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.
What is constantly being said by me however, is that some of us are sick of scientists approaching a subject with either racial, religious or darwinist glasses on and then, coming to conclusions from that limited vantage point.
How the hell are we supposed to arrive at the truth if we look at a subject with filtered priorities and prejudice.
Originally posted by Skyfloating
Hanslune & Harte:
Sorry for the aggravation folks. It was indeed a complete misread. I was thinking "What the hell is he so angry about?". My apologies.
Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by Harte
Wait a minute here. Ease up. As far as Im concerned whether the Pacal image is an ancient astronaut or not is a matter of interpretation. Just because you dont share Hancock/Danikens interpretation does not necessarily make them liars.
Introduction
In 1929, a group of historians found an amazing map drawn on a gazelle skin.
Research showed that it was a genuine document drawn in 1513 by Piri Reis, a famous admiral of the Turkish fleet in the sixteenth century.
The Controversy
The Piri Reis map shows the western coast of Africa, the eastern coast of South America, and the northern coast of Antarctica. The northern coastline of Antarctica is perfectly detailed. The most puzzling however is not so much how Piri Reis managed to draw such an accurate map of the Antarctic region 300 years before it was discovered, but that the map shows the coastline under the ice. Geological evidence confirms that the latest date Queen Maud Land could have been charted in an ice-free state is 4000 BC.
The official science has been saying all along that the ice-cap which covers the Antarctic is million years old.
The Piri Reis map shows that the northern part of that continent has been mapped before the ice did cover it. That should make think it has been mapped million years ago, but that's impossible since mankind did not exist at that time.
Further and more accurate studies have proven that the last period of ice-free condition in the Antarctic ended about 6000 years ago. There are still doubts about the beginning of this ice-free period, which has been put by different researchers everything between year 13000 and 9000 BC.
The question is: Who mapped the Queen Maud Land of Antarctic 6000 years ago? Which unknown civilization had the technology or the need to do that?
It is well-known that the first civilization, according to the traditional history, developed in the mid-east around year 3000 BC, soon to be followed within a millennium by the Indus valley and the Chinese ones. So, accordingly, none of the known civilizations could have done such a job. Who was here 4000 years BC, being able to do things that NOW are possible with the modern technologies?
As can be seen below, an azimuthal projection ( looking at the globe from a point above the globe), from the point above Cairo, Africa (Egypt) shows that the Piri Reis map corresponds more or less with the lower right quarter of this map if one rotates it some 20 degrees counter clockwise.
Originally posted by cormac mac airt
You are accusing mainstream of that, but isn't that what the fringe is doing. Isn't the belief that ALL OF MAINSTREAM is out to lie to you, so you must come up with your own interpretation FILTERED and PREJUDICED? It works both ways.
Originally posted by Hanslune
No problem at all, I wish I had more time to spend at the site.
Plus an update to the Scott Creighton Giza Pyramid apex question at this link
Giza apex
I believe somewhere you or someone else had a map that showed the Giza perimeter wall encompassing the location of the "apex", that map appears to be in error.
Back in a few days, actually I'm going off to do a tour of the ruins in the "four corners area" and then on to Guatamala for some pyramid hugging.
When I get back I'll try and read thru the entire thread. If anything worthwhile comes up take it to the Hall of Ma'at - where you can get a professional read on the idea/concept/question.
[edit on 4/3/08 by Hanslune]
Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by Harte
By the way...your assertion that Hawass had "no idea at all" of Bayuks extraterrestrial-channeling activities cant be true...unless you are saying that people can hold seminars in the Pyramids without Hawass consent or knowledge.
Originally posted by Harte
reply to post by spacevisitor
Again, please every now and then use the search function here.
All of the above is available on at least three other threads here at ATS. As well as several other conclusive arguments against this idea.
Harte
Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by Harte
Wait a minute here. Ease up. As far as Im concerned whether the Pacal image is an ancient astronaut or not is a matter of interpretation.
Originally posted by spacevisitor
[You are right, I mostly don’t do that [search function ], but I go check that out.
Originally posted by Byrd
Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by Harte
Wait a minute here. Ease up. As far as Im concerned whether the Pacal image is an ancient astronaut or not is a matter of interpretation.
Actually, no. The symbols that he deliberately clips out of the image is Mayan writing. So you have the tomb and the tomb inscription... and believe me, it says nothing about outer space, astronauts, or anything like that. It's about Pacal and his death and includes some prayers.
Originally posted by Byrd
Actually, no. The symbols that he deliberately clips out of the image is Mayan writing. So you have the tomb and the tomb inscription... and believe me, it says nothing about outer space, astronauts, or anything like that. It's about Pacal and his death and includes some prayers.