10,000 Year Old Pyramid Discovered in Bosnia, page 9
Pages: <<  6    7    8    9    10    11    12  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 4 times


reply posted on 27-4-2006 @ 07:35 PM by Harte
Originally posted by Jah Il
Despite it all, I think everyone here has to be able to admit that the rather long list of pyramids, no matter what their composition or location....is beginning to get long. i find that unusual.


Most (known) pyramids were built at such varying dates from ones in other lands that there can be little doubt that they are unrelated.

The truth is, the "pyramids" of South America are only called "pyramids" because when they were discovered, Egyptian pyramids were the only comparable structures. The South American "pyramids" are completely different than the Egyptian ones. If you call what we find in Egypt pyramids, then what we find in South America are not pyramids.

Originally posted by Jah IlI think its about time the scientific community gets all access to that ground penetrating radar, in order to ascertain how many pyramids there are.

I understand that even India and Japan have their own as well.


My understanding is that archaeologists use GPR all the time. It's not exactly all that dependable, unless you're looking for voids, and even then it's usually only right about half the time.
Also, what pyramids in Japan and India? I hope you're not referring to the Yonaguni "monument," a natural formation off the coast of Yonaguni-Jima.

Originally posted by Jah IlWhy a Pyramid? What are the possible reasonings of this structures?

Pyramids are the simplest stable structures that can be built. That's why pyramids.

Harte


reply posted on 27-4-2006 @ 08:46 PM by maus
Originally posted by Essan

No, we're dealing with a megalomanic destroying the archaeological remains of a medieval fortress and town.



btw he's doing so illegally - the Bosnian Minister for Culture has revoked all licences issued to him to dig. Not that that will bother nor stop Osmanagic.

Those who still think there's a pyramid in Bosnia are advised not to read this



1) did u know that a rich amateur (non archeologist) discovered the so called TROY ? Schlimann (spelling)
2) did u know that this amateur pretty much devasted TROY to find the treasure ? (because Troy is actually 8-12 cities one above the other for the centuries of existence)
galen-frysinger.com...

3) today History, Archeologists and you too maybe, thank that amateur who destroyed a lot but gave to the history much more than his rude way to dig.


A) does the BOSNIAN MINISTER OF CULTURE wake up ONLY NOW ? they probably want to send home Osgman(etcetc) and pass this to some ass sitting on a chair in some offices, and get all the AWARDS for the finding

====================

*FIRST U GIVE ALL LICENSES TO HIM* cos u think it's impossible to find a pyramid in bosnia
*THEN WHEN THERE IS EVIDENCE* oh sorry no more licenses, you are an amateur!
(smart!)

====================



imho your petition is very suspicious, like you have something to earn from it.
(like someone said, serbian or croatian, or be at the side of who wants to take all the merits)


cheers


the skepticals should start thanking god he's digging, instead of just posting news on a website, we want the truth, and we want digging, investigations.

if bosnian minister of culture revoced the license or what u call it, why on earth they ever allowed him to start anything, why dont they arrest or stop him, he's doing that in bosnia, it's clear that neither they want to stop him.
IF THAT HAPPENS IN ANY OTHER STATE, THE STATE, POLICE ETC STOP EVERYTHING THE DAY AFTER, OR ELSE your infos are lies, or else the minister of cultures wants the american-bosnian to keep digging, OR SEND HIM OUT OF BOSNIA, MR INDIANA JONES, AND PUT POLICE TO WATCH THE SITE in wich world do you live ? oh right in the world of online petitions !

petitions online, lmao




[edit on 27-4-2006 by maus]

[edit on 27-4-2006 by maus]


reply posted on 28-4-2006 @ 05:01 AM by maus
Originally posted by maus
Originally posted by Harte
Also, what pyramids in Japan and India? I hope you're not referring to the Yonaguni "monument," a natural formation off the coast of Yonaguni-Jima.
Harte


actually the university of ryukyus who studied it didn't say it's natural (unless we want to believe at all costs even paying with life that it's natural and no matter what)
and if you see these pics if you say that is natural i start believing in ET

images.google.it...
www.morien-institute.org...



