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: 19
12
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd



on moon pyramid, something




Y'know what it looks like -- it looks like some of the bath/steam rooms in old Roman houses. That deep "pool" on the floor is kind of a giveaway, I think. But I'd defer to others since in making this guess I'm simply going on some material I've seen on Discovery and the Travel Channel -- and not on having taken courses in it.


My first reaction was that it was a well. Either filled in on purpose or over time, but im no expert.




posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd

Not like that, no. The manpower needed is immense and only a largeish civilization (coordinated by rulers) could hae done this. There are megaliths and mounds (and huge mounds here in America built by AmerInds.) There are pyramids of dirt faced with stone where the Chinese built a tomb and then piled a (literally) mountain of dirt over it and paved that with stone to discourage robbers an desecrators (worked well, I should add.)

It requires a lot of labor, a lot of resources, a settled population area capable of supporting tens of thousands of people in a small area, and a decent level of stoneworking.


Thanks for missing me! I had an ISP Change, which did not "Overlap" as expected, and left me "Scrambling" to use Wireless Pirating. But that's over.

So, The Chinese eh.

You are a wealth of Info my friend. I know you saw another Topic I posted that spoke of Wu Hu (Five Hu) from which Genghis, Kublia, and Attilia decended, and who's ultimate decendant was Hu, "Son of Heaven".

Some review of this in general, may result in expressing what I am suggesting a bit easier.

freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com...
en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...:Huns_empire.png
en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...:Mongol_Empireaccuratefinal.png

These "Chinese" Burials? Where would these Type of Burials be Located? Within the "Khan" or "Hun" lands?

I am wondering if the Hu where involved. If so, the Cultures of Construction may have resulted in just such formations and could point to these "People" with their unique heritage being the builders? These where Great and Lessor and Great Cultures several times over.

The Finds in Bosnia would be well within the Range of the Hu, which did live and come from this General Region. They held Power from the Dawn of Time. There is no reason to suggest, it could not have occured elsewhere in their History.

Just speculating!

Ciao

Shane



posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 08:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harte
Leaving out agricultural purposes, the only other such "transformation" of topography would be various types of fortifications, as far as I'm aware.

But anytime you want to lump me in with the esteemed Byrd, I'm glad to read it!
Harte


Yes, I had thought of that but I was under the impression this may have not been "AS Grand" if you take my meaning. A Fortress upon a Pinnicle, or Mountain Top certainly, but I did not consider it being the Whole Mountian previously. I guess anything is plausible though.

When I think of a Fortress, or Secured Spot, I think of Masada, or a Outpost like this. Limited and Restrictive Access. David had a Fortress in Meggido as well, that was good for this, due to the Tunnels and Water Access they had access to within the Fortress, but was difficult for the armies assaulting them to gain a stronghold. They could not support the Seige and feed and water the army, outside of the Fort.

And at no time, have I ever suggested you are simply blowing hot air, and spewing crap. You are a very good researcher and have studied many topics very well. Your conclusions make me shake my head most times (And I guess this could be reversed), but the info is generally useful and should be reviewed inorder to ensure other aspects are considered, when discussing a topic.

You do lack the people skills Byrd has, but the Info is always good.


But I am happy to lump you with Byrd as being a source of Information.

Ciao

Shane



posted on Jul, 1 2006 @ 06:02 AM
link   
Well put Shane, and I'd like to second that notion. You two make it easy for us to ask questions becasue you have the resources that some of us lack, or the searching skills to do that anyway. Thanks for being here.

Back on topic: Anybody think that the entire hill could have been engineered as a fortress by the Romans during thier occupation, and it just got covered up over time?

TheBorg



posted on Jul, 1 2006 @ 07:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheBorg
Back on topic: Anybody think that the entire hill could have been engineered as a fortress by the Romans during thier occupation, and it just got covered up over time?


I think that the Romans did not use that type of fortress.

They usually built forts for protecting the cities, with the fort just outside of the city, and they did built cities on top of hills, at least here in Portugal.



posted on Jul, 2 2006 @ 02:49 AM
link   
Well then could they have witnessed a new form of defending a base, and incorporated it into their building in that area? I mean the Romans were notorious for stealing, erm assimilating, anything that worked. This could have just been one more of those things that was assimilated for a short period of time early in the occupation, and over time, they needed it less and less, until such a time that they just abandoned it altogether.

