( a strange turn of phrase) at the end of the Pleistocene .
Your wiki bland assessment of several millions of years doesn’t actually tally with the research done- many papers showing vertical isostatic movement mechanisms are at play there, shoreline/sediment/fauna evidence. I would go as far as to say the Wiki statements on the Plateau that you like to quote from, don’t take into account all the available recent data .
Please describe a scenario where a geologically proven ‘sea level ‘ volcanic event ISN'T at sea level?
.. the Late Pleistocene/Holocene is not several millions of years ago, is it now?
How could you quote back at me ‘several million years ‘ having supposedly just read the paper I linked you to? And there are lots relating to puzzling isostatic mechanisms, anomalies in the crust below the Plateau.
So, when you and wiki quote ‘sea level’ WHICH sea level are you both talking about?
OUR sea level ? Or the sea levels that have been proved to exist there in the not so distant past .


You'll need a lot more than one volcanic event because seamounts can rise and sink without the plateau even moving - and some those seamounts have been shown to have never been above sea level in the last 2 or 3 million years. If all you have is the seamounts, then: Tick - it's not what Plato described. I've tried to provide the evidence that causes the mainstream not to invest in this idea. If I hadn't, you certainly wouldn't have.


So you agree the mechanisms for vertical movement exist at the Azores, then?
Tick 1 for Plato.
Tick 2- ancient shorelines on the Plateau, evidenced at Pleistocene/Holocene.
Tick 3- it’s STILL where Plato said it was.
Tick 4- Timeframe.

The ‘A’ word is generally scoffed at by Academia, but the research into the Plateau is peer reviewed.
You know that.
I would STILL like to see the PROOF that the Atlantis tale is pure Allegory as you continually state. This statement must be backed by fact, or it is simply conjecture- the stuff you hate.
I am yet to find evidence it was/was meant to be allegory . Please prove this statement.

Relating the thread back to its original title , and how the YD events shaped our position on the planet, what is your opinion on THE TRAVELS OF PEDRO DE CIEZA DE LEON. A.D. 1532-50 regarding the pre-Inca megalithic work presented by ‘fromtheskydown’ ?
Seems like word ‘from the horses mouth’ doesn’t tally with your ‘belief system’ to me.

Personally , I don’t really care what the mainstream thinks of the Atlantis tale - nor you to be frank- you are not the ‘official’ mainstream spokesman, you just think you are- the mainstream is coming round to the YD events being something awfully spectacular , and Plato’s tale of Atlantis correlates to the 2nd events of the YD AND Meltwater Pulse 1b.
The world , it seems, was plunged into catastrophe, and Plato indeed talks of catastrophe, huge earthquakes, pyroclastic mud events.
The Azores sits on triple plate pull , has vulcanism AND proof of vertical isostasy.
It’s also only 400km or so from the Mid Atlantic Ridge, which itself has had sediment samples showing (again) vertical isostasy. You don’t need me to explain the physics of one half of a plate rising , and the other half lowering, do you? The behaviour of the MAR also has implications for the Azores, it’s something I’ve been looking into .
It’s up to you whether you like to look at the undersea evidence regarding the Azores, or choose to ignore it.

Simply Parroting the official line on everything is not good research ; the research on the Plateau is there for all to see.

If the sciences were run according to your fascist view on the ‘party line’ , NOTHING would get researched, NO-ONE would be allowed to ‘what if’ , and humanity would lose out in the end clinging to outdated data.



This power came forth out of the Atlantic Ocean, for in those days the Atlantic was navigable; and there was an island situated in front of the straits which are by you called the Pillars of Heracles; the island was larger than Libya and Asia put together, and was the way to other islands, and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean;


a reply to: Harte


edit on 24-3-2020 by bluesfreak because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-3-2020 by bluesfreak because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-3-2020 by bluesfreak because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-3-2020 by bluesfreak because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-3-2020 by bluesfreak because: Autofill



posted on Mar, 24 2020 @ 08:12 AM
link   

I've tried to provide the evidence that causes the mainstream not to invest in this idea. If I hadn't, you certainly wouldn't have.