New Question, is it 'soooo natural' because it looks so damn casual, random, natural perhaphs, or because seems impossible that a man built that in the deep pacific ?

if it's the second as i suspect, here's some 'reliable sources'

www.aims.gov.au...
(Australian Institute of Marine Sciences)

if we think we, as human race, discovered all, or know all about our past, we confirm our arrogance, and prove that we are so 'sure' like we were 100 years ago (the big members of world archeologist/sciences societies, that laughed at you if you said ' we can fly ' ) - sorry for my english -

[edit on 28-4-2006 by maus]


reply posted on 28-4-2006 @ 06:50 AM by AGENT_T
Robert Bauval first propounded the theory that the pyramids of Giza mirrored the formation of the stars comprising Orion's belt in his book "The Orion Mystery". Graham Hancock extrapolated this theory to include Ankor Wat in Cambodia, regarding it's alignment with the constellation Draco, in his book "Heaven's Mirror". Using astonomical software, they searched for when in history these ancient buildings would have aligned with their mirrored constellations. The date was about 10,500BC.

Geologist Dr. Robert Schoch, in conjuction with John Anthony West, concluded that the weathering on the Sphinx indicated that it's carving was possibly dated to between 12,000 and 10,000BC.

This would suggest that these wonders of the ancient world were contemporaneous. The overall theory is that whatever civilisations were responsible for their construction, were subject to some cataclysm, most probably a flood, that left many of these monuments below sea level today.

There are ruins off the coast of Yonaguni island, near Japan, that look man-made. There are ruins under the sea in the Gulf of Cambay that look man-made. Which all lends credence to the possibility of ancient civilisations thriving 12 to 15 thousand years ago.

The Sanskrit Vedas, specifically the Mahabrahata and the Ramayana, substantially older than many ancient texts surviving today, speak of apocalyptic wars between the Rama and Asvin empires. The Rama empire consisted of Northern India and Pakistan and Asvin was.....Atlantis. These wars were fought with 'Virmanas', (literal translation 'flying machines') and what can only be described as ICBMs.

Interestingly, if the Sphinx is meant to be a lion, then that would tie in with it's facing the constellation of Leo as it rose in the east on the Spring Equinox. And the last time that happened was....10,500BC.

So, a cataclysm engulfed the world roughly 12,000 years ago and, according to Plato's account of Atlantis, the Egyptians learned much from the survivors of that cataclysm, including perhaps, the religion and myths of Atlantis. Could not these beliefs be the basis for 'messianic' religions today?




apologies for the long quote. i copied this for my own interest around christmas/new year and aftter numerous xp crashes lost this and sooo many other links it,s just sad

but anyway thought it would be of interest to this discussion as the are saying this is the oldest pyramid. to me it would seem there was a heck of a lot of construction going on at that time..

maybe a granite block sale on at pyramids-r-us???


reply posted on 28-4-2006 @ 08:43 AM by theTRUTHtheWAY
Originally posted by maus
Originally posted by Essan

No, we're dealing with a megalomanic destroying the archaeological remains of a medieval fortress and town.



btw he's doing so illegally - the Bosnian Minister for Culture has revoked all licences issued to him to dig. Not that that will bother nor stop Osmanagic.

Those who still think there's a pyramid in Bosnia are advised not to read this



1) did u know that a rich amateur (non archeologist) discovered the so called TROY ? Schlimann (spelling)
2) did u know that this amateur pretty much devasted TROY to find the treasure ? (because Troy is actually 8-12 cities one above the other for the centuries of existence)
galen-frysinger.com...

3) today History, Archeologists and you too maybe, thank that amateur who destroyed a lot but gave to the history much more than his rude way to dig.


A) does the BOSNIAN MINISTER OF CULTURE wake up ONLY NOW ? they probably want to send home Osgman(etcetc) and pass this to some ass sitting on a chair in some offices, and get all the AWARDS for the finding

====================

*FIRST U GIVE ALL LICENSES TO HIM* cos u think it's impossible to find a pyramid in bosnia
*THEN WHEN THERE IS EVIDENCE* oh sorry no more licenses, you are an amateur!
(smart!)

