Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Who lost these ancient technologies and stuff

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 15 2006 @ 07:19 AM
link   
I'd recommend this book to anyone who is genuinely interested in the truth
www.hallofmaat.com...




posted on Dec, 15 2006 @ 08:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by khunmoon

Everything changes, definitions, reality etc., nothing static, least of all glass.



I was taught that it was a liquid also.

Now back to topic. Are there any OOParts that are not frauds?
Marduk your google fu is awesome. Can you see if there are any that cannot be explained?

Thanks

[edit on 15-12-2006 by ultralo1]



posted on Dec, 15 2006 @ 09:20 AM
link   


Marduk your google fu is awesome. Can you see if there are any that cannot be explained?

soory to spoil your misconception but its not really google fu
I have actually researched most if not all of these ooparts before and written about most of them at some point myself
so finding references for the truth of them is relativly easy as long as you know the truth and know what search parameters to use
for instance
googling "nuclear desert glass" will give you links to all the cranks sites whereas googling "desert glass" will link you to sites that actually discuss the glass without the alien connection

when you think about it the claim that aliens did anything in our history just doesnt stand up
4000 years from now anyone investigating our culture would find only an overwhelming amount of evidence attributable to us
so investigating the world that apparently was built by aliens 4000 years ago should throw up an overwhelming amount of evidence attributable to them
and it just doesnt
not one crahsed space ship
not one laser pistol

when you investigate the agendas of the authors claiming that this alien hypothesis is true you soon see through them
not one of them is qualified in the science that they claim to be an expert
and in these cases an expert opinion is the only one thats valid
the claims that archaeologists are covering up the truth is a load of rubbish made up by the same authors because without that claim their books are easily indetifiable as science fiction

we've even had posters here claiming that I am part of the cover up
thats just paranoia from people who happily make ignorant statements having just watched this weeks stargate sg1 episode
it makes me laugh it really does that people would happily believe things for which there is no evidence and no artifacts and then claim that it is critical analysis of the facts and evidence that lef them to that belief. and then when asked to link to the evidence or the facts that they have analysed they have no answer


i know quite a few Archaeologists
and they all got into the field because they want to uncover the past
not hide it

the only thing that ever made me say "how" is the reed boats pictured at Gobustan, Azerbaijan that date to 6000 - 8000bce
thats a full 2000 - 3000 years before archaeology currently has reed boat technology as listed
now that really is an oopart
and its one thats registered by credible historians as well
It was what set off Thor Heyerdhal;s imagination and led to his fame
and yet no one seems to have heard of it
you know why ?
because it doesnt fit
donsmaps.com...



posted on Dec, 15 2006 @ 03:06 PM
link   
Marduk, I dont know where to start. I like the fact that you make me think about things. There are so many thoughts that I want to express. As Mulder says "I want to believe". I dont know why I want to but I do. I do belive in science but I also believe that science is still in its infancy and to think we have most of the answers is ignorant. We as modern people seem to have an arrogance in our belief that we are smart and advanced.
Scientific theory is based on concensus (sp). I know your are going to say something about repeatable expeirments, i am talking about theoretical science. Astronemy just had an upset a month or two ago when a gamma burst lasted longer than a few seconds. Decades of research and concensus and Phds patting each others back, all of that was thrown out the window in less than a day. Did science say that "we were wrong". No they said that it was it was always probable that it could happen but the chances were so small that it was inconcievable.

The point to my ramblings is that in my opinion, science is a growing evolving theory. All it takes is one different outcome or one different observation to throw the theroies out the _ So to place ones "faith", for a lack of a better word, into science is small minded.