Ps-
??!!! Talk about stating the obvious,I’m showing you that there is other data regarding your belief in the allegory ridicule .
You want me to accept the view of an entire ‘movement’ based on the ASSUMPTION of allegory, and yet you do not wish me to follow the research of a ‘movement’ based on peer reviewed research?
Just so you know, the great minds of literature from the past who studied and made these proclamations about Plato’s work, didn’t have the data available to them that we are discussing .
If there’s ever any more proof of an idea becoming entrenched over time due to assumptions then this tale is it.
I don’t really care about convincing you , I’m just allowing the others on here to see there is other data that shows you have no clear headshot whatsoever . a reply to: Harte


edit on 24-3-2020 by bluesfreak because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2020 @ 10:28 AM
link   
"No clear headshot"?
Maybe Harte needs to change his name to Oswald.



posted on Mar, 24 2020 @ 11:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: bluesfreak

"Clear headshot"



....no an unloaded and missing rifle

You can always find 'possibility' and pile possibility on top of other possibilities. In the end Plato's story falls apart due to:

No ancient Sais or Athenian or even Greece existing in the time frame asserted.

No archaeological evidence for Atlantean existence in the Med - or anywhere for that matter.

Those two are real 'killers' and simply cannot be ignored no amount of 'possibilities' can out weigh them.

Possibilities are not reality. The present orthodox position is based on a clear lack of evidence for Atlantis. The big bad science community isn't being mean to you.You are quite free to raise the millions needed to explore said under sea geological structures with maritime drones or dredging.

But the fringe community won't perhaps you should concentrate on why that is happening?

However, it would be cheaper to conduct numerous archaeological excavations in/find new sites around the MED. to find Atlantean artefacts
you might also want to review the archaeological record of Athens and Sais).

People have been beating this to death for 150 years+ and they will go on doing so for another 150 more years because they want Atlantis to exist and in their minds the "possibilities" overrides the lack of evidence. They will argue it over and over again but NEVER take the steps to find the necessary evidence.



posted on Mar, 24 2020 @ 02:48 PM
link   

...no an unloaded and missing rifle You can always find 'possibility' and pile possibility on top of other possibilities. In the end Plato's story falls apart due to: No ancient Sais or Athenian or even Greece existing in the time frame asserted. No archaeological evidence for Atlantean existence in the Med - or anywhere for that matter. Those two are real 'killers' and simply cannot be ignored no amount of 'possibilities' can out weigh them. Possibilities are not reality. The present orthodox position is based on a clear lack of evidence for Atlantis. The big bad science community isn't being mean to you.You are quite free to raise the millions needed to explore said under sea geological structures with maritime drones or dredging. But the fringe community won't perhaps you should concentrate on why that is happening? However, it would be cheaper to conduct numerous archaeological excavations in/find new sites around the MED. to find Atlantean artefactsyou might also want to review the archaeological record of Athens and Sais). People have been beating this to death for 150 years+ and they will go on doing so for another 150 more years because they want Atlantis to exist and in their minds the "possibilities" overrides the lack of evidence. They will argue it over and over again but NEVER take the steps to find the necessary evidence.


Cool, tag team.
Seriously , after testable evidence handed to you , you still come back and triumphantly pronounce
“ where is it all then???”
The reply is the same- it’s 400ft underwater somewhere.
The ‘Athenians’ in the tale were described to Solon in the fashion of ‘your ancestors did something special, repelled an ancient invasion ,but even you don’t know about it. After this triumph they were all drowned and lost in pyroclastic mud flows during a great earth shaking cataclysm. ‘
They are identified as ancestors to the Greeks, and Athenians and you know it.

It’s not about ‘wanting ‘ Atlantis to exist , as you are so sure of, it’s now become testing Plato against hard data.
By lumping ‘Atlantis’ in with the ‘crystal antigrav’ brigade you can heartily scoff away to your hearts content, looking deep into Harte’s eyes, however, as I’ve stated before , when the geological processes that exist at the Plateau are examined , it’s not so laughable . It’s just that YOU don’t ‘want’ to believe it as you are so closed minded.
If you haven’t read the evidence presented so far, at least tag in with something decent.

