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.

 

Bribe your way to knowledge

page: 2
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 11:53 AM
link   


to actually find something that would drastically change how people think in one go today would not be welcomed by the officials or the people, the officials would try and cover it up but if it did get out i dont think most people could handle it....


Howdy Dar Kuma

I don't see how any official would be remotely interested in this (accept perhaps the Egyptian ministry of antiquities), you'll notice that the finding of a possible other species of humans caused barely a ripple. The "officials would be concerned about how people think" is a fringe creation to try and come up with a reason why a conspiracy would take place.

My standard questions to this is:

When did the conspiracy begin?

Who is running it (you'd need archaeologist and host of experts to know what to look for) yet no such body of people is "missing" from productive work - are they using a bunch of losers?

How do you get all the nations to agree on what the standards of what should be "suppressed"?

One last question; who monitors archaeological research in the most western countries?

Its a trick question - be careful.

Howdy Skyfloating - good question - easy answer, all those things I mention would be easily ID after a mere ten thousand years - depending on soil conditions and method of preservation (ie in dry sand, bog, underwater, buried, acid soil, etc, etc)

Remember we have found wooden artifacts back as far as 400,000 years, human bodies back 5,000+ years and pottery back 29,000 years. bone/antler artifacts x a hundred thousand years, and stone tools x hundreds of thousands of years.

In general conditions ceramics, glass and some plastics are essentially indestructible.




posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 12:05 PM
link   

I know if I knew anything about where all the secrets are you could buy me out for paltry 300,000.


Oh my... I wouldn't even get out of bed for less than 3 million - and that's BrP or EUR!



But, seriously, darling: archaeologists do not have "weaknesses".
That's why they ARE archaeologists... ; )

(How do I know that, you ask?
What do you think...?)



AN AFTERTHOUGHT: Come to think of it... there IS one. The only thing he cares more about than King Tut's mask is his own mask... But he's already very well remunerated for everything he doesn't say, I should think.





[edit on 28-11-2007 by Vanitas]



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 12:25 PM
link   
The secret of success in Archaeology, to obtain the "National Geographic" moment is to discover something new, to add to knowledge.

THAT is a rule that has not changed in 150 years.

Anyway the main source of manpower in archaeology is volunteers, local native workers and grad students - people not noted for supporting the great conspiracy - and very very vulnerable to bundles of cash.

Or do you think archaeologist do the digging up, finding, cataloging and presevation?



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune

One last question; who monitors archaeological research in the most western countries?

is it Indiana Jones ?



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 12:34 PM
link   


is it Indiana Jones ?


Dead wrong Cleopatra lips - study harder and try again!



posted on Nov, 29 2007 @ 01:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune
How about a habitation level with inclusions of plastic, radioactive materials, high tech ceramic and genetic material from non humans? ie a trash pit?


it would be ruled out of place, and thrown away as contamination in the dig.



How about a pollen count that shows hybird grain crops showing up where none existed before along with industrial pollution.


It would be ruled out of place, and thrown away as contamination of the dig.







A light fixture, broken and thrown away insitu?


it would be ruled out of place, and thrown away as contamination in the dig.



I can think of dozens and dozens of examples of irrefutable evidence.


they would be ruled out of place, and thrown away as contamination in the dig.


think i'm kidding? it's true. they also don't date objects that are visually out of place for the dig in question. if the dig has been pre-dated, and an object that looks new or misplaced is found, it's rejected as contamation.



posted on Nov, 29 2007 @ 01:31 AM
link   


it would be ruled out of place, and thrown away as contamination in the dig.


Hans: Why would they do that? They have proof – or do you think there are no archaeological “believers”? Why would they give up fame and fortune – why destroy knowledge?




It would be ruled out of place, and thrown away as contamination of the dig.


Hans: Kinda of limited in your vision of the archaeological vision are you Undo – only a lab could detect this and evil archaeologist wouldn’t be there.




think i'm kidding? it's true. they also don't date objects that are visually out of place for the dig in question.


Hans: Really may I ask what digs you’ve been on? I've been on about twenty...do you have any basis for your claims or are you just making stuff up?



if the dig has been pre-dated, and an object that looks new or misplaced is found, it's rejected as contamation.


Hans: Only in your made up dreams Undo, please read a basic book on archaeological technique, I would recommend the latest from Collin Renfrew.

Phew



posted on Nov, 29 2007 @ 01:34 AM
link   


why destroy knowledge?


