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.

 

2012 and the crystal skulls

page: 2
8
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 27 2008 @ 02:21 AM
link   


In 1970 the Crystal Skull was examined by experts at the Hewlett Packard Crystal laboratories. Their conclusions surprised even themselves. They found that the Crystal Skull had been carved out of an exceptional piece of pure crystal against the grain or structure of the crystal. This should have caused the crystal to shatter. More puzzling still, there were no tool marks to be seen. Not even microscopic ones.


What techniques did they use to attain these results?


Originally posted by zysin5
Now IM sure many skulls are fakes.. And the Vatican holds onto many of the smaller skulls.. But still there is one skull that at the time Hewlett Packard did tests on.. They where not able to come to up with a 100% answer.

Please send me a link on any new tests so that I can update my personal research..

Many thanks.

Here is my Source to my information at the time.

And I am talking about the Mitchell Hedge skull.. Not the others..

And I was just putting in some other information.. LIke Ive said in the past. I dont claim to know the truth.. I just seek the truth..
Hence if you have something up to date.. I would be more than happy to check it out! Not trying to prove anything here.. Just trying to share what I know at this time.. Which is not that much..heheh




Although it is an anthropologically accurate carving of a human skull produced by a scientifically advanced civilization, they admitted that we couldn't make it today and had no idea who had made it and for what purpose.


Im just going by what I have read.. So much info these days, Its an effort to stay on the up and up.

And for the record.. I really like it when skeptics come in and challenge these theories.. If they can not hold up to other sources. then its all good, and its why I am here.. To learn more.. So please by all means..
debunk my information, so that I can update my knowledge pool.

I did read your posts, however I would like to see more than just your own words.. I would like to see links and where you get your sources from.
You have a well thought out posts, but agin, they are in your own words.
I need more substance to come to any end to this thought pattern, as I added all my links and source material for you to check out.

[edit on 27-5-2008 by zysin5]


“There is doubt he found the skull in Lubantuum. Mitchell-Hedges did not travel alone: Dr. Thomas Gann accompanied him and he left, upon his return, an account of his travels. The publication is intriguing if only because none of the photographs show Anna, which suggests she was not even in Lubantuum, as her dad claims. For sure, travelling in those with a 17-year old daughter was not customary, but not necessarily extra-ordinary either, seeing her dad was a famous explorer. But it is remarkable that Gann’s account does not mention anything about the discovery of a crystal skull – a unique artefact, irrelevant of whether they felt it was highly prized or not.
As a consequence, another argument goes that the family did not have the skull until 1944, when Mitchell-Hedges bought the skull in London. Joe Nickell, in Secrets of the Supernatural, argues that the skull was bought from Sidney Burney, for 400 pounds. It is known that Burney had the skull as early as 1936. Nickell also uncovered a reference in a letter from Burney to the American Museum of Natural History, dating from 1933. Burney placed it up for auction in 1943 at Sotheby’s, where the Museum of Mankind wanted to purchase the object. Burney then withdrew it from auction and sold it privately to Mitchell-Hedges – reason unknown. Anna Mitchell-Hedges has stated that Burney had received the skull from Mitchell-Hedges as pawn: Mitchell-Hedges was in need of money