So to summarise , in the area Plato states an Atlantic landmass existed , modern data proves:

*Vertical isostatic movement ‘several’ times in its past
*Shorelines/sand/shallow water fossils/fauna from previous ancient shorelines
* volcanic event at the late Pleistocene/Holocene boundary AT SEA LEVEL (not our sea level)
*Timeframe matches with 2nd YD event and Meltwater Pulse 1b, verifiable world altering climate events
*its STILL where Plato describes it
*unusual crustal formation under the Plateau, a thinner mantle that allows for vertical flex.
*Triple plate pull on the Plateau , as well as influence from the Mid Atlantic Ridge.
Because you don’t ‘want’ Plato’s tale to be real, this starting evidence testing Plato’s description isn't seen as evidence to you .
You feel you can/should discount it as no ‘archaeology ‘ has been done somewhere 400 ft below the med. - but not Spain or east Africa .

Please provide the hard proof that the tale is allegory , that Plato meant it as a lesson (also guessing extremely accurately verifiable worldwide cataclysmic events) . Please provide the proof he ‘made it up ‘. You can’t , and yet your whole ‘belief system’ is based around this assumption .
reply to: Hanslune



posted on Mar, 25 2020 @ 02:40 AM
link   
I used to think it was the Azores. But that doesn't fit with the "Greater than Libya and Asia combined" part.



originally posted by: bluesfreak


It’s not about ‘wanting ‘ Atlantis to exist , as you are so sure of, it’s now become testing Plato against hard data.
By lumping ‘Atlantis’ in with the ‘crystal antigrav’ brigade you can heartily scoff away to your hearts content, looking deep into Harte’s eyes, however, as I’ve stated before , when the geological processes that exist at the Plateau are examined , it’s not so laughable . It’s just that YOU don’t ‘want’ to believe it as you are so closed minded.
If you haven’t read the evidence presented so far, at least tag in with something decent.




I am almost up for the "crystal antigrav" version nowadays.

When you look at ancient "sacred" geometry, it looks like a system of mathematics that specializes in trigonometry rather than computational math.

Which means it might have been more suitable for approaching things like Einstein's Field Equations, which are entirely based on curvature.



Some stuff I've been reading about aliens suggests that actually what got aliens worried when they saw humans setting off nuclear bombs wasn't the possibility we wipe OURSELVES out. It was the possibility we might become dangerous to them.

IF we could travel faster than light, that is. Until we get that second technology, we can't hurt them and they feel safe from us.


Suppose an ancient culture were on the doorstep of getting both. They show they have figured out how to temporarily reduce a rock's apparent mass, to lift it. Or manipulate gravity to do it. So they're very close to understanding the crazy physics of faster-than-light travel.

And then they figure out the bomb part...

Aliens would face a choice. Do they let it continue? Or do they put a stop to it?

Is there some way they can put a stop to it, and not make all of humanity hate them forever? (Perhaps because humanity forgets they ever had such technology????)



posted on Mar, 25 2020 @ 04:07 AM
link   

I used to think it was the Azores. But that doesn't fit with the "Greater than Libya and Asia combined" part


Still, the Azores and associated chains of islands are the only possible location if you bring the sea level far lower than it is today . Coupled with raising and lowering mechanisms that do exist there.
The phrase used is “greater in extent than..” which has many interpretations, I feel extent can mean ‘range’ or ‘reach’ of this ‘empire’ that is talked of.
Interestingly, ‘empire’ could also simply mean ‘places they could reliably travel to and return from consistently and safely.
Although the Dialogues do state that before the war with the proto-Athenians, they had ‘subjugated’ the North African coast up to Egypt, inside the mediterranean.

Regarding the movement of large blocks- it’s still very mysterious .
It looks like a race of megalithic builders were once around who had techniques of moving gigantic stones that we don’t fully understand .
Who knows what was going on 11,500 ish when this tale was referring to.
My suspicion is a Bronze Age culture that had boats , understood metalwork (Oricalchum descriptions) and were very ambitious.
The second YD events tie in with Plato’s timeframe and could have put a stop on humanity at this point- see the link I provided on a previous post - human population ‘bottlenecks’ around this time; the bottlenecks Harte said didn’t exist .