Because their firm belief in the knowledge they've supposedly already accumulated about the dates of geological strata and what should be in them, forces them (for many reasons, including economics) to keep the dig to
unearthing only items that support the established theory. I asked the same question and was told that they can't afford to date out of place objects.



posted on Nov, 29 2007 @ 01:39 AM
link   
for example, if they find a bottle cap in a dig that's supposed to be paleolithic, they throw it away, as it's "obviously" a modern piece of trash that has either accidentally or by some force of nature, managed to insinuate itself in the dig. they don't have the manpower or permission to date every item that's found in a dig. instead, the age of the strata is predetermined and out of place objects are removed and disposed of.



posted on Nov, 29 2007 @ 03:59 AM
link   
Howdy Undo

Archaeology simply doesn't work that way. How many digs have you been on - are you basing your opinion on what you have observed or what you've been told to believe by fringe writers?

If one finds a coke bottle in a dig (coke bottles are often - a commonly agreed ID that an area has been worked before) you of course don't date it. One can normally tell when a strat has been damage or an intrusion has taken place.

Again, fame, fortune and money goes to those who find new stuff, that is a basic tenet of archaeology. I know of no archaeologist who goes out to find nothing.

Find something new and you get fame and fortune, more money for research, book deals, tenture, media expose, etc - why would you pass this up?

Oh here is a question for you, how did the 19th century archaeologist know to destroy material that only a modern man would now recognize?

Puzzling isn't it?? LOL



posted on Nov, 29 2007 @ 04:14 AM
link   
This site cracks me up. I love how this guy makes a good point on how to obtain "Above Top Secret" info and you all poke fun.

YOU are the ones who are being rediculous. Searching on the internet for these secrets lol. If you really want some secret info make some friends in the real scientific and political world and kick them a few dollars here and there, how do you think so many countries now have nukes? By searching on the internet?


You can actually view this mans proposal as a business plan. Take the raised capital to obtain information. With this information you can do all sorts of things. I'm willing to bet many of you truth seekers out there would log on to a site that actually provides solid info for a monthly fee, I'm talking hundred, maybe thousands of dollars per article. I know I would. With this recuring monthly revenue you could obtain more info. Of course you would have to find a secure place to host the server and have very expensive tech to make it untracable.

Personally, If I ever come into large amounts of wealth, I'm talking billions, not millions. I will setup shop with my own "black" projects, I wouldn't mind being one among few that can travel among galaxies and contact aliens, its also a very good business investment.



posted on Nov, 29 2007 @ 04:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune
Howdy Undo


Oh here is a question for you, how did the 19th century archaeologist know to destroy material that only a modern man would now recognize?

Puzzling isn't it?? LOL


Well, logic tells me that the farther down you dig, the more likely you'll find data related to the concepts advanced by ancient astronaut theory, referencing pre-flood Mesopotamia and Egypt. By the time of the 19th century, most of ancient archaeology was still buried under heaps of sand. For example, the Osirieon at Abydos, Egypt, was rediscovered three separate times because the desert sands kept reburying it and the sumerian texts were under somewhere in the vicinty of 8ft of flood silt. Anything from that time frame is now highly controversial, and is simply chalked off as fantastical and mythological.



posted on Nov, 29 2007 @ 04:43 AM
link   


If one finds a coke bottle in a dig (coke bottles are often - a commonly agreed ID that an area has been worked before) you of course don't date it. One can normally tell when a strat has been damage or an intrusion has taken place.


Right, I know this. That's what I'm tryin' to tell you. That's not all that isn't dated. I've been told this by other archaeologists, not by "fringers", because I asked if they dated all items found in a dig, and they said no. I asked did they date out of place items, such as modern day trash or what they assume is modern day trash, they said no. They can't and don't date out of place items in a pre-dated dig. And things considered to be modern day contrivances, are removed and discarded, even if the dig is new and undated.

[edit on 29-11-2007 by undo]



posted on Nov, 29 2007 @ 07:04 AM
link   


Anything from that time frame is now highly controversial, and is simply chalked off as fantastical and mythological


Sorry Undo but that isn't true, most of the cuneiform deals with economic and accounting data - none of which is controversial. I cannot think of anything taken out of Sumerian sites that is controversial (except to specialist in obscure areas) the controvery has been provided by fringe writers misreading and misinterpreting materials to met their own agendas.

The physical evidence from Sumer isn't controversial (controversial in the since of it being out of place) at all, nor is there any such matter found in any of the earlier sites. Controversy is provided by later fringe writers.

Your archaeologists are correct - if they find something modern mixed into a layer then they know the layer is comtaiminated - its very easy to tell if the contimation came from, we know modern stuff very well. Real alien stuff would come from undisturbed layers, and it wouldn't look like a coke bottle.

