Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Who lost these ancient technologies and stuff

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Byrd.... you were silent about these items.....There are others.....How can they be explained.....or are you reserving judgement, because you can't explain them?

Based on my experiences, there is a spiritual side that science is just starting to uncover. Some of the Ancient records make this clear. To ignore it would be the same as ignoring the physical evidence found around the world. They are one and the same, if you look at the evidence.

home.hiwaay.net...

The dateing of these sites are probably bang on for when Noah's tribe re-settled the area.

[edit on 8-12-2006 by win 52]




posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 11:59 AM
link   

You are a horses ass and i certainly hope you get another warn for your impertinence. Its not ok to voice ones opinion around here anmore?I certainly hope a mod takes note that all i made was a comment and i'm persistently attackd by this nutcase.
But you do not care - I have a long membership here and i will not put up with your stupid put-downs.
Yea yea, what i said is "real way out there" yea yea yea....insane...i dont know anything....NEITHER DO YOU.

Please, let's everybody calm down


I really know that Marduk is the most spasmodic and meddlesome, irritating person here in the board and i really mean it more than anyone.
It is only Marduk! Some of us accept the way he is. Others' don't.
I don't know how he is thinking: Perhaps he want to gather points in order to inspires more mana. Or that's his profile is. Dgtempe, please do not proceed to any complain and give him one more chance. After all, we need to prove our words rather than speaking without any rational arguments to weight our words. And despite you are here long time proves nothing. We are equally judged no matter the points we have got, the longer we stay.

Now Marduk, mind not to be so impolite or else you will get banned from the forum and you will have to start from the beginning. I am saying that 'couse many of us can learn various things from you and we don't wonna lose you. Some people thinking different from you and you sould respect them. Mind to study sociology one day and you will understand. According to my opinion this is the only thing remains to get an indegrated form of scholar.

Please, i want all of us to return at the main topic and step aside our old conflict. Let it be history.



posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 12:11 PM
link   


I liked the dental tools the Greeks used thousands of years ago- they're still the same, yet no knowledge of these were passed down?

the earliest dentitsry was performed by the Etruscans not the greeks
they were so advanced that they hadn't discovered the benefit of toothpaste and the dentistry was not for dental health reasons it was so that rich people could have gold teeth made to show off their wealth.
by todays standards the tools are next to useless
links.jstor.org...




The markings in Peru, the Sphynx, the piramids, etc, where did they come from?

The Nazca markings were made by local indians. there is nothing amazing about them at all except for their size and number.
the sphinx and the pyramids were made by the ancient egyptians.
you should do some research on them theyre quite famous for building sphinxes and pyramids




Did you know that archeologists are not allowed to report every finding they make?

this is absolute crap. there is not a single archaeologist on earth who holds back discoveries from the public
people who train to be archaeologists study for three years because they want to uncover things not because they want to hide them



Not to mention the fact that earth has been nuked before and green glass has been found?

www.saharamet.com...



Libyan Desert Glass is a natural glass composed of nearly pure silica (98 wt %). The formation of this glass, because of its unusual composition has for long been considered as mysterious. Chemical analyses show that the glass is locally enriched in meteoritic elements, with typical chondritic proportions. The only explanation for these observations is that Libyan Desert Glass results from a meteorite impact on a silica-rich target.





Now Marduk, mind not to be so impolite or else you will get banned from the forum

I haven't been impolite at all
its not my fault if other posters who make wild claims they know nothing about can't take the truth when it is presented to them


[edit on 8-12-2006 by Marduk]



posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 09:38 PM
link   
If you wonder why ancient technology disappears look no further to our modern times. With our rapidly growing technology, we are watching old technologies disappear before our eyes.

Fifty years ago, every engineer worth his salt knew how to use a slide rule. With the advent of the digital calculator, the slide rule has disappeared. I reckon you would be hard pressed to find an engineer under 40 who knows how to use a slide rule. We can probably dedicate a whole thread to listing technologies that people cannot use any more.



posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 10:49 PM
link   
Sorry but i think you mist the point of the thread. The fact that some of these artifacts have been dated as for back as 300 million years ago and seem to be man made implies so much.

it's just a shame that you don't hear about these discoveries in the news more often. And people should really look into this stuff.

Like Bill Hicks always said. We are being lied too. And as long as we watch our football games, eat fast food, and have to worry about where our next pay cheque is coming from and don't strive to reach a common goal we will never find the answers.



posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 11:10 PM
link   
Charles Berlitz discusses things like this in some of his books involving the Bermuda Triange and Atlantis, suggesting that there was an ancient technological culture that was completely lost in some way. Whether due to the cataclysm that goes with the Atlantis story, or the Biblical Great Flood, the entire civilization was lost and largely destroyed, only leaving little clues as to their nature.