Ps- the sacred geometry stuff is very interesting, fascinating in fact, but I don’t know enough about it to comment .
My mind is continually open, unlike others on here. reply to: bloodymarvelous


edit on 25-3-2020 by bluesfreak because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-3-2020 by bluesfreak because: Spelling !



posted on Mar, 25 2020 @ 09:48 AM
link   

The Earth was hit by a fragmented comet around 13,000 years ago at the end of the Pleistocene Era and scientists are now starting to agree.

A new research paper has been published in Scientific Reports regarding an ancient civilisation in what is modern-day Syria that was wiped out by the cataclysm, as academics finally come round to the idea that yes this event did happen.

Even the sceptic Michael Shermer, who famously debated Graham Hancock on the Joe Rogan podcast has tweeted Graham saying:

“Ok Graham, I shall adjust my priors in light of more research like this, and modify my credence about your theory.”

Full Article



posted on Mar, 25 2020 @ 10:44 AM
link   
Can’t get more obvious than graphs like these:





Atlantis timeframe matches meltwater pulse 1b and second proposed YD impact/airburst events.
In relation to the whole thread , any ancient cultures or indeed civilisations that existed must have been established before these events , as the climate the earth was plunged into (nearly back to ice age temperatures, nuclear winter event?) was most certainly not conducive to developing ‘civilisation’ , there would have been crop failures, die off of fauna and plants worldwide.
I imagine our ancestors had an extremely difficult time between these two events, (to put it mildly) and the second may have been worse than the first, could have been a ‘tipping point’ for collapse , and certain meltwater based events in the Atlantic; from Plato’s description it seems many island chains were drowned.
As for South America, the great evidence provided by ‘fromtheskydown’ ( that Harte seems reluctant to respond to) regarding the Incas appropriation of megalithic ruins ( some researchers ascribing the same concept to the dynastic Egyptians) is very revealing - a culture believing these megalithic master works were created ‘by the gods’ .
To look at our landscapes now and ask ‘where are they then?’ As Hanslune typically does , is foolish; the world didn’t look the same before or after these events, and if you study the evidence of this, it’s PLAINLY obvious.

a reply to: kloejen



posted on Mar, 25 2020 @ 11:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: kloejen

The Earth was hit by a fragmented comet around 13,000 years ago at the end of the Pleistocene Era and scientists are now starting to agree.

A new research paper has been published in Scientific Reports regarding an ancient civilisation in what is modern-day Syria that was wiped out by the cataclysm, as academics finally come round to the idea that yes this event did happen.

Even the sceptic Michael Shermer, who famously debated Graham Hancock on the Joe Rogan podcast has tweeted Graham saying:

“Ok Graham, I shall adjust my priors in light of more research like this, and modify my credence about your theory.”

Full Article



So a science writer (Shermer) is convinced by a writer (Hancock) about a Younger Dryas impact event. I would like to see some actual paleontologists and archaeologists weigh in.



posted on Mar, 25 2020 @ 12:32 PM
link   

So a science writer (Shermer) is convinced by a writer (Hancock) about a Younger Dryas impact event. I would like to see some actual paleontologists and archaeologists weigh in



Shirmer’s decision on this is based on the science of the impact proxies, where they were found , and under what circumstances.
Forgive me, as I don’t intend to be rude by any means, but what could an archaeologist add to these results apart from confirming the layers in which they were found?
It seems these proxies are found in the same layer, worldwide, in a similar manner to the proxies that sealed the debate on the KT event . The proxies infer ET related bolides, as did the KT event to a single bolide.

It also seems to me that these results, and future results from this layer, may force a change on the whole of archaeology , geology, paleo studies.

Ps- I feel the term ‘writer’ is a little Harsh on poor old Hancock- lets give him a little credit; he is a researcher, even though the mainstream hate to call him that .
Why have none weighed in? Or have we just missed it?
a reply to: Byrd


edit on 25-3-2020 by bluesfreak because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-3-2020 by bluesfreak because: Missed words



posted on Mar, 25 2020 @ 05:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: bluesfreak

So a science writer (Shermer) is convinced by a writer (Hancock) about a Younger Dryas impact event. I would like to see some actual paleontologists and archaeologists weigh in



Shirmer’s decision on this is based on the science of the impact proxies, where they were found , and under what circumstances.


I don't doubt that. What I doubt is the depths of his knowledge.


