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.

 

Awesome Ancient Geographic Geometry

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 12:23 PM
link   
The ancient ruins scattered across the globe are all basically in a straight line around the planet. I have known bits and pieces about the correlations of giza to Ankhor Wot to Nazca for some time but havent read anything like the site provided in the link below. It's fantastic to say the least.

I cant help but speculate what the implications of these findings could lead to. Perhaps pre-crustal shift and pre- flooding areas of civilzation lay undescovered along this line. I think that any " would be" explorers should start along this line - in the ocean , the jungles of the Amazon, the Saharra desert - what amazing finds are out there, along this line , waiting to be discovered ?

Click here for full explanations - please post your thoughts:

www.dudeman.net...



"
The Great Pyramid is aligned with Machu Picchu, the Nazca lines and Easter Island along a straight line around the center of the Earth, within a margin of error of less than one tenth of one degree of latitude. Other sites of ancient construction that are also within one tenth of one degree of this line include: Perseopolis, the capital city of ancient Persia; Mohenjo Daro, the ancient capital city of the Indus Valley; and the lost city of Petra. The Ancient Sumarian city of Ur and the temples at Angkor Wat are within one degree of latitude of this line. The alignment of these sites is easily observable on a globe of the Earth with a horizon ring. If you line up any two of these sites on the horizon ring, all of the sites will be right on the horizon ring. 3-D world atlas software programs can also draw this line around the Earth. Start on the Equator, at the mouth of the Amazon River, at 49° 17' West Longitude; go to 30° 18' North Latitude, 40° 43' East Longitude, in the Middle East, which is the maximum latitude the line touches; then go to the Equator at 130° 43' East Longitude, near the Northwest tip of New Guinea; then to 30° 18' South Latitude, 139° 17' West Longitude, in the South Pacific; and then back to 49° 17' West Longitude, at the Equator "

- Amazing




posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 02:34 PM
link   
Whats the deal - no comments ? Has this been covered - I mean geeze people - here is evidence that almost all of the enigmatic prehistory structures are aligned on the same latitude line ? How can this possibly be coincidence? I say no way. This screams of advanced knowledge - read the site that is linked. All of the coordiates are there for you to verify - Am I the only one that finds this amazing or what ?

I think I'll look into exploration along this lattitude line and see if what I find - geeze some input from ATS was expected whats up ?



posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 02:36 PM
link   
It was only 2 hours between your first post and second post. And its bollocks anyway, there is no straight line between the actual buildings.



posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 02:39 PM
link   
Besides, there are many, many ancient sites out there, so while I'm sure you could come up with dozens of lines like this, it doesn't really mean anything. Because of the great number of sites like the ones you mentioned, it really can be a coincidence.



posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 02:59 PM
link   
Too much math, I don't understand that at all. Sorry, but it looks like a good theory and interesting aswell, I just can't seem to break through the language in there.



posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 03:06 PM
link   
Excellent example of how to manipulate data to produce a predetermined false theorm tbh.

People produce patterns from all sorts of data where nothing unique exists, eg 'the bible code'



posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
It was only 2 hours between your first post and second post. And its bollocks anyway, there is no straight line between the actual buildings.


Put it as it is Nygdan, 'its bollocks anyway' maybe its the way you put it, but that is hilarious!!!


And if you want people to reply to threads, try not to post at that time!! I mean bloody hell, 6:20 where I am!!! Ive just gone to bed at that time.



posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 03:56 PM
link   
Hey, if nothing else, this website is a great read! The autor certainly seems to have done his homework and presented it in a colorful fashion.

But is it a bona fide discovery?? If I were a UFO believer anyway, I'd say yes. If I believed in Ley Lines (Ley Lines aren't necessarily straight) then I'd probably say yes.

How about a list of mystical sites that don't have a chance of falling into one of these lines?


BTW, I saved the entire page for later reading too.


[edit on 13-7-2005 by Toelint]



posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alias Jones
~snip~
here is evidence that almost all of the enigmatic prehistory structures are aligned on the same latitude line ?
~snip~
Am I the only one that finds this amazing or what ?


For the sake of being technically correct and/or picky, the "structure" latitude line isn't really a latitude line. The map pictured has been conveniently angled in order to cause the monuments in question to fall approximately on the same line.

Since only 11 sites are shown, and that data is probably fudged to quite a degree, it's my assumtion that this is mostly coincidence.

What it does show, however, is that monuments were being built within a reasonable distance of the equator. I assume this is because ancient human populations were more dense nearer to equatorial warm areas.

I bet that between some other appropriately angled map and the hundreds or perhaps thousands of similar such sites, one could find a similar "line" that passes thru many as well.

