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.

 

Bosnian Pyramid Update

page: 15
12
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by newtron25

You goofball!

Maybe thats what we'll start calling these things, the Bosnian Goofballs!



Mysterious carved stone balls found across Bosnia are similar to ones found in Costa Rica.

Those are some of the first things that came to my mind when I saw those Bosnian Goofballs.


They are granit and some of the balls have holes across their surface.

Fascinating.


Geologist Mile Vujačić believes that the Bosnian stone balls were produced naturally by water shaping the rock over a long period

?

Shaped like that? I don't know about that.


What's to stop the Bosnian Goofballs being left-over trebuchet ammo? Medieval engineers would carve rocks into spheres because they knew a sphere was more aerodynamically predictable (ie aimable) that any old lump of granite they picked up.


[edit on 18-6-2006 by HowlrunnerIV]




posted on Jun, 19 2006 @ 05:58 AM
link   
moon pyramid




posted on Jun, 19 2006 @ 06:05 AM
link   


A press conference held earlier today (Sunday) at the Bosnian Pyramid of the Moon puts “beyond doubt” the existence of a pyramid at the site, says the Archeological Park: Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun (APBPS).

The Pljesevica Hill was previously named the Bosnian Pyramid of the Moon by the APBPS Foundation. Experts from the Foundation have now revealed the discovery of a vertical wall that forms part of the Pyramid of The Moon.

Lamia el-Hadidi (Conservation Specialist, Egypt) assumes that the wall forms part of a tomb belonging to the pyramid. She pointed out that the wall is clearly manmade, comprising blocks that have been cut by man, refined and used to build this vertical wall.

Prof.Dr.Ric.Geol. Dario Andretta, chairman of the Humanitarian University for the Multidisciplinary International Culture (Rome), announced that this evidence puts beyond doubt the existence of a true pyramid at this site.


I'm sorry, but this is now descending into farce.

The discovery of a wall on the side of the hill "puts beyond doubt" that the hill is a pyramid?


"clearly manmade, comprising blocks that have been cut by man, refined and used to build this vertical wall" - this description would apply to by house as well. Whoo whoo.

Why exactly are they "assuming" that the wall forms part of a temple? Is it because they already assume that the hill is a pyramid? Most of hills in the UK have walls on them of some kind - should they all now be re-classified as man-made?

Also would can anyone tell me what this instituation is: "Humanitarian University for the Multidisciplinary International Culture". Is it one of those places where you can buy a Phd for $50?

And who is this fantastically qualified guy: "Prof.Dr.Ric.Geol. Dario Andretta"? I find no mention of him or his dodgy sounding university on the net apart from in relation to this subject. Is he another snake oil salesman like Osmanagic ?



posted on Jun, 19 2006 @ 06:27 AM
link   
These photos of partial stone walls are the first thing that indicates man was there.

I'm still not at all sure if that means the entire hill is a pyramid or if these walls are simply
entry ways to tombs or shelters within the mound.

At least now they do have good reason to continue the excavations to see what is there.



posted on Jun, 19 2006 @ 08:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Harte
So big whoop. Arrowheads/spearheads from the neolithic hunters that lived in Bosnia would be cooler to me.

Well, lets not be too discouraged by these things. Perhaps this is another problem with the pyramid claim, when it falls flat, everything else is a dissapointment. Those Bosnian Goofballs are damned neat. Why would someone make a sphere? What if they themselves are neolithic? They bring up some pretty interesting questions in and of themselves.


Eteric Rice
If a strong enough flood swept through the area and took down a couple of hills on the way, it could have covered the pyramid

Sounds reasonable. However, keep in mind, that a flood isn't required to have it covered, and that a flood would probably leave flood deposits.


Byrd & Hajduk & Vjoe
egyptian bosnians

Also, lets recall that, being a muslim region, that there very well could've been immigration of people from muslim egypt into muslim bosnia.
And, if I recall correctly, Bosnia has a lot of dervishes and sufis. Perhaps, considering the esoteric nature of those groups, and the connections of a long history of esoteric thought to egypt, that might explain and motivate a movement of people on a few occasions from egypt to bosnia.

Also, the Gypsies are sometimes said to have gotten that name because they, or at lost some groups of them, claimed to be, or were said by others to be, originally from eGYPt. So Roma in bosnia might be a relic egyptian population (or at least the source for the claim anyway).


on claim that Illyrians are actually Albanians

Consider that there are ethnic africans who live in london and speak the Queen's English. This does not make them Anglos. Similarly, Albanians may or may not speak a derivative of Illyrian, but thats seperate from if they are continuous with the Illyrians genetically.




Prof.Dr.Ric.Geol. Dario Andretta, chairman of the Humanitarian University for the Multidisciplinary International Culture (Rome), announced that this evidence puts beyond doubt the existence of a true pyramid at this site

That is poor reasoning on Dr. Andretta's part.