I have a deep mistrust in archeology, not because of any consperacy, but due to the fact that archeology has a lot of eductated guess work involved in it. Yes, the artifacts that they dig up are real but when it comes to piecing a society and culture together from burial sites and artifacts I find it hard to believe that the guesses are accurate. We cannot even get a concensus on whether dinosaurs had skin or feathers. So when archeologist tell me that there is no way that any other civilization could have existed before us, I just smile and wait for that one discovery that just might show up one day that proves them wrong. Dont ask me why I hope that they are wrong, I dont know why. Maybe it is just to show them that they were wrong, or maybe its just to show them that thier arrogance was unjustifyed.



posted on Dec, 16 2006 @ 03:48 AM
link   
well so far the earliest known civilisation was Catalhoyuk
www.smm.org...
it dates from 7000bce
there is nothing more advanced than that anywhere on earth
when you remember that the ice age didn't actually end until 9500bce and the human population of the earth at that point was less than 5 million (less than the current population of london) its easy to see why



posted on Dec, 18 2006 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Marduk,

thank you for that last post on Gobustan. I am very interested in artifacts that seem out of place for their time period. This interest does not stem from my own desire to find evidence for some theory. I believe humans are very ingenuitive, and a group of us can come up with some pretty advanced stuff to fit our needs and wants.

This find at Gobustan is very interesting. I especially enjoyed the description of graffiti found from Roman legions and Alexander the Great's men. It's like an ancient subway car.


Also, thank you to the other poster for providing the extra links. I will try and digest those at some point.

If anyone has any other artifacts the archeological community finds interesting.... please let me know.



posted on Dec, 18 2006 @ 01:25 PM
link   
swastikas have been found in the geghama mountain range as well dating from a little earlier
www.iatp.am...



posted on Dec, 24 2006 @ 07:27 AM
link   
i think this is funny

person A has beleif and look for ideas to support it

person B has beleif and look for ideas to support it



person A has more "expertise" and therefore more less likely to admit holes in his ideas, or any long held beleifs


person B has less "expertise" and his ideas are deemed as "imaginative" or unsupported by the minds that are collectively worshipped and respectively "hived" in regards to appease the currenty power structure

WE MAY NEVER KNOW THE TRUTH we just beleive we do

do most "scholars" hold the beleif that civilizations from thousands of years ago COULD NOT have had better technologies or understandings of knowledge then WE DO NOW?

is this beleif rooted in the misconception that our society places success and wealth based on MATERIAL items. so since there were no beamers and rolex's thousands of years ago, these civilizations were INFERIOR to us. something tells me these ancient civilizations had a higher value on SPIRITUALITY, which seems almost fictional and mystical to many today.

so i wonder if because of these commonly held beleifs what ever they find dating back in the past is somehow defined in a way that fits there beleifs and other stuff like crystals and tzolkin wheels are just kind of marveled at like "ah that's cute a crystal" and wow they had an ancient calander guess they weren't all that dumb. that my friends IS IGNORANCE and it is ignorance past down to these respected minds who mold our beleifs and opinions.


[edit on 24-12-2006 by cpdaman]



posted on Dec, 24 2006 @ 11:19 AM
link   
Mysterious Egyptian Glass Formed by Meteorite Strike, Study Says; December 21, 2006



Strange specimens of natural glass found in the Egyptian desert are products of a meteorite slamming into Earth between 100,000 and 200,000 years ago, scientists have concluded.

a chemical analysis showed that the glass was created in temperatures so high that they could only have been the result of a meteorite impact.

Gordon Osinski, a geologist at the Canadian Space Agency in Saint-Hubert who conducted the analysis, found that the glass samples contain strands of molten quartz, a signature of meteorite impacts.

"We can now say for definite that they were caused by a meteorite impact," he said.


Believe it or not.



posted on Dec, 24 2006 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by ultralo1
Now back to topic. Are there any OOParts that are not frauds?

Yes, but not the ones that are usually on OOPart lists.

They include things like an unusually sophisticated gold necklace in Britain dated to the Bronze Age (sophisticated for that era and a technique that we don't know about today. We could duplicate it or better it, but it wasn't a common technique then and we don't know what they did.)

The sky-disk of Nebra is one that, again, is unusual:
www.stonepages.com...

OOParts can be created when sites are bulldozed:
www.stonepages.com...

I think that a lot of museums have collections of "what IS this thing" lurking around in odd corners. They are not lost bits of machinery that turn up in coal seams or anything dramatic like that. But they are interesting oddities... trade goods, perhaps, or souveniers, or even works of (then) visionary artists.



posted on Dec, 24 2006 @ 08:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by ultralo1
I have a deep mistrust in archeology, not because of any consperacy, but due to the fact that archeology has a lot of eductated guess work involved in it.