I believe you are leaving out the word "disturbed", your archaeologist friends probably mentioned that word too. It means the strat has been mixed or disturbed by intrusion or other factors.

No archaeologist in his right mind would throw away anything that is going to make their career.

I can just see a meeting with the funding source: Oh yes sir thanks for this 450,000 dollars to dig for three months - no worries we promise not to find a thing.

And with that I must now say adieu - It is the National day Holiday in the United Arab Emirates and I'm off for five days.

Good discussion Undo and all others, back in a few days. Excellent points Darkstar 86

I'm giving a speech tonight on Arab History (Dilmun) and I think I'll add to it a passage on cognitive dissonance - just for Skyfloating J W A F M I

[edit on 29/11/07 by Hanslune]



posted on Nov, 29 2007 @ 09:28 AM
link   
It's controversial if when someone repeats what was written by the sumerians: et.al, Enki's temple ziggurat was built entirely of metal [not mudbricks], which causes a flurry of accusations that the individual is just quoting Sitchin. .. you know what I mean since that was also your reaction and I had to prove it to you. But you already knew that, you said, after i proved it to you and then you pretended like that wasn't your question at all. Very disengenious. And you expect me to believe that people such as yourself, are going to be honest about anything else regarding this topic? You can't even admit you were wrong about the sumerian texts not mentioning metal "Thingies" as you called them.

Here's an example of your genuine approach to the topic:



Undo could you be so kind as to specifically state which Sumerian story has that story about the metal thingy? I've read every known piece of Sumerian literature and don't recall that - its not - dare I say it - Sitchin stuff is it?


Now mind you, this reference about Enki's metal temple/ziggurat is in at least 2 prominent sumerian texts as provided by 2 different mainstream universities: The UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD and THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANNIA.

ENKI'S JOURNEY TO NIBRU
www-etcsl.orient.ox.ac.uk...
ENKI BUILDS THE E-ENGURRA
www.utexas.edu...

THOSE ARE NOT SITCHIN TEXTS.

You are not as familar with the Sumerian texts as you are pretending to be. Then when caught in the lie and your attempt to discredit the actual texts by insinuating them to be Sitchin texts when they are university texts....

Disengenious.

It's mind boggling that this type of half-baked scholarship is what is passing for the educated opinion. On the one hand, you expect the general public to accept your opinion on subjects, but refuse to accept what was written by these ancient civs, even when they wrote it and it was translated by people who's opinion you profess to have faith in. And if someone points it out that they wrote it, then obviously the person must be saying they have proof that it's true. Whether Enki ever existed or had a metal temple is beside the point. As you weren't even willing to admit it was mentioned in their texts, as translated by your fellow academicians.



[edit on 29-11-2007 by undo]



posted on Nov, 29 2007 @ 10:00 AM
link   
I'm curious

what do you think Enkis temple actually was ?



posted on Nov, 29 2007 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by kerkinana walsky
I'm curious

what do you think Enkis temple actually was ?



It's irrelevant what *I* think it is. Read the texts. What do they (the sumerians) say it is?



posted on Nov, 29 2007 @ 11:22 AM
link   
they say it was a temple

Enki, the lord who determines the fates, built up his temple entirely from silver and lapis lazuli.


e built the temple from precious metal, decorated it with lapis lazuli, and covered it abundantly with gold


the temple of Enki bellows


During the night the temple praises its lord and offers its best for him


Before lord Enki, Isimud the minister praises the temple; he goes to the temple and speaks to it.

these are just in the first 17 lines
its pretty much called a temple all the way through
let me ask you again

what do you think it was
are you embarressed to say what you think for some reason ?
you think its something techy don't you, a tank ?, an aircraft ?

made from silver and carnelian it wouldn't function very well
you do realise that both silver and carnelian were regarded as holy substances in mesopotamia don't you claiming to make a temple from it is just a statement to how very holy it was ?
its not a case of thinking the Akkadians who wrote that were lying, they were attempting to get across the idea that it was sacred



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 01:16 PM
link   
Howdy Undo

I see you've hijacked my thread to continue your failed argument

1, You were called on to support your contention that the Sumerians had floating metal temples.

2. They do NOT, there is no evidence they are real, they are mythical

3. I'd appreciate if you'd stop hijacking this thread, I'm sure I'm find again where you are on about this subject and you continue to insist the Sumerians really really had flying metal temples.....



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 01:31 PM
link   
So the question is

Why have no alternatives used money as a way to break into the mythical conspiracy?

I'd suggest it because they are out to make money not spend it.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join