HowlrunnerIV
What's to stop the Bosnian Goofballs being left-over trebuchet ammo?

Thats a good call.
Seems a def. possibility. I wonder if the town was ever ensieged? Or if any armies from the region used the town as a base for a seige somewhere else.



FallenFromTheTree
These photos of partial stone walls are the first thing that indicates man was there.

Not quite. The hill is known to have been inhabited, and there are a few already known archaeological sites on the hill.



Either way, the stone balls and the wall are interesting.



posted on Jun, 19 2006 @ 09:22 AM
link   
Nygdan wrote

Not quite. The hill is known to have been inhabited, and there are a few already known archaeological sites on the hill.

no it is not truth , this hill moon pyramid was never inhabited , but sun pyramid was inhabited on the top of pyramid, it was a castle where bosnisn kings ruled Bosnia in medival times

and that photo of stone wall is from moon pyramid



posted on Jun, 19 2006 @ 09:40 AM
link   

18 June 2006

Latest discovery proves pyramid theory


Y'know, it actually doesn't. It just proves there's old buildings on the site -- which we already knew.


Lamia el-Hadidi (Conservation Specialist, Egypt) assumes that the wall forms part of a tomb belonging to the pyramid. She pointed out that the wall is clearly manmade, comprising blocks that have been cut by man, refined and used to build this vertical wall.


Except that they're not consistant with the OTHER blocks pointed out to be part of the "pyramid."



Andretta has also announced that more experts from across Italy will be coming to join Bosnians on the site to be part of largest current international archeological project.

It is said that the discovery of the entrance at the Bosnian Pyramid of the Moon proves beyond doubt that this is a true pyramid.


I have to ask -- what does he know about history and archaeology? There are many mines around (if you remember, the last time they announced a "tunnel into the pyramid", the experts came out and said "dude, it's an ancient mine. Not a tunnel into a pyramid." and that was announced and then hushed up.

They have a wall and what they say is a step and now they leapfrog to "It's an ENTRANCE and IT'S A TOMB FOR THE PYRAMID!"

That's unprofessional -- it's a step and a wall. At this point there's no further evidence about what they mean.



posted on Jun, 19 2006 @ 10:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke

And who is this fantastically qualified guy: "Prof.Dr.Ric.Geol. Dario Andretta"? I find no mention of him or his dodgy sounding university on the net apart from in relation to this subject. Is he another snake oil salesman like Osmanagic ?


I understand that he founded his own University, and then awarded himself the title 'professor'. Some of us are probably better qualified to speak on geological and archaeological matters than he is.


As for the 'stone balls' - geologist Paul Heinrich makes a good case for them being naturally occurring 'Megaspherulites' in this post on the Hall of Maat website. Anyone who believe otherwise had best brush up on their geology



I also see that Robert Schoch (of Sphinx erosion fame) is soon to visit the site. He's already said that he believes from what he's seen so far that it's a natural hill that may have been altered by humans. I wouldn't at all be surprised if that becomes the 'offical' Osmanagic line before too long as well - once he realises he can't hold back the overwhelming tide of geological evidence any longer (ie they didn't build a pyramid from scratch, rather they altered an existing hill to look more like a pyramid)



posted on Jun, 19 2006 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Crvenkapica
no it is not truth , this hill moon pyramid was never inhabited[..]and that photo of stone wall is from moon pyramid

ACK!

My error, apologies, I thought it was the same hill.



www.hallofmaat.com...,406316,406316#msg-406316
explain the formation of both spherulites and megaspherulites by the crystallization (devitrification) of vitreous (glassy) rhyolitic volcanic material, after it has been erupted as pyroclastic flows and while these deposits cooled to create
either vitrophyre or welded ash flow tuff

Thats interesting, at first I thought that they were talking about whats sometimes called volcanic 'bombs', which are lava that cools in the air and is rounded, but here
minsocam.org... (an abstract)

you can see that they are talking about it forming in situ.

Then again, the pics on that site show them clearly imbedded within the surrounding rock, which, to say the least, strongly argues against human manufacture.


I'm impressed. I thought that they were man-made myself, and I'm a pretty critical person. I've seen small perfectly rounded concretions, those just seemed too darned big to be them though! Seems to blow it out of the water there. If they want to say that they aren't natural then they at least need to cut them up, drill the, examine the composition, etc.



posted on Jun, 19 2006 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke
Also would can anyone tell me what this instituation is: "Humanitarian University for the Multidisciplinary International Culture". Is it one of those places where you can buy a Phd for $50?

And who is this fantastically qualified guy: "Prof.Dr.Ric.Geol. Dario Andretta"? I find no mention of him or his dodgy sounding university on the net apart from in relation to this subject. Is he another snake oil salesman like Osmanagic ?


Here you have the site of the university, you can see for yourself what kind of university it is, but only if you know Italian, the English version lacks almost everything.