It's a stretch, and there would have to be a lot more evidence, but it is certainly a fascinating subject.



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 07:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by thedangler
Sorry but i think you mist the point of the thread. The fact that some of these artifacts have been dated as for back as 300 million years ago and seem to be man made implies so much.


It implies they've been misidentified, assuming they ever existed in the first place.


it's just a shame that you don't hear about these discoveries in the news more often. And people should really look into this stuff.


Could be a good reason for that. Can you think what it is?



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 08:06 AM
link   
dgtempe, just ignore that boy who just grew old but didnt grow up. He has been strutting his 'google linking pages knowledge' as if he has knowledge of the very stuff being discussed in most thread. And at the same time, calling others ignorant if the views expressed are different from his. And not only using one nick, COULD be using several other nicks to support himself! LOL!

People who seriously discuss topics are those who express their own critically analysed thoughts on a subject, and not regurgetate whole text of someone else's work, or denigrate others who's thoughts may not be in agreement with others.

Perhaps it is their agenda to prevent a topic from being discussed?

As our knowledge in many subjects expands, so too will works written by past qualified persons be outdated and should be subject to scrutiny against the latest knowledge.

Each day we read newspapers. Are journalist 'qualified' to report what they published? Newspapers make money too, should we discard them and not read newspapers for their intentions are to 'profit' - bottomline ?

In our day and age, serious thinkers and charlettans abound side by side. How to separate the weed from the chafe? Anyone can write a story, a report, a thesis, a hypothesis, but ultimately, what makes the difference are the cross references the authors put in the works or the lack of it.

Therefore, do not generalise that anyone who writes is 'out to profit', for commercial gain, etc. Even qualified researchers are out to gain something out of their work - fortune or fame, or had been paid in funding by govts.

Rather, read their works thoroughly for free in libraries, ( not googled summarized texts!), check their references, then make up your mind through critically analysizing their works.

If one has not the time to do this research, then it is best not to claim that they are 'Knowledgeable' on the subject. Only makes a fool out of themselves when they attempt to put others down with 'googled' info.

[edit on 9-12-2006 by SeekerofTruth102]



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 09:18 AM
link   


dgtempe, just ignore that boy who just grew old but didnt grow up.

Peter Pan ?



He has been strutting his 'google linking pages knowledge' as if he has knowledge of the very stuff being discussed in most thread

oh so I'm somehow finding this stuff on google without knowing anything about it. In that case why don't you try it. Look for the truth instead of accepting the lies



And at the same time, calling others ignorant if the views expressed are different from his

when I have proved my position is right and the other poster is still talking crap without even reading the links I have provided because he read it in a pseudosicence book once then yes hes ignorant
anyone also defending his position without doing a little research is also ignorant. Its funny how the ignorant stick together like they think there is safety in numbers


Perhaps it is their agenda to prevent a topic from being discussed?

so me providing links to aid the discussion is preventing it while you talking crap is aiding it
how narrow minded and ignorant a view that is




People who seriously discuss topics are those who express their own critically analysed thoughts on a subject

No that once again is pseudoscience where you allow your personal belief without any evidence to be spewed forth onto a forum because you think its somehow relevant
it isn't
nobody who has objected to my posts has studied the subject in question therefore none of their thoughts are critically analysed
if they were they wouldn't start personally attacking me when i was critical
theres this thing called Logic....perhaps you've heard of it
theres this other thing called common sense, clearly you haven't heard of that



And not only using one nick, COULD be using several other nicks to support himself! LOL!

I always post under Marduk
I have never posted as anything else anywhere ever
if you can't handle the fact that this one poster knows far more about most of the things discussed here then perhaps you should ask yourself why that is
heres a clue
it isn't because I base anything on personal belief
and theres this other thing called experience perhaps you've......
nah
you havent have you



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 09:52 AM
link   
Come now Marduk: you should know full well by now that posting links to internet websites that support your conjectures is simply not allowed. Showing that every other expert on the subject agrees with you, or that your idea is support by masses and masses of empirical evidence is simply cheating and means you're incapable of thinking for yourself!

What you have to do is refer people to a long out of print book from the 19th or early 20th century, preferably by some bloke no one has heard of. Note: it must be one which takes no account of modern scientific theories all of which are complete bunkum (plate tectonics? pollen studies? don't make me laugh ....!!!!
). This shows that you have done proper research and are undoubtably right about absolutely everything.




posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 03:58 PM
link   
The inevitable reply:


[insert quote from previous post]

[insert meaningless data]

[insert quirky quip]

[insert
]


There you have it. The recipe for embracing ignorance.