Sorry for all of the speculating here, but it's quite interesting that the Romans used what appears to be an old fortification for defensive purposes. If it's true that this site wasn't made by the Romans, then the natural thought of an ancient civilization comes to mind as having been the ones that did build it. I'm just rifling through possibilities, as there seems to be a lack of serious thoughts by any of the researchers there. Maybe I'm just impatient. No, I take that back, I AM impatient, but it's because they should have some information as to what/who/when this site was made for/by. I just wish there was more info on it. Oh well, guess I'll have to wait.

TheBorg



posted on Jul, 2 2006 @ 03:30 AM
link   
As far as I'm concerned the most important
information at this site will be the age of the oldest artifacts found.

Could this be a crude early pyramid, a fortress or a burial mound?

Is there any possibility that the caverns below can give us a clearer indication
of what went on back when it was in use?



posted on Jul, 2 2006 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheBorg
Well put Shane, and I'd like to second that notion. You two make it easy for us to ask questions becasue you have the resources that some of us lack, or the searching skills to do that anyway. Thanks for being here.

Back on topic: Anybody think that the entire hill could have been engineered as a fortress by the Romans during thier occupation, and it just got covered up over time?

TheBorg


I appreciate it, Borg and Shane. I would agree that I don't have the temperament of Byrd, a subject about which I have U2U'd Byrd, asking how she can put up with all the craziness around here without occasionally lashing out.


Regarding the Bosnian hill as fortification, it does not look like it to me. I only mentioned forts as one of the reasons that hills, or other topography, are altered by humans. I was specifically thinking of Masada, Shane, when I made the comment. Anyway, I'm no expert, but you asked for examples of reasons that topographical features become altered by humans (other than agriculture), and forts are the only things that came to mind. The hill in Bosnia is (I believe) too large to be explained this way, though I'm sure that only a small part of the hill has been archaeologically explored. If the entire hill has been covered, as the "alternate historian" suggests and claims, then there's no way it's some kind of fort. On the other hand, I don't believe they've uncovered enough yet to rule out a road system leading to the top. Such a road would likely require switchbacks, unless it spiraled around the hill, and switchbacks utilized in stone paved roads would result in some of the look that we are getting in these pics.

By the way, I suggested this stuff might be the remains of a road a good ways back in this (or maybe the other) thread.

Harte



posted on Jul, 2 2006 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harte
I appreciate it, Borg and Shane. I would agree that I don't have the temperament of Byrd, a subject about which I have U2U'd Byrd, asking how she can put up with all the craziness around here without occasionally lashing out.

Nice to see this is therapy, of sorts!

Where can we send the Bill?



I was specifically thinking of Masada, Shane, when I made the comment.
Anyway, I'm no expert,......

But you did answer, with relative information. Information that should be at least considered.

I did note somewhere, in one of Sam's comments, that they had done many Mini excavations or coring of this entire hill, and that this was why he considered the Pyramid aspect of the discovery. Apparently, those slanted "walls' carry to the top, under much the same sort of 'covering'.

I expect this means those angles seen, would continue upwards to the peak/top.


Such a road would likely require switchbacks, unless it spiraled around the hill, and switchbacks utilized in stone paved roads would result in some of the look that we are getting in these pics.
By the way, I suggested this stuff might be the remains of a road a good ways
back in this (or maybe the other) thread. Harte

I think "a good ways back" some of the Photos submitted here, did have that sort of feature, to suggest it maybe a pathway or road.

But I believe we are going to be seeing two, three, four or more completely different sort of finds under these Hills, which will overlap and be found within the Site.

My personal view is the "Pathway/Road" is one, The Angled Walls are another and those Sphere are another. We may find many things in the "Midsts" of these three associated Pyramds, (if this is what they will be) that none are looking currently.

I think this is the exciting part of this. No one knows what to expect, outside of the Original (There's something under that hill) Presumption anyhow.

And to Anyone????????

Has anything else been putforth about those Spheres/Balls, or is "That Aspect" currently being reviewed, pending a response now?