====================



imho your petition is very suspicious, like you have something to earn from it.
(like someone said, serbian or croatian, or be at the side of who wants to take all the merits)


cheers


the skepticals should start thanking god he's digging, instead of just posting news on a website, we want the truth, and we want digging, investigations.

if bosnian minister of culture revoced the license or what u call it, why on earth they ever allowed him to start anything, why dont they arrest or stop him, he's doing that in bosnia, it's clear that neither they want to stop him.
IF THAT HAPPENS IN ANY OTHER STATE, THE STATE, POLICE ETC STOP EVERYTHING THE DAY AFTER, OR ELSE your infos are lies, or else the minister of cultures wants the american-bosnian to keep digging, OR SEND HIM OUT OF BOSNIA, MR INDIANA JONES, AND PUT POLICE TO WATCH THE SITE in wich world do you live ? oh right in the world of online petitions !

petitions online, lmao




[edit on 27-4-2006 by maus]

[edit on 27-4-2006 by maus]


hey maus i totally agree with you.
The petition is a bunch of non-sense that completly has no relation to the excavation of the pyramid. More so the patition is bunch of political bull$%#& probably written by the serbs or croats to hinder the excavation process.
And whoever brought up the link to that petition has no clue of the ongoings in the Balkans and the relations that it has to the excavation.
Bunch of political garbage thats all.
Like you I just want to see the results this excavation will bring forth. And since the the pyramid is located on Bosnian soil its people should have to full right to do whatver they want to it as long as it doesnt hinder the results we all are waiting for.


reply posted on 28-4-2006 @ 01:52 PM by Harte
Originally posted by maus
actually the university of ryukyus who studied it didn't say it's natural (unless we want to believe at all costs even paying with life that it's natural and no matter what)
and if you see these pics if you say that is natural i start believing in ET
New Question, is it 'soooo natural' because it looks so damn casual, random, natural perhaphs, or because seems impossible that a man built that in the deep pacific ?

If you want to know why this natural formation should not be referred to as a "pyramid," or even a "structure" (which implies it was man-made,) I suggest you read my post in the Yonaguni thread it is here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Regarding the link you posted to the pics, I suggest you take a look at the "Giant's Causeway" in Ireland. It's basalt columns are far more regular than anything on the Yonaguni formation, and it's certainly natural. Also, your photo source, the Morien Institute, provides every reason needed to understand why this formation is natural. You have but to read it. There's a link to them in the post I made in the Yonaguni thread.

Lastly, even if the Yonaguni formation was built by your grandfather, calling it a "pyramid" and lumping it in with all the other "pyramids" in the world is just flat out wrong. The Yonaguni monument is not in the least shaped at all like a pyramid, not even close. You can see the overall form at the Morien Institute website. It's not even regularly shaped. Completely amorphous.

Harte



reply posted on 28-4-2006 @ 02:26 PM by Harte
Originally posted by Shane
I am sure Byrd will correct this, but I was lead to believe, the VAST AND OVERWELMING number of Pyramids had a flat surface on the top, and this was where, as in the case with the Mexican and South America structures, the bloodletting and human sacrafice to those they worshiped, took place.

The Pyramid represented mans ability to have communion with these lesser gods and dieties.

Remember, God, and the ones claiming to be gods were always associated with being seated upon a mountian.

But I do not think they ARE UNRELATED, this being the reason.

Shane


Shane,

Well, yes, if you mean they are related inasmuch as they are objects of religious significance, then of course they are related. There are a million other ways they are "related," if you want to go to the extreme. For example, they are all man-made. They are all made of rock. They are all above ground. They are all located on this planet. Etc.

And while the Mesoamerican Gods may have been represented as seated on mountains, the Egtptian pyramid represents the ulitimate mastaba, or mound. These mastabas were used as early tombs, stacking mastabas will give you a stepped pyramid similar to the oldest pyramid in Egypt (Saqquara - unless I mispell). The mound represented by the mastaba represents the creation of the world, a "mound" rising up out of the sea, forming a place for life to exist. The Egyptian creation myth.