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by southern_cross3
The inevitable reply:


[insert quote from previous post]

[insert meaningless data]

[insert quirky quip]

[insert
]


There you have it. The recipe for embracing ignorance.


And then there's always the compulsory request to please stay on topic



Question...what data in this thread, in your opinion, is meaningless?



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 08:53 PM
link   
Ah, you misunderstand me. I was reciting the formula for many of Marduk's posts. It seemed that the topic had strayed to that for a bit.

At any rate, I certainly believe an ancient technological civilization is plausible. There is the account of Atlantis which includes descriptions of lasers and underwater craft.

My other idea gets into religious realms, so just ignore it if you're a skeptic, but keep in mind that there were a couple thousand years between the creation of man and the Great Flood of Noah. I don't remember the exact amount of time but I could easily look it up if necessary. This can be calculated with the help of a particular chapter in Genesis that gives the ages of all the patriarchs, and at which age they had their children. It's possible that there were forms of technology at this time. The society described sounds much like our own in terms of vices, but the only problem is the fact that it took Noah a couple of our lifetimes to construct his Ark. I have wondered if there could be a connection between Atlantis and the Great Flood, though there's not really any evidence. However, it would be fascinating to research.



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 09:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Marduk



p.s. anymore has a y in it




Byrd, thank you for that information.



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 09:04 AM
link   


There is the account of Atlantis which includes descriptions of lasers and underwater craft.

ooph how interesting
perhaps you can link to a website that reveals the source for this claim



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by win 52
Byrd.... you were silent about these items.....There are others.....How can they be explained.....or are you reserving judgement, because you can't explain them?


It's the end of the semester (I'm a grad student) and I have a 7,000 word paper to finish (with citations) and two lab sections (30 students) to grade for a professor. Can I plead laziness and say "which OOPARTS" and "have you actually googled to see what others are saying about them (not the OMG! THEY'RE OOPARTS! but the scholars?)


home.hiwaay.net...


We've discussed this site before, and he's skipping a LOT of monuments to cherry pick the ones that fit his idea. He misses the best of the Chinese sites, ancient sites like Stonehenge, Medicine Wheels that date to 10,000 years ago in Canada, major sacred sites like Painted Rock in California, the White Shaman site in Texas, etc, etc, etc. If I'm allowed to pick a certain set of sites, I could construct "great circles" that fit any way I like to put them.


The dateing of these sites are probably bang on for when Noah's tribe re-settled the area.

If you're talking about a mythical worldwide flood, there wasn't one (we have settlement records and written records that go through the time of the supposed flood and no mention is made of "everyone died but we were sent here by our great-grandfather and we're back to rebuild the area."

(getting back to schoolwork)



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedangler
Sorry but i think you mist the point of the thread. The fact that some of these artifacts have been dated as for back as 300 million years ago and seem to be man made implies so much.


Perhaps you could list a few of these 300 million year old artifacts and show how their age was proven? The ones I know of are fakes. I'd like to see your set of links.



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 02:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by southern_cross3
At any rate, I certainly believe an ancient technological civilization is plausible. There is the account of Atlantis which includes descriptions of lasers and underwater craft.


You do realize that those stories were "channeled" in the 1950-1970 era, right, and that before that there were no stories that told of this material?

And that Plato himself says the Atlanteans were defeated by the Bronze Age Athenian army?



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 02:33 PM
link   
No, if you don't believe me you can look it up yourself. It's common knowledge to those who have even read about the subject a couple times. The Atlanteans had devices of crystal that amplified energy which passed through them. They also had crafts that could travel underwater and in the air. Some have speculated that the little gold pre-Colombian delta planes, if built in real life, could travel underwater and in the air.

If someone else has a source feel free to post it. I've read this information in books, but don't have the books with me at this time.



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 03:19 PM
link   


The Atlanteans had devices of crystal that amplified energy which passed through them. They also had crafts that could travel underwater and in the air. Some have speculated that the little gold pre-Colombian delta planes, if built in real life, could travel underwater and in the air.

now youre just being ignorant
Byrd just told you that the source for these technological atlantis stories was channeled during the 50s
the source is a fruticake called Edgar Cayce who was also a convicted criminal and a fraudster
he made prophecies while he was allegedly asleep and became known as the sleeping prophet. he predicted that Atlantis would rise from the depths in the late 60s
it didn't


the original story and the only credible one was written by Plato 2500 years ago and appears in two texts
here they are
Critias
etext.library.adelaide.edu.au...
Timaeus
classics.mit.edu...

obviously you haven't even read them and are making unqualified statements about something you know nothing about
if you do read them you will find no descriptions of submarines or aircraft or crystal power whatsoever







new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join