Forgot to add that they have online a copy of the letter that Osmanagich sent to Dario Andretta.

[edit on 19/6/2006 by ArMaP]


Another edit just to add that
this document says that the university uses the ancient greek method of Masters and not professors, and that its courses are not recognised in Italy.

[edit on 19/6/2006 by ArMaP]



posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 04:10 PM
link   
bosnian sun pyramid




posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 04:51 PM
link   
That picture reminds me of what I have already said about the difference in vegetations on the hill.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I think that usually, people who are looking for buried things try to look for some type of plants that grow in particular conditions.

In this case, buy the pictures that had been published, the large stone "slabs" were found in one or more of the zones where the trees grow, and has been said in previous posts, some trees can grow in places with very little dirt over the rocks.

Some pines grow only over stony ground, in the places where these pines grow we can be sure that that place is a place with many large stones underground.

If the trees in the supposed pyramid are of this type, then the stone "slabs" should be found only in the places where the trees grow and not in the rest of the hill.

This is something that I have been thinking since the first time I saw the pictures from Google Earth, where the difference in the vegetation can be seen, but I never explained what I was thinking.



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 04:23 AM
link   
Well, after seeing that last Sun Pyramid pic, I've decided that no matter what anyone decides, that's a pyramid. Nothing naturally forms that shape, and I mean nothing. If anyone thinks so, I encourage them to provide visual evidence of any known naturally-formed structure that has that shape. Otherwise, I'll maintain that it's a pyramid.

TheBorg



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 08:05 AM
link   
What shape? A triangle?

A mound of dirt has that shape.

Also, notice, the visoko hill, it has a pyramid look to it, but not on all faces.



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 09:02 AM
link   
** sigh **

How often do we have to point this out - there are hundreds of pyramidal shaped hills around the world. Apologies to those who have seen these before:-

The Malvern Hills, England



Binnein Beag, Scottish Highlands



Schiehallion, Scottish Highlands



Pyramid peak, Antarctica



In the case of Visocia, I think the hill actually looks more pyramidal than it really is (as shown in relief maps) because of the trees growing on it. The trees help to smooth out the profile of the hill, making the slopes look much more even than they really are.

And in this picture, for example, Visocica doesn't look like a pyramid at all!



[edit on 21-6-2006 by Essan]

[edit on 21-6-2006 by Essan]



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 09:13 AM
link   
Essan, they are clearly all pyramids. Dont be silly and pretend otherwise.



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 09:50 AM
link   
The trebuchet/mangonel ammo idea is interesting, and might be pretty easily verifiable, as didnt these usually have some kind of indiciation carved on them as to their weight? I know the Romans did this. The idea of that type of shape is to give it a much better accuracy and range. Any force that would expend the time and energy to make a projectile of that type would be completely daft not to note its weight as that is a HUGE factor in determining exactly where it will land.



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 09:52 AM
link   
Crvenkapica:

Is it possible to provide the following:

1) Top down/aerial view of the sun pyramid with the compass overlayed - this would give more accuracy regarding its orientation.

2) A picture of the Sun pyramids south face.

Cheers

JS



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 09:58 AM
link   
Essen - you have quite obviously photoshopped all of those images. It is IMPOSSIBLE for nature to form pyramid shapes. You are a republican shill and disinfo agent! (oops, sorry thought I was in the 911 forum for a minute)

It is also impossible for nature to form anything into a sphere, as any of those fools who try to sail round the world will tell you after sailing off the edge into space.



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
That picture reminds me of what I have already said about the difference in vegetations on the hill.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I think that usually, people who are looking for buried things try to look for some type of plants that grow in particular conditions.


Sometimes, yes... but you do bring up a very good point about the vegetation. It does change as the soil changes. However, what I can't answer (and thus can't answer further is):

* did humans do any agricultural or forestry work on the top of that hill?
* where is the "tree line" (the highest point where trees can grow on the mountains in that region)?
* what vegetation is in the two areas?

If this was in West Texas (and it isn't), the vegetation on top would indicate that there's mostly rock underneath a very thin layer of soil. But... not being in Bosnia and not being familiar with the botany of the area, I can't say further than that.


In this case, buy the pictures that had been published, the large stone "slabs" were found in one or more of the zones where the trees grow, and has been said in previous posts, some trees can grow in places with very little dirt over the rocks.

...

If the trees in the supposed pyramid are of this type, then the stone "slabs" should be found only in the places where the trees grow and not in the rest of the hill.

This is something that I have been thinking since the first time I saw the pictures from Google Earth, where the difference in the vegetation can be seen, but I never explained what I was thinking.


Excellent points, really, but we'd need a geologic map and an idea of the botany of the area for more information. Given the process of soil formation (it tends to run downhill), I would expect the soil layers near the top to be thinner and the ones toward the bottom to be thicker... which sorta matches the vegetation pattern. Also, this should be a limestone based soil, which will restrict which plants can grow there.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join