Forgive me, as I don’t intend to be rude by any means, but what could an archaeologist add to these results apart from confirming the layers in which they were found?

Knowledge of what the signs are for civilizations (and cultures) for one thing. Information about local existing cultures in the area, cultures previously in the area (because I don't believe there were civilizations (i.e. cities with farms and trades and shops and long-distance trade) in the area.)

There's quite a bit of difference between what the layman knows and the archaeologist knows (and you'd want a specialist in those areas.

The paleontologists would know about the animal history of the area. A few bones are interesting but do they know about the botany (what happened to the plant life in the area) and the ecosystem (paleontologists know this sort of thing.)

I worked for a paleontologist who specialized in the fossils of the late Cretaceous in Alaska. He'd dug all over the state, focused on some narrow areas, and what he knew and told about what he found was staggering. The papers and books you see don't hold a candle to what Dr. Tony Fiorella knows.


It seems these proxies are found in the same layer, worldwide, in a similar manner to the proxies that sealed the debate on the KT event . The proxies infer ET related bolides, as did the KT event to a single bolide.


And I know that "sold" the idea to Shermer. The thing is, the ones who know about the biology of the area at that time (paleontologists) are generally UNconvinced.


It also seems to me that these results, and future results from this layer, may force a change on the whole of archaeology , geology, paleo studies.


It might but as of now the evidence doesn't support it.


Ps- I feel the term ‘writer’ is a little Harsh on poor old Hancock- lets give him a little credit; he is a researcher, even though the mainstream hate to call him that .

It's one thing to be a "crawl through the library of favorite books and call yourself a researcher" -- which I find Hancock is. It's quite another thing to be a "go to 12 years of intensive schooling and learn the staggering amount of knowledge about a field and THEN investigate researcher."

Two different types of research. The first one has a background that's very incomplete and leads to a lot of wrong directions.

I'm not trying to be cruel or snooty here, but having worked for a paleontologist (one of the great things is that I also had (brief) access to the books and papers and saw first-hand how they identify dinosaurs and populations) I know that what you learn from reading in a library just doesn't compare to everything you learn from 12 years of intense study at universities (to get a PhD) and doing field research with others.

In addition, the PhD has access to books and papers that the average person doesn't even know about or know how to find (even in this age of Internet.) They also have instant access to a group of others with similar knowledge... so that if they didn't know (for instance) about the pattern of tree ring growth during an event they can reach out to colleagues and have the answer (and a discussion and opinion) within a matter of hours via email.


Why have none weighed in? Or have we just missed it?


They have: en.wikipedia.org...

edit on 25-3-2020 by Byrd because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-3-2020 by Byrd because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2020 @ 06:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Byrd




so that if they didn't know (for instance) about the pattern of tree ring growth during an event they can reach out to colleagues and have the answer (and a discussion and opinion) within a matter of hours via email.

Their expertise also provides the ability to realize what might be important. To know what questions to ask.

edit on 3/25/2020 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2020 @ 06:07 PM
link   
Hi Byrd,
Thanks for your illuminating response.its much appreciated - Id love to know some of the stories from that Alaskan trip, sounds awesome. Tell us all some of the stories , then ??!?!

I understand your point about phd level stuff, and agree entirely , but strangely , that’s what drew me to the work of the Comet Research Group , 15 phds involved in the research, some serious minds Indeed.

I read the wiki link you posted, some new info which was very interesting , but some also where I’ve read counter refutations of many of those (valid) criticisms , it’s a total back and forth minefield !!! But a fascinating one.

Regarding the thread and the ‘A’ word being discussed I have a question , if I may, regarding Herodotus.
And please correct me if I’m wrong on any of this .
Is Herodotus dating of 25 years correct for the construction of the Great Pyramid? Is that the accepted timeframe ? Are there any written surviving AE records that give a different length of time for construction.
Is Herodotus the only source?
Do we believe him, but don’t believe Plato? a reply to: Byrd


edit on 25-3-2020 by bluesfreak because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2020 @ 07:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: bluesfreak
Hi Byrd,
Thanks for your illuminating response.its much appreciated - Id love to know some of the stories from that Alaskan trip, sounds awesome. Tell us all some of the stories , then ??!?!


Oh, I didn't go. I was just a lab worker who processed the fossil material once he brought the (tons, literally) stuff back to the lab.