My point was that the existence of the South American "pyramids" is not dependant on the existence of the Egyptian ones. In other words, they were constructed completely independantly of each other, in two far separated epochs of time, by two completely different cultures, to be used for completely different reasons. They are only superficially similar, which similarity can be explained by the "basicness" of the shape itself, and the ease with which it can be built.

Consider this, neither culture had conceptualized the keystone arch as a load bearing structure. In South America, they did have an arch of sorts, consisting of stair-stepped stones leading up from each side of a support column. The Egyptians didn't even have this. How much different would these structures appear (from each other) if a keystone archway principle had been discovered by either of these two cultures (but not by both)?

Harte


reply posted on 28-4-2006 @ 06:05 PM by denythestatusquo
Originally posted by Harte
Most (known) pyramids were built at such varying dates from ones in other lands that there can be little doubt that they are unrelated.

The truth is, the "pyramids" of South America are only called "pyramids" because when they were discovered, Egyptian pyramids were the only comparable structures. The South American "pyramids" are completely different than the Egyptian ones. If you call what we find in Egypt pyramids, then what we find in South America are not pyramids.

My understanding is that archaeologists use GPR all the time. It's not exactly all that dependable, unless you're looking for voids, and even then it's usually only right about half the time.
Also, what pyramids in Japan and India? I hope you're not referring to the Yonaguni "monument," a natural formation off the coast of Yonaguni-Jima.

Originally posted by Jah IlWhy a Pyramid? What are the possible reasonings of this structures?

Pyramids are the simplest stable structures that can be built. That's why pyramids.

Harte


You make a lot of strong statements with little proof or even a logical argument to back them up... sounds like science speak to me.

I'm willing to bet that if I show 100 monkeys pictures of pyramids in central and south America that they will agree they are similar to such structures in Egypt and other countries too.

Yonaguni is natural????

Show where else this natural phenomena occurs? I for one would love to see it. Furthermore they have just began to study it and it is bigger than you realize.

In regards pyramids being the simplest stable structures I disagree with this immensely since a stone pyramid is actually more difficult to build than a box of the same size it appears. Look at the cuts in the stone as an example and the angles and mathematics involved.


reply posted on 28-4-2006 @ 08:36 PM by Nygdan
Originally posted by denythestatusquo
You make a lot of strong statements with little proof or even a logical argument to back them up... sounds like science speak to me.

Harte simply noted that if you have primitive building techniques, and want to build a tall thing, then it needs a wide and strong base to support it, hence, the pyramid shape, which is a Mound.


I'm willing to bet that if I show 100 monkeys pictures of pyramids in central and south America that they will agree they are similar to such structures in Egypt and other countries too.

And if you show them ziggurats they'd say that they look similar, and if you showed them a pile of sand poured out of a jar, they'd think it looks similar too.

Its a mound, a mountain.

Furthermore they have just began to study [Yonaguni] and it is bigger than you realize.

They have yet to show that the thing is man made. It looks like weathered rocks. Rocks can, despite what people think, weather with sharp angles.

In regards pyramids being the simplest stable structures I disagree with this immensely since a stone pyramid is actually more difficult to build than a box of the same size it appears. Look at the cuts in the stone as an example and the angles and mathematics involved.

The blocks that make up the pyramid are simple square blocks, they aren't angled. And building a pyramid is the simplest, because it the lightest on top. Building a square, it'd be so heavy, it'd crack and fall in on itself. Thats why all tall buildings from those times are mound shaped.


reply posted on 28-4-2006 @ 09:12 PM by denythestatusquo
Originally posted by Nygdan
Originally posted by denythestatusquo
You make a lot of strong statements with little proof or even a logical argument to back them up... sounds like science speak to me.

Harte simply noted that if you have primitive building techniques, and want to build a tall thing, then it needs a wide and strong base to support it, hence, the pyramid shape, which is a Mound.


I'm willing to bet that if I show 100 monkeys pictures of pyramids in central and south America that they will agree they are similar to such structures in Egypt and other countries too.

And if you show them ziggurats they'd say that they look similar, and if you showed them a pile of sand poured out of a jar, they'd think it looks similar too.

Its a mound, a mountain.

