Bosnian Pyramid Update

page: 6
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 31 2006 @ 06:46 AM
link   
You as well might be right. It might have been built by Romans, but so far no documents exist to support that either.

At another location in Bosnia, while they were digging tunnel they discovered one of those spheres that can be found in South America and else around the world. We are talking about almost the whole mountain atop of the sphere! How did it get there, and is there anything else around is hard to say, but most importantly, it’s not natural phenomenon, or is very rare, that current geology can’t explain it.

My guess is that whoever (if anyone) has built something on that hill, he most likely has left more of the stuff below the hill. All of that is still waiting to be found. (How long it took modern archeology to find builder’s city for Egyptian Pyramids?)




posted on May, 31 2006 @ 07:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by vietifulJoe
I am not expert in geology; neither am I an expert geologist or scientist.

Is this created by those tectonic movements?


No, they look man-made - probably some form of flagstone shaped and laid down as a pavement or road. Impossible to date from the pictures though. Could be 2,000 years old. Could be 2 years old....



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 07:59 AM
link   
This find is not 2 years old. I'll buy the possibility of a medieval burial ground MAYBE, but if I'm not mistaken, what was happening during Medieval times? Not a lot of investing in the dead, as I recall. Certain not a lot of time to stop, terraform a giant hill into a mausoleum for anyone...not even a king or a queen. Weren't they busy building trebuchets and catapults, fashioning swords, designing armaments....not exactly the culture that focuses on the dead...except maybe to avoid being dead. Many people fighting in medieval times, not a lot celebrating their loved ones by spending what must have been decades building a massive burial ground. Something this large would surely have made it onto a tapestry or something. I'm guessing even the monks would have been in on this action were it happening then...not so sure. Going to have to pass on that one. But 2 years ago....yup. A great time to bury slabs of sandstone across a several mile area....

Hey, I'll bet satellite photos...perhaps even on Google Earth, might disclose disturbances in the ground should any of this be a hoax. Should be easy to spot, those idiots thinking they could pull a fast one on the rest of the world....thought they could just slip a few hundred slabs of sandstone, polish some giant stones, dig a few tunnels...nobody will notice. And when it comes time to make our splash....SURPRISE! Look what we found! Yeah that sounds right.


This is really beyond skepticism. I would suggest grabbing a plate, Essen. There's a whole lotta humble pie headed your way, dude.



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 09:44 AM
link   
Medieval Europe didnt have time to venerate the dead?

Look up cathedrals in Europe. More complex than any pyramid. And thoroughly medieval.

If you want to look for similar natural formations type 'limestone pavement' into google images. I'd post some of the pics here but i dont know how, sorry.



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 09:44 AM
link   
In Bosnia, as in some other places on Balkan, you can find so called 'Stecke' (Stechke). Those were grave cover stones, man made for the dead. Not a lot of details are known about those stones, and I am not sure how many of them can be found around Visoko/Visocica.

Here is couple of pictures:






You can check more pictures at Google - Images

I am open minded that this might be as well just another military structure, but no where we can find any documentation about it. It is known that there were tribes on this are before Roman occupation, but it is unclear what 'tribes' really mean. (How large tribes)



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Uncle Joe
Medieval Europe didnt have time to venerate the dead?

Look up cathedrals in Europe. More complex than any pyramid. And thoroughly medieval.

If you want to look for similar natural formations type 'limestone pavement' into google images. I'd post some of the pics here but i dont know how, sorry.


First, I'm sorry you don't know how to post photos.

Second, my point may have been made more clear had I said, in medieval times, their focus was probably not on efforts on the scale and type as you may find in a hill-based burying ground. You're trying to compare a cathedral - an obvious centre of religion, work, commerce to a burial ground? Cathedrals created their own economies and were build over the course of centuries. The Cathedral of St.John the Divine in New York, NY is still being built. So if this were on par with one of those, the amount of commerce and activity surrounding it would have left a trail - HUGE historical trail. Where is it? Historical records. Anything. It would show up like the Goodyear blimp on the air-traffic controller's screen for any respectable historian.

So where is it?