Amazing? Not yet, but certainly noteworthy and warranting of further investigation. I'd be real interested to hear what you find out in your investigations. Good find.



posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
It was only 2 hours between your first post and second post. And its bollocks anyway, there is no straight line between the actual buildings.


It it's short and brutal way that has got to be one of the most effective posts I've seen on this site. I'm still snickering to myself 10 minutes after reading it. Then again, I'm easily amused.



posted on Jul, 14 2005 @ 07:42 AM
link   
I never said it was a straight line - if you could read you'd have known this - the site states within 1/10th of 1 degree deviation for the monuments to fall with in. The map is not rotated out of line - in fact if you look at it you can easily see the land masses line up.

Those who feel that snide and rude comments are hilarious - I say please click the ignore me button and stay away from my posts and to all of you that would rather comment on others rude replies than comment on the topic at hand in an appropriate ATS way with some scientific forethought - I say to you as well stay away

This forum used to be good - I don't know what happened but it sure seems to me to be getting lame. If the topic isnt about terrorism or getting niuked - no one bothers to discuss it.



posted on Jul, 14 2005 @ 01:04 PM
link   
I think that the problem people are having with the information, AJ, is that its not really saying much. There's lots of big ancient sites out there, it should'n't come as a surprise that some of them line up. Heck, any two points can be connected with a line in the first place, so having a few more isn't really all that great.

Also, many of the things lined up here are cities. Cities are big, and most civilization, in the old world certainly, was going to be confined to that generalized region anyway, so some cities are going to have to be within a broad line.

Also, these cities, they're wildly seperated in time, and clearly unrelated. What theory explains why they are in line but other important cities, like the hittite capitals, or the greek and minoan capitals, aren't? Why should those cities have been planned out in a line?



posted on Jul, 14 2005 @ 02:30 PM
link   
Now that's better N- thanks for the civilized reply.

Ok - I hear what you are saying - there are alot of enigmatic ancient sites throughout the world, many of which are in equatorial areas of the planet . Prehistoric civilizations if you will , or whoever is responsible for erecting these monliths, for whatever reason all decided to build pyramids and obelisks even though they had no contact and inadvertantly developed the same ( more or less ) religious, astronomical and building styles. Coincindence I suppose is a possibility but one frankly I find extremely unlikley. The fact of the matter is we have a planet wide saturation of highly advanced, astronomical, behemeoth undertakings with very, very similair characteristics dotting remote regions of our planet at roughly the same time. Now before you all go off on the the time thing , I dont mean exactly the same time - suffice it to say at a time before mainstream science says we where capable of building such structures.

I propse the 10,000- 11,000 BCE timeframe for construction of many of these sites - and no I have no concrete proof - if I had I'd be in Vienna getting my prize.

Is it really that hard to believe that an advanced civilization exsisted on Earth, was travelled, highly advanced and skilled at building huge monuments ? A people destroyed by some as yet undescovered calamity ? I dare say I think it to be so. The amount of evidence , worldwide seeming to illustrate the accomplishments of a highly advanced people pervade every continent and undeniably lay submerged in seas the world over.

The flood myth is an accepted theme in almost every religion the world over , the evidence of advanced civilization remains. The mystery is far from solved , but I , for one, must come to the conclusion that there is much , much more to this story than you will find in our libraries and books. The edifices where designed and constructed to stand the test of time, and stand the test of time they have - they where built as a testament to their builders, long forgotten by our modern world, yet the proof of their exsistence is everywhere and yet we still deny them.

It is time for a fundamental shift in our undertsanding of the ancients , and thus a quantum change in the understanding of ourselves. We are the children of these once great people and the time has come for us to embrace our history as that of one far greater than we currently give ourselves the credit for.



posted on Jul, 14 2005 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alias Jones
I propse the 10,000- 11,000 BCE timeframe for construction of many of these sites - and no I have no concrete proof - if I had I'd be in Vienna getting my prize.

You have no proof, concrete or otherwise. How can you just "propose" a date range without telling us what you are basing it on? Why should I believe your theory over any other theory with no proof?



Is it really that hard to believe that an advanced civilization exsisted on Earth, was travelled, highly advanced and skilled at building huge monuments ?

What do you mean by "highly advanced"? If you mean a machine based culture then, yes I find that very hard to believe as there is no evidence for it. All these ancient sites you are talking about are mainly made blocks of carved stone. Not fibre glass, not polymers, not stainless steel or any other material that would take a machine based culture to produce.



A people destroyed by some as yet undescovered calamity ? I dare say I think it to be so. The amount of evidence , worldwide seeming to illustrate the accomplishments of a highly advanced people pervade every continent and undeniably lay submerged in seas the world over.