Furthermore they have just began to study [Yonaguni] and it is bigger than you realize.

They have yet to show that the thing is man made. It looks like weathered rocks. Rocks can, despite what people think, weather with sharp angles.

In regards pyramids being the simplest stable structures I disagree with this immensely since a stone pyramid is actually more difficult to build than a box of the same size it appears. Look at the cuts in the stone as an example and the angles and mathematics involved.

The blocks that make up the pyramid are simple square blocks, they aren't angled. And building a pyramid is the simplest, because it the lightest on top. Building a square, it'd be so heavy, it'd crack and fall in on itself. Thats why all tall buildings from those times are mound shaped.


Your first point about ancient buildings having to be pyramids: what about angkor wat then?

Your second point that a ziggurat is the same as a pyramid: I doubt this because one structure is angular and the other round.

Your third point about Yonaguni is absurd since amateurs found it and nobody has applied a sufficient effort to study the ruins within the academic community besides those wishing to seriously debunk it. Furthermore where are other natural formations like this since that was the argument made in this thread?

Lastly, the blocks in a pyramid are complex cuts and I can't see why you believe otherwise??? This requires a great deal of mathematical knowledge and precision in shaping the materials which is greater than making blocks. In fact some very old structures have used arches and columns with massive blocks for foundations such as at Baalbek in Lebanon. This site has been built upon by several ancient cultures and its exact age is unknown and may well predate Egypt.


reply posted on 29-4-2006 @ 01:09 AM by maus
hi denythestatusquo i agree with u on yona, for the others :

i have another question ( staying at the part of sciences more than imagination )

see these 2 pics
www.morien-institute.org...
www.morien-institute.org...


it's clear that water CAN'T do these long (walk? paths) at 90° (they should be smooth! only a laser or manmade work can do that defenetly not water, wind may flat more i guess as the top of certain mountains, but also there we'd have some erotion? smooth) and for meters the same, also the stairs, 90° each anglese, admitting that nature could have draw that, HOW MANY ARE THE MATEMATICS CHANCES that a 90° degrees angle is repeated in a structure (yona site) x10 x100 x1000 ? i guess mathematics, sciences and statistics will tell u 0.00000%

if anyone knows other 'natural' things like this (and i dont wanna see random figures with random angles, and if u show me a 90° nature object i wanna see it repeated)

thanks



i still think the world sciences refuses to think that someone (just old tribes not aliens) has built that when the sea level was lower than today)
[we saw this happen a lot in centuries, even the church] ( a big % of possibility based on past facts and history )

i find that more acceptable than 'just natural' ( 1 chance in a million of chances )


btw back to bosnia, i have only a doubt, and we'd need a 'geologist' to tell me if the semi-flat rocks under the dirt is a natural thing or not (i just ask i have no idea, not geologist yet )


we shall not think to our pre -history age after the last glaciation? 12k>6k about ufos, invasion etc, but maybe the farmers and hunters we imagine had more skills than we can understand (not that they had lasers or alien technology) but the problem is that or 1) ruins are too old and hiding to find 2) a lot has been destroyed by time, so we dont h ave much that we can prove, and what we can find is megalitic stuff (all over the world)

can we see this period of the human race under another view (a bit higher than what we think)



[edit on 29-4-2006 by maus]
Pages: <<  6    7    8    9    10    11    12  >>    ^^TOP^^



Ancient Aliens & The Riddle of the Missouri Mystery Mound
  Posted 17 days ago with 75 member flags
Amazing, X-Ray probe of Antikythera Mechanism (Video)
  Posted 15 days ago with 58 member flags
Eye of Horus is actually an early math system?
  Posted 13 days ago with 45 member flags
Pi, Golden Ratio and Speed of Light encoded into Great Pyramid
  Posted 6 days ago with 32 member flags
A Tribute to Native Americans
  Posted 18 days ago with 30 member flags
Why is the Ancient Alien Theory difficult to accept?
  Posted 11 days ago with 26 member flags
Unknown ancient language found on unearthed Assyrian tablets
  Posted 15 days ago with 21 member flags
"The Venus Blueprint"
  Posted 9 days ago with 14 member flags