Also, what are the expectations of the "Season" this site can be worked on in Bosnia. At what point will the Winter, interfere with the site? I would think at some point, concern to Protect these uncovered digs would need to occur, to ensure they are still there, in the same condition, next season.

Just wondering.

It is exciting seeing this progress. Discovery.

Ciao

Shane



posted on Jul, 2 2006 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by TheBorg
Back on topic: Anybody think that the entire hill could have been engineered as a fortress by the Romans during thier occupation, and it just got covered up over time?


I think that the Romans did not use that type of fortress.

They usually built forts for protecting the cities, with the fort just outside of the city, and they did built cities on top of hills, at least here in Portugal.


Have to agree with this since most known remote Roman centers were in fact walled cities or fortresses. Also the roman penchant for plumbing and facilities like stadia and centra squares and entertainment would not lead to this style of building or technology I believe.

There is many parallels though with what we have seen in the america's especially central and south America if you ask me.



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 06:20 AM
link   


www.bosnianpyramid.com...
2 Jul 2006

Pyramid ridge revealed


The Foundation currently responsible for exploring the Bosnian Valley of Pyramids at Vosici?, which is believed to be home to a number of ancient pyramids, says it has further proof that the largest site, named the Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun, is a true pyramid. The Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun Foundation has found what it believes to be the line that joins the North and East sides of the pyramid - see images, below. So far the Foundation has uncovered about 6 m of the ridge that it says forms the 'join' between the two faces of the pyramid.





why do they always show a small portion of the finds? Why didn't they excavate 50m of this ridge(which could be done in less than a day) and then take photos of it.
They uncovered this 3 meter part of the ridge (30mins of work), didn't even uncover the stones - all we see is dirt - and published the pics of it.
Now we won't see any progress on this ridge part for weeks(i presume). Why didn't they uncover at least 50m of it and cleared the dirt off the stones? In 2 days since this discovery, they could've cleared at least 100m.
Clearly the ridge is the most important thing to prove the pyramid is there so why aren't they working on it?



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 06:22 AM
link   
Ya I saw this too on the site.
I didnt put it here because it just looks like a mound of dirt.
There is nothing to its definition. Im sure there is perhaps something
there but they could of at least cleaned it.



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 08:30 AM
link   
They're not showing you all everything, because ordinarily archaeology, or any science research for that matter, is not published in real time.

Everyone is frothing at the mouth here, the guys there with shovels know this and all they can do is appease everyone with photos to keep people interested.

If the people like I read on this thread are like the rest of the world who is watching this happen, then they are dying to tell these guys how best to dig, where to dig, what part of the pyramid to uncover next....

Do you think if you were in their position you would get a little tired of people pushing you around? No matter how controversial this endeavor seems to everyone?

You can't be serious when you say "They should have shown us more. Why didn't they expose more of the structure to prove its a pyramid."

I think the arm-chair archaeologists that weigh in on this thread don't have a clue as to the entirety of the effort involved (and I'm going to say right now that I don't have a clue either) in such a huge research effort - both in physical scale and in the impact it might have on science.

Give them a bloody break already. They've been screaming for help, money and at least enough credibility to offer enough evidence one way or the other as to if this is a "pyramid" or not.

Keep in mind, Osmanagich (sp?) has even altered his view as to what this might be since he started.

Science is like that. You get what you find, not what you think you might find.



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 09:21 AM
link   
Maybe is they finished excavating one location, instead of showing a few photos of what look like bedrock and then moving on to dig somewhere else, they'd have a wee bit more sympathy?

And it is after all in their express interest to prove it's a pyramid. That would then bring in the money needed for more extensive excavations.



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by newtron25
Everyone is frothing at the mouth here, the guys there with shovels know this and all they can do is appease everyone with photos to keep people interested.

Well that is their own fault for making all sorts of wild claims about the hill(s) before they even started digging. Osmanagic did not say "We think this hill may be a pyramid, we'll investigate, collect evidence and then make a conclusion". He started shouting his mouth off about it definitely being a pyramid and just like the ones in South America. He also said he believed they were over 12,000 years old as they showed signs of being underwater, which is frankly a crazy claim. If you make fantastic claims you better start backing them up othewise you will draw flak. Real researchers tend to gather evidence before they make claims.



Do you think if you were in their position you would get a little tired of people pushing you around

Nobody on this thread is pushing anyone around, we are just discussing things. Who is meant to be pushing Osmanagic around?