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 12:31 PM
link   
I am not sure its a pyramid (i am only disputing by structure not by shape) it definalty looks man made. I hope it turns out to be a significant historical find for a few reason

1) so some of you naysayers will listen to logic for a change
2) so you same people as above can give the finder a break
3) so hopefully we can get some more truth.




posted on May, 31 2006 @ 06:36 PM
link   
In this photo two things can be seen:

First, the vegetation is different in the sides that look like two pyramid sides when compared with the vegetation on the rest of the hill.

Second, the region looks like it has been the stage of some geological activities.
The hill on the brackground looks like it has been cut in half by a huge landslide, and all that region looks like the result of strong erosion.

Also, in the some of the photos, especially this one

the slabs are allmost horizontal, they do not look like they are making a pyramid with the sides making a 45º angle.


d1k

posted on May, 31 2006 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
In this photo two things can be seen:


What a beautiful area to live in.

That is a fantastic picture. Sorry to get off topic.

[edit on 31-5-2006 by d1k]



posted on Jun, 1 2006 @ 08:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
In this photo two things can be seen:

First, the vegetation is different in the sides that look like two pyramid sides when compared with the vegetation on the rest of the hill.

Can you say different exposure to the sun? And differences in wind distribution of pollen/spores...are you kidding me?

Second, the region looks like it has been the stage of some geological activities.
The hill on the brackground looks like it has been cut in half by a huge landslide, and all that region looks like the result of strong erosion.

Also, in the some of the photos, especially this one

the slabs are allmost horizontal, they do not look like they are making a pyramid with the sides making a 45º angle.


If I'm not mistaken (I'm going to Google this one) early Egyptian pyramids were not perfect either...

Again, speculation either way, this seems like a legitimate site for investigation. If what you believe actually turns out to be merely geological features due to erosion or landslides, then this might reveal interesting information about the nature of the area and how it was formed. Not exactly as sexy as a pyramid, but worth a few masters theses or perhaps a doctorate or two from it.

If what you believe turns out to be false and it is man-made, then two things may be surmised based upon initial claims by the Indiana Jones hat wearing guy: 1) the hills or more precisely what is under the sediment on the hills actually is a pyramid (holy guacamole, i think I just swallowed my dentures or stepped on my Blackberry! Hooray! OR 2) it is another man-made structure with another purpose as yet to be determined.

To sum up - if its just an interesting geological formation, yay. Good for Bosnian geology experts. Another nickle. If it's a pyramid, awesome for the world. Repeat - awesome. If it's something else entirely...let's be clear, this thing is huge. It covers an enormous area of real estate for what speculators think may or may not be resting on that hill. If it doesn't fit within the category of pyramid, (and trust me, I'm really not buying this argument that it looks just like a collection of burial markers - after going through the effort of carving out half-ton slabs to cover a grave, why then place those markers on a purposefully carved out hill...that has tunnels??? Even early civilized man was not that silly.) this is when we say we have another thing altogether on our hands that may escape explanation.

That would really send us all back to Google looking for more photos.

Newtron



posted on Jun, 1 2006 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by newtron25
Second, my point may have been made more clear had I said, in medieval times, their focus was probably not on efforts on the scale and type as you may find in a hill-based burying ground. You're trying to compare a cathedral - an obvious centre of religion, work, commerce to a burial ground? Cathedrals created their own economies and were build over the course of centuries. The Cathedral of St.John the Divine in New York, NY is still being built. So if this were on par with one of those, the amount of commerce and activity surrounding it would have left a trail - HUGE historical trail. Where is it? Historical records. Anything. It would show up like the Goodyear blimp on the air-traffic controller's screen for any respectable historian.

So where is it?


So where is what?? I'm baffled as to what point you are making. Your Disney films view of European history and culture aside: what mainstream historians are saying is that this is a perfectly normal hill formed by natural geological processes and that various human cultures over the centuries have left their mark on it. Including the construction of a burial site in medieval times.

You appear to be suggesting that the construction of a burial site on a hill should have left a "HUGE historical trail", but that the building of one of one of the worlds' largest man-made structures wouldn't?