It's just pure speculation and wishful thinking though isn't it?



they where built as a testament to their builders, long forgotten by our modern world, yet the proof of their exsistence is everywhere and yet we still deny them.

Again, what evidence?

I'm not denying that "the ancients" where any less intelligent than us, they weren't. However there is simply no evidence for a past culture that was in any way the match for ours in terms of technology. They might have been wiser than us, they might have been happier, I don't know - but they did not have our technology.



posted on Jul, 14 2005 @ 05:13 PM
link   
Based on my belief and Biblical point of view of the world I can say there are similarities amongst ancient cultures.

In Genesis it talks about how man built the tower of Babel to reach the heavens. Some say it was used to build a spiritual portal for the fallen angels to come back into the world as they did in Genesis 6, which is why God had created the flood. The tower showed advanced spiritual understanding of our universe and this could have ultimately destroyed mankind. So God scattered the land and the people.

This scattering brought influence of the knowledge of the great flood to ancient cultures that were made from these people and the spiritual knowledge to build Ziggurats and pyramids shape structures that all show that there was a common beginning, this is why the sacrificing and pyramids go hand in hand with the knowledge of moving large stones. Some stones like the Jupiter temples in Lebanon weigh 1000 tonnes and more than what machines can do today-some say it was the help of the fallen angels and the offspring the giants or nephelin. If you look at the way the stones have been put together they seem to have the same workmanship as the South Americans.

Pyramids as such have been found in China, Middle East South America and probably more are being discovered. The same themes run throughout. They also had knowledge of the shape of the world, Pi and planets they say these cultures died out because of the sacrificing of humans. No wonder God did the right thing and the ones that lived had less knowledge of it all.

The more they discover the more the Bible makes sense, and a lot more is being discovered like ancient Biblical sites. A lot of Biblical evidence is hard to retain as its in the middle east Arab countries, and they would not be happy if you proved the Bible right, plus any evidence would have been destroyed if they found some like the library in Alexandria and the slabs on the pyramids on how they were built apparently.

Its up to you what to believe but this is my view on all this but many others have similar interpretations.



[edit on 14-7-2005 by The time lord]



posted on Jul, 14 2005 @ 05:30 PM
link   
Well, while many people claim that because there are ancient pyramids in Egypt, Southeast Asia, and Latin America that the cultures must have communicated or that they provide a link, this is not true. Triangles have been proven to show the strongest architectural structure. You can see this on many things, like the Eiffel Tower and many suspension bridges. So the triangle shape was just discovered by all of these cultures, not shared among them or metaphysically broadcast to them.



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 03:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fortimus
Well, while many people claim that because there are ancient pyramids in Egypt, Southeast Asia, and Latin America that the cultures must have communicated or that they provide a link, this is not true. Triangles have been proven to show the strongest architectural structure. You can see this on many things, like the Eiffel Tower and many suspension bridges. So the triangle shape was just discovered by all of these cultures, not shared among them or metaphysically broadcast to them.



So they all got this great idea to make a triangle just like that, at around the same time eh? That is a change of 0.00001% to happen if they didnt communicate one way or the other with eachother.. Because a triangle shape is proven to be strong doesnt mean a thing.. A "Pyramid" in a box shape would still be standing today including the chambers..



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 08:11 AM
link   
Hello Alias Jones and all,

bc] The problem here as that you've all skimmed over Jim Alison's work and you've all missed the point. Admittedly, the lineal [i.e., straight line] layout that connects the four globes in the illustration is deceiving, but if you take the time to mark your own globes at Easter Island, Nasca, Giza, etc [as suggested] .. you'd see that what you're looking at is an ancient equator with the northern pole positioned at ~60N :: 140W.

This line of globes is showing the equator that corresponds to Charles Hapgood's Alaskan pole position as defined in Hapgood's 1956 book [wherein Einstein wrote the forward], Earth's Shifting Crust.

bc
.



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 10:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by beforebc
Hello Alias Jones and all,

bc] The problem here as that you've all skimmed over Jim Alison's work and you've all missed the point. Admittedly, the lineal [i.e., straight line] layout that connects the four globes in the illustration is deceiving, but if you take the time to mark your own globes at Easter Island, Nasca, Giza, etc [as suggested] .. you'd see that what you're looking at is an ancient equator with the northern pole positioned at ~60N :: 140W.

This line of globes is showing the equator that corresponds to Charles Hapgood's Alaskan pole position as defined in Hapgood's 1956 book [wherein Einstein wrote the forward], Earth's Shifting Crust.

bc
.



Word to your mother!!!



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 11:24 PM
link   
i wish i had the means to see if the nazca lines themselves correlate with other ruins in this manner



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join