Science is like that. You get what you find, not what you think you might find.

Someone should tell Osmanagic that before he makes any more unsupported claims. Though Osmanagic isn't a scientist, but an "explorer" and "businessman", and he has not approached this project in a scientific manner. The expression "working hypothesis" is one he might like to use in the future.



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 10:28 AM
link   
To date, I haven't seen one shread of evidence that supports a man-made pyramid.

I've seen a hill that resembles the shape of a pyramid.

I've seen man-made walls that are from earlier times.

I've seen man-made paths that are from earlier times.

I've seen mad-made steps that are from earlier times.

I'm still waiting for a man-made pyramid.

Don't get me wrong though - I certainly hope they find a pyramid - it will be very exiciting...though no evidence to date supports the fact that a man-made pyramid exists.

Cheers

JS



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 01:26 PM
link   
Newtron, you bring up some points that I hadn't considered until I did some reading of other discussions elsewhere.



Originally posted by newtron25
They're not showing you all everything, because ordinarily archaeology, or any science research for that matter, is not published in real time.

Everyone is frothing at the mouth here, the guys there with shovels know this and all they can do is appease everyone with photos to keep people interested.

If the people like I read on this thread are like the rest of the world who is watching this happen, then they are dying to tell these guys how best to dig, where to dig, what part of the pyramid to uncover next....


Agreed, certainly, that they don't publish in real time. But this drama has been going on for months, and they claim that they still don't have any artifacts. This was suspicious to me, because humans are messy animals and there'd been people up and down the hills all during the past centuries. Somebody would have dropped something and those drops (even modern stuff) are valuable clues because they tell what happened to the land during the time the dirt was laid down.



I think the arm-chair archaeologists that weigh in on this thread don't have a clue as to the entirety of the effort involved (and I'm going to say right now that I don't have a clue either) in such a huge research effort - both in physical scale and in the impact it might have on science.


Okay... here's something that's bothering me. In the early photos released you can see at least one photo with what I recognize as real archaeological standards: areas laid out into grids with string, and the dig proceeding at a slow pace and with trowels and tools for carefully removing dirt. I think I remember seeing something indicating there was screening (sifting dirt through mesh screens.)

In the most recent ones, I see a number of people with pickaxes and shovels, hovering over a slab of rock. The pictures of the people investigating the building structure show a marker (the thing with red and white stripes) kind of haphazardly leaning against the dirt (for a photo, you'd have it straight so you can see where "up" is) and no marking of the site into sectors (it's done with string. String is cheap.)

This isn't science. It's digging holes in the ground. When you go in with a pickaxe, you damage evidence. It's like investigating a crime scene with a backhoe.


Give them a bloody break already. They've been screaming for help, money and at least enough credibility to offer enough evidence one way or the other as to if this is a "pyramid" or not.

Actually, they're convinced it's part of a pyramid complex and nothing will convince them otherwise. A number of professionals visiting the site have identified the stonework and have identified bedrock and said it's buildings of various ages on a hill.

Some of these were people he invited directly (and then dismissed their findings.)



posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 10:38 AM
link   
Since this is, according to the prior post, not science, but akin to a backhoe at a crime scene, then what is driving these guys??

If its not a pyramid, and it will become readily evident once they've finished showing enough of the site to offer that it isn't, what are they uncovering here? If it's a medieval fort or Roman structure...holy discovery! That is STILL amazing and possibly worthy of rewriting in a small way how we view those time periods. Doesn't the effort in finding the truth here still merit some respect? Especially since, and it has been said before, no larger authority on the topic is willing to step in assist them in order to protect the data being collected. What about a major University offering to do a "parallel research effort" looking into their theory of what the site may hold? They could offer tools and manpower (interns) under the guise that they are looking for something else while insisting that the Pyramid team make use of their help or there is no association with the original research effort. Blackmail them into excavating properly. Just a thought.

If the Pyramid team are profiteers, somewhat credentialed profiteers, then how do they think they are going to get away with pick-axing away at this valuable site? Is some money/fame/notoriety in it for them? Or are they truly in it for the science?