I'm really not sure how the discovery of some man-made pavement on the side of a natural hill (that is vaguely pyramid shaped) makes the hill a "pyramid" in the sense of the Egyptian pyramids that were constructed from large stone blocks piled on top of each other. So there are tunnels in the hill - so what? Again finding tunnels in hills is hardly unique. Humankind has been digging tunnels in hills since we first mastered tool making. I have walked through tunnels in the Julian Alps in Slovenia that were constructed during the first World War, maybe these tunnels were made in the 20th century as well....



posted on Jun, 1 2006 @ 08:52 AM
link   
So where is what?? I'm baffled as to what point you are making. Your Disney films view of European history and culture aside: what mainstream historians are saying is that this is a perfectly normal hill formed by natural geological processes and that various human cultures over the centuries have left their mark on it. Including the construction of a burial site in medieval times.

You appear to be suggesting that the construction of a burial site on a hill should have left a "HUGE historical trail", but that the building of one of one of the worlds' largest man-made structures wouldn't?


It would obviously depend upon the time period. If it were built during a time when there were no monasteries or no technology to allow for the writing of history and printing it, the only historical trail would be harder to document - it would require actually digging with a shovel....how is this a Disney films dipiction? Are we to now define all incredible discovery (and I am NOT saying this is one of them - it is possible though...) by measuring them against Disney film scripts? That speaks more to the saturation of American culture in your mind than in mine. It also speaks to the aperature of the mind and the ability is has to accept anything outside the small realm of what is known. Reality will always be the basis for truth, however, without challenging the boundaries of the truth, we can not hope to discover what we don't know is there. There has to be room question what we know and room for free thought and ideas. Goes without saying.

I'm really not sure how the discovery of some man-made pavement on the side of a natural hill (that is vaguely pyramid shaped) makes the hill a "pyramid" in the sense of the Egyptian pyramids that were constructed from large stone blocks piled on top of each other. So there are tunnels in the hill - so what? Again finding tunnels in hills is hardly unique. Humankind has been digging tunnels in hills since we first mastered tool making. I have walked through tunnels in the Julian Alps in Slovenia that were constructed during the first World War, maybe these tunnels were made in the 20th century as well....

I am happy for you and your sojourns. Perhaps the thought of mankind digging tunnels since the advent of toolmaking was a thought you may have had while walking those tunnels....and now perhaps the thought of mankind in Europe being capable of more than just painting on a cave wall may come to mind the next time you're there. If you're lucky maybe soon...



posted on Jun, 1 2006 @ 10:21 AM
link   
You've lost me a bit there to be honest.

When I was referring to your "Disney" view of medieval it was really for comments such as:



Weren't they busy building trebuchets and catapults, fashioning swords, designing armaments....not exactly the culture that focuses on the dead...except maybe to avoid being dead. Many people fighting in medieval times, not a lot celebrating their loved ones by spending what must have been decades building a massive burial ground. Something this large would surely have made it onto a tapestry or something


The thing is I don't think anyone disputes the fact that there is a medieval burial ground on this hill. I also don't think anyone is suggesting that the entire hill was somehow constructed as a burial ground.

So far all I see is:

1 A hill in a vague pyramid shape

2 Tunnels in the hill that we have no idea when they were constructed

3 Evidence of human construction - which is not disputed as there was definitely a medieval burial ground on the hill and it may have been occupied many times over the centuries

4 What appears to be perfectly normal slabs of naturally occuring rock, which will most likely be found on any of the surrounding hills

To go from this to suggesting that it is man-made pyramid is pure sensationalist speculation. Even if evidence of terra-forming is found (which seems very unlikely at the moment) this would not provide any evidence of a link to the pyramids of Giza or South America, which were constructed from cut stone blocks and not "shaped" hills.



posted on Jun, 1 2006 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by vietifulJoe
Is this created by those tectonic movements?

Tectonic? Probably not. But it doesn't look man-made.


Theborg
This is NO natural formationp

Not a single one of those pictures shows anything that isn't relatively common in nature. None of them require men to build them, and most are clearly not built by man. One, maybe, sorta looks like it could go either way, maybe.

As far as infrastructure, it'd be nice, but there is no sense in looking for it when its not been demonstrated that this thing is a man-made structure.


ArMaP
the vegetation is different in the sides that look like two pyramid sides when compared with the vegetation on the rest of the hill.