Have you ever taken an archaeology course (I have)? Have you ever gone out on a dig (lots of state organiztions, like Texas Archaeological Association sponsor digs where you can go out and get involved even without a degree or anything more than your own trowel, a pair of gloves, and something to sit on.)

The current ideological clime is to be suspicious of scientists -- something about all that education somehow turns them into cheezy weasles in the mind of much of the public and they teach others that scientists "can't be trusted"... when none of them have ever even talked to one or worked with one.

That's like saying "lifeguards can't be trusted" and "soldiers can't be trusted" and "kids under 25 can't be trusted" and so on and so forth.

Here's a link by real archaeologists with interesting current news and talk on archaeological subjects. I hope you'll read some of these and perhaps think about whether their opinion on ancient material is much better than someone who read one Graham Hancock (a reporter, not an archaeologist or scientist) book and now knows everything about a culture.
www.archaeologica.org...

And, of course, Hall of Maat
www.hallofmaat.com...


We cannot even get a concensus on whether dinosaurs had skin or feathers.

Erm, you may not be able to have a consensus, but the paleontologists I do some volunteer work for certainly have a consensus based on a lot of fossil material (some of which I've seen.)

I encourage folks to do volunteer work for local museums. It's fun and educational and very broadening, particularly if you talk to the scientists who work there and ask them about stuff.



posted on Dec, 27 2006 @ 08:46 AM
link   
Bryd,
Thanks for the reply. I do not mistrust scientist, I work with them everyday. I work mostly in the life sciences. So I do not have first hand knowledge of the physical sciences like archeology. My statements regarding them are generalized. I do stand by my statement that I find it hard to believe how archeology can guess at how cultures and life styles were just by looking at what they dig up. For example the discovery channels version of walking with dinosaurs, they were telling the matting habits of creatures that have been extinct for millions of years and passing it on as a fact. It is times like that when I question the validity of the teachings. Just like in last months National geographic magazine, they had an artical about the oldest child skeleton. They made a whole page, including graghics, about how the child was carried by his mother and father and how he was cared for. They only stated once at he begining of this exerpt the words "may have". I personally feel that when a subject is purely conjecture that there should be a large disclaimer. This should be even more so in articales an programs that are directed at the general public, so it is not interpreted as fact.

Hope you had a merry christmas



posted on Jan, 16 2007 @ 02:06 PM
link   
i was listening to george noory last night...and some guy on there who i think was a palentologist (i was dozing off) mentioned something about the whole..them not being allowed to tell the public all of their discoveries too..so i have heard that before..i think it's true. who knows what kind of shiz they have found and not told us. maybe we shouldn't know



posted on Jan, 16 2007 @ 03:22 PM
link   
so when you were half asleep you heard a palaeontologist say he couldn't divulge all the secret things he uncovered
fyi Palaeontologists study dinosaurs
what do you think he found
the remains of a nuked plesiosaur with a "ban nuclear testing now" placard




posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 06:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Marduk
well so far the earliest known civilisation was Catalhoyuk
www.smm.org...
it dates from 7000bce
there is nothing more advanced than that anywhere on earth
when you remember that the ice age didn't actually end until 9500bce and the human population of the earth at that point was less than 5 million (less than the current population of london) its easy to see why


It is sooooooooooo wrong, unreliable source.

The earliest civilization was the Adam family. Adam Eve Caen Habel. - Qooran the most reliable source, the most read book in the world.

1.5 billion people can't be wrong.



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 12:43 PM
link   
im getting a bit sick of you filling every thread with religious fundementalism
you can shove Allah where the sun doesnt shine for all I care
he doesnt exist and you know it
if you think he does and is the answer to everything why is it you are only saying that on a public forum
this reeks that you have little real faith
people who do have faith don't feel the need to talk about it all the time
they are content with it and it is enough
its the same as the old saying that those who talk about sex all the time arent getting any
this forum is not the place for this kind of nonsense
every time the "A" word comes out of your mouth a little bit more of your soul gets dragged down to hell for being faithless
you've already been warned once by the mod team that this forum is not the place for Allah
why don't you take him out and play with him somewhere else





new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join