If they are "crazy" and don't know what they are doing, then what is the international community doing just letting them ruin possibly unreplaceable research as they take pick-axes to the site? Is it possible to discredit an entire effort like this to the point that ANYTHING they do is seen as unworthy research?Isn't the rest of the archaeological community also culpable here of contributing to their failure to uncover properly what may or may not be there? I am still really confused as to how to look at this research team, if they are not on to something very big - whether it be a pyramid or not. I don't know whether to view them as frothing-at-the-mouth lunatics bent on proving their specific theories or as enthusiastic "scientists" who have just happened on to something a whole lot larger than they had planned in the first place.

You bring up better points than I had, Byrd. I'm just hoping that something is there. I'd rather see someone, anyone, uncover something through unorthodox methods then have the official representatives of the field step in and stop them because their premise what outrageous in their eyes. It seems that because of the history of Osmanagich and his ideas about Atlantis, nobody else seems to care except to tell them how crazy they are or how poorly they're doing it. How often has a research effort of this size fooled researchers so entirely?

If anyone has examples they can think of I'd really appreciate hearing them? Not just smaller mistakes like Al Capone's vault and Geraldo Rivera in Chicago. I'm talking very big claims that have turned out to be utter rubbish. I'm sure there are a few.

Anyone?



posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 10:52 AM
link   
Here is a copy of a letter from Dr. Hawass (of Egypt) to editor fo Archaeology Magazine. Harsh stuff:



~~~~~~~~


ARAB REPUBLIC OF EGYPT
MINISTRY OF CULTURE
SUPREME COUNCIL OF ANTIQUITIES
3 El Adel Abou Bakr Street, Zamalek, Cairo, EGYPT • Phone: 736-5645 • Fax: 735-7239
4D Fakhry Abdel Nour Abbassia, Cairo, EGYPT • Phone: 684-3627 • Fax: 683-1117
Tuesday, June 27, 2006

Mr. Mark Rose
Archaeology Magazine

Dear Mr. Rose,
In response to your question regarding the “pyramid” in Bosnia, here is my answer: The discoverer of the “pyramid” in Bosnia, Semir Osmanagic, who claims that a hill near the Bosnia River is a man-made structure built before the end of the last Ice Age, is not aspecialist on pyramids. His previous claim that the Maya are from the Pleiades and Atlantisshould be enough for any educated reader.

This “pyramid” is actually a sloping hill near a village. This was famous in the Middle Ages as a meeting place for merchants. What was found there is really just a mass of huge stones, evidently a natural geologic formation. The stones do not match, and there is no evidence that they were put together to form a solid structure. No one can say that these stones were transported by human beings since each weighs approximately 40 tons. Apart from its general outline, this hill bears absolutely no resemblance to the Egyptian pyramids. Mr. Barakat, the Egyptian geologist working with Mr. Osmanagic, knows nothing about Egyptian pyramids. He was not sent by the SCA, and we do not support or concur with his
statements.

Other archaeologists, such as a specialist in Prehistory at the National Museum in
Sarajevo named Zellika, have stated that Mr. Osmanagic is giving out false information. What can Mr. Osmanagic use to show the age of the “pyramid?” No archaeological materials have been found near the pyramid. Mr. Osmanic’s theories are purely hallucinations on his part, with no scientific backing.

Sincerely yours,

Dr. Zahi Hawass
Secretary General, SCA

~~~~~~

My apologies in advance if this is a repost.


Newtron



posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 11:51 AM
link   
I believe that this was posted here before.

This letter from Dr. Zahi Hawass is very interesting. I am thinking to send an email to SCA just to validate its origin.

More interesting is how much effort Mr. Mark Rose has put to disprove any future digging on the location. Apparently there is a personal conflict between him and Mr. Osmanagic.

Here is copy of fax from Egyptian Embassy from Sarajevo where they promised to send two experts during summer of this year. Letter is dated 8/3/06.



Those two experts are the one who said that it is primitive pyramid, but apparently they are not working on the same team with Dr. Zahi, as their statements are contradicting each other.

IMHO it is very unprofessional from Dr. Zahi to give any comments without visit of location, and that is one of the reason I personally doubt origin of this letter. But you never know. He might have his reason to say so, same as Mark has his reasons to spent so much time to disrespect Osmanagic.


[edit on 7/5/06 by vietifulJoe]



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join