How is it different? Its darker, but its in shadow.


newtron25
early Egyptian pyramids were not perfect either

The blocks on those structures were clearly cut. And, as you note, the egyptians spent a long time experiementing. Where are the experiments here? Where are the mastabas, the stacks, the bent pyramids, the collapsed ones, the records of a civilization that people would even want to dedicate their time to building such a thing, etc.
Analogy to egpyt is a net loss for this location. There doesn't seem to really be anything suggesting that its actually a man-made pyramd. Some sides of this hill are pyramid-like. But that ain't saying much.


why must people immediately offer skepticism when presented with information that does not fit nicely within their idea of "normal" and "reality."??

Anyone that looks at a hill that, from a particular angle, looks like a pyramid and says 'it must be a pyramid', is the one in the wrong here. Anyone that looks at rocks that have rectangular cracks and says 'it must be man-made' is in the wrong here. Skepticism is a healthy reaction, especially when there are amazing claims based upon poor evidence.

proving someone wrong first requires a basis to start from.

The focus here really has to be on showing that there is a suggestion of a pyramid there. Thats the basis. No one needs to 'prove' anyone wrong here, there's not enough evidence to say that there is anything like a pyramid there.


I'll tell you why none of that is happening: legitimate researchers are too good to associate themselves with someone who isn't as schooled as them

Thats a load of bunk. If there was any indication that there was a pyramid there, with all its incredible implications, then, at worst, he's have a gaggle of researchers trying to pull the discovery out from under him and take the credit for themselves.

It's snobbery Doug.

? Its snobbery to have an expectation of a minimal standard of evidence? Its snobbery to note that a person is, apparently engaged in lieing and cheating to back up their claims, such as the fake emial accounts? Thats all snobbery? Or common sense?

people are entitled to research whatever they believe

And who exactly said that this guy should be locked up???

Sure beats dismissing him wholesale

The people that dismiss this thing wholesale aren't in this thread.


If it's a pyramid, awesome for the world. Repeat - awesome

Yeah, it'd be great. But thats not enough reason to accept that its a pyramid.


Crvenkapica
today egyptian expert ali abdulah berekat confirmed da bosnian hill is a pyramid

Upon what evidence???

some kind of ancient script found in the valley of bosnian pyramids

Why are you calling that a script?

some kinf of steps close to the pyramid

You are aware that rock weathers naturally that way no?


shane
You see, EXPERTS ARE CONFIRMING THE CLAIM

And what of the experts that are rejecting the claim?

Who cares about experts. Who cares about arguements from authority. What is the evidence supporting this being a man-made structure?
The stone? Why? Beucase it has realtively straight lines in it? Because it has rectangular features to it?

Please, someone, explain why this indicates human action.



posted on Jun, 1 2006 @ 11:23 AM
link   
Moon pyramid , excavations












posted on Jun, 1 2006 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
Tectonic? Probably not. But it doesn't look man-made.

Probably not? Doesn't look man-made and is not man made is quite different. Apparently you see better then those who are digging, including that Egyptologist who said that stones were connected same way as those in Egypt.


Originally posted by Nygdan
The blocks on those structures were clearly cut. And, as you note, the egyptians spent a long time experiementing. Where are the experiments here? Where are the mastabas, the stacks, the bent pyramids, the collapsed ones, the records of a civilization that people would even want to dedicate their time to building such a thing, etc.
Analogy to egpyt is a net loss for this location. There doesn't seem to really be anything suggesting that its actually a man-made pyramd. Some sides of this hill are pyramid-like. But that ain't saying much.

If you limit your views to current books about history, you can then assume that mastabas and collapsed pyramids were Egyptian experiments. But what if all 'evolution' of pyramids known to our world was actually just another try to reproduce something that was there before the time of known Egyptian history??

As you said, some sides are pyramid like (at 30%) which is good enough reason for someone to start to dig and check why the whole hill has so many abnormalities.



Crvenkapice, ima li Vuka?
Poj'o ti je slicice (ne vidim ni jednu
)

[edit on 6/1/06 by vietifulJoe]



posted on Jun, 1 2006 @ 01:41 PM
link   
I have dishes to wash and a carpet to vacuum.

In the meantime, enjoy the exchange. The more that is revealed either pro-pyramid or con-pyramid is going to send this thread into the nutzo zone again....


Later taters!