I understand your point about phd level stuff, and agree entirely , but strangely , that’s what drew me to the work of the Comet Research Group , 15 phds involved in the research, some serious minds Indeed.

However...

They're astronomers. They know about rocks that hit the earth but they don't do the kind of dating a paleontologist does, they don't know about cultural things (when astronomers tried out a pet theory on Gobekli Tepi, they didn't know about the symbolism found in other digs and the culture itself and went really badly off the mark in their ideas.)

I have a very dear friend who's a PhD in astronomy and while he can do rings around me on geology and planetology, he's a hopeless mess with information science and computers.


I read the wiki link you posted, some new info which was very interesting , but some also where I’ve read counter refutations of many of those (valid) criticisms , it’s a total back and forth minefield !!! But a fascinating one.


It is.


Is Herodotus dating of 25 years correct for the construction of the Great Pyramid? Is that the accepted timeframe ?

It seems reasonable, yes. He's repeating what he was told, however, and the "news" was 4,000 years old by the time he heard it.


Are there any written surviving AE records that give a different length of time for construction.

No. We have the logbook of Merer, but that's just the record of one load.

There's actually no records of how long it took to build anything in ancient Egypt. Pharaohs would order things built or buildings and complexes repaired and expanded, but if they kept detailed construction records, they didn't preserve those... any more that we preserved the architectural notes or details of building of the Roman Colosseum, Windsor Castle, Lindenhof Castle, etc, etc.


Is Herodotus the only source?

Yes -- but no. There's all sorts of records there in the cemetery at Giza (things written in tombs, information from the digs of the workers' quarters and supervisors' quarters, etc, etc.)



Do we believe him, but don’t believe Plato? a reply to: Byrd


Sort of. He's unreliable... but he does record what they thought at the time when he lived. So the facts can be wrong but his statements about these untruths they believed are correct.



posted on Mar, 26 2020 @ 07:49 AM
link   

No. We have the logbook of Merer, but that's just the record of one load. There's actually no records of how long it took to build anything in ancient Egypt. Pharaohs would order things built or buildings and complexes repaired and expanded, but if they kept detailed construction records, they didn't preserve those... any more that we preserved the architectural notes or details of building of the Roman Colosseum, Windsor Castle, Lindenhof Castle, etc, etc.



Sort of. He's unreliable... but he does record what they thought at the time when he lived. So the facts can be wrong but his statements about these untruths they believed are correct.


Oh come on guys ....
so Byrd, this means you/mainstream archaeologists ascribe to the mathematics based on this said 25 years?
The “ one block every 5 mins for 24 hrs, for 25 years“ mathematics?
Surely not, please .

... thus proving that you ‘choose’ which evidence is ‘real’ or not ; the entire mainstream reasoning behind the GP construction is based around this ‘tale’ from Herodotus .
Can you see the lack of coherence here?

Have read Merer’s logs, was actually quite surprised at how many ‘stop overs ‘ they had, nights off awaiting a load , how it didn’t seem very ‘time sensitive’ to be honest.
I know it’s just a log, not a diary, no personal thoughts supposed to be in , just info and accounting for record keeping purposes , but it doesn’t seem to fit in with the ‘push’ required for the speed at which YOUR accepted 25 year calculations require?

We believe Herodotus and ignore ignore Plato , even though modern data shows many hits on his description- the fact that isostatic evidence at the Azores exists in the manner it does, should be enough to raise an eyebrow , yet Plato is handily tossed into the ‘Allegory’ bin, hard data related to it treated as “yeah, but it’s about Atlantis, so....we don’t have to worry”

I personally feel that the 25 years xBlocks every 5 mins ,24 hours a day for 25 years is just as dubious in fact more so, than academics believe Plato is.

If the hypocrisy here wasn’t so vast, it would nearly be funny. But it isn’t.

a reply to: Byrd



posted on Mar, 26 2020 @ 10:44 AM
link   
Mathematicians have calculated that to make the 3 Giza pyramids in the lifetimes of the Pharaohs they were supposedly made as tombs for would mean

1 block every 2 minutes for 80 years.

Did not happen.

The Pyramids were already there.



new topics

top topics



 
37
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join