P.S. Healthy skepticism is also one way of saying "I don't believe in Santa, I hate the Easter Bunny, the tooth fairy didn't give me enough money and there's no such thing as speeding tickets."



posted on Jun, 1 2006 @ 02:22 PM
link   
The one thing that I think when I see this structure is, "where's the stone"?

Let's say he's right and that it's a pyramid. It must have been carved over generations of time - or a huge number of people worked on it over a shorter time.

So (in the words of an old American television commercial), "where's the beef?"

* where are the storage areas for the food for the workers? (on the plain of Giza, where the complex with the pyramids and Great Pyramid and sphynx are located, there's a lot of these areas.)
* Where are the piles of bones of animals hunted and killed? (lots of these on Giza.)
* And where are the latrines (because that many people put out a lot of poop, whether it's only a few thousand for five or six generations or a million people for 10 years)? (yes, unglamorous, but there's a lot of midden heaps around Giza and a lot of interesting things are recovered from them.)
* where's the places for workers to live? (there is a vast city of workers' houses on the plains of Giza)
* where's the incredibly huge quarry (probably quarries) that they brought the rocks from (this should have left huge gaping holes in the landscape. We do know where the quarries for Giza are.)
* where's the evidence that people of that era had the technology and tools to build a pyramid? (in Egypt, we see houses and other pyramids built... more than that, we see houses and temples with stone blocks of uniform size. These existed long before pyramid building began (BTW, there ARE megalithic structures in the area, but they aren't made of uniformly cut stones. The stones are mostly in their natural shapes and could be moved and set up by a group of 50 humans.)
* if he's saying the hill was carved -- where did all the stone go?



posted on Jun, 1 2006 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by vietifulJoe

Originally posted by Nygdan
Tectonic? Probably not. But it doesn't look man-made.

Probably not?

Yeah, as in probably not the result of tectonic deformation, since it looks like regular weathered limestone. Everyone seems impressed with the regularity of the facets. A diamond has regular facets. Limestone can have regular facets. Heck, you can see it clearly right here
img455.imageshack.us...
And here
img382.imageshack.us...

On a larger scale, that weathering produces the steps. From another angle, it produces the 'blocks'.

All we have are the photos, and someone saying 'I am an expert, its man-made'. Sure as hell doesn't look man-made, what is the 'expert' specifically using as evidence that its man made????


experiments. But what if all 'evolution' of pyramids known to our world was actually just another try to reproduce something that was there before the time of known Egyptian history??

The claim was that it doesn't matter that the bosnian pyramid isn't perfect, because even the egyptians made imperfect pyramids. I noted that the imperfect ones were earlier ones that occur in sequence and show the evolution of the structure, whereas here, there's just this one pyramid, sprung up from no where, with no archaeological record, no memory of it, no work-camps, and no civilization to have made it. In egypt it takes an entire course of a civlization to make it. Here, its in the middle of nowhere. If the egyptians needed many attempts, why would these pre-bosnians perfect it at once?


As you said, some sides are pyramid like (at 30%) which is good enough reason for someone to start to dig and check why the whole hill has so many abnormalities.

I'm not saying that no one is allowed to rut around here. But I sure as heck ain't going to sit around when someone says that this sort of thing
img382.imageshack.us...

Is 'clearly manmade'.

There's nothing preventing the ancient peoples of that era from making pyramids, the egyptians and mayans could do it, so, yeah, why not these people. The problem is, that a somewhat pointy hill made up of normal looking limestone 'doth not a pyramid make'.


Healthy skepticism is also one way of saying "I don't believe in Santa, I hate the Easter Bunny, the tooth fairy didn't give me enough money and there's no such thing as speeding tickets."

Or its what prevents a person from seeing a perfectly normal rock that is unfamiliar to them and saying "WOW MAGIC!!!"



where's the incredibly huge quarry (probably quarries) that they brought the rocks from

Heck, where's the evidence that the rock isn't perfectly in situ??? It sure looks like it is.



posted on Jun, 1 2006 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

ArMaP
the vegetation is different in the sides that look like two pyramid sides when compared with the vegetation on the rest of the hill.

How is it different? Its darker, but its in shadow.


Thats not an effect of the shadow, the vegetation on the South side of the hill is clearly different from the vegetation in the North side, as you can see in this photo from Google Earth.


This photo show better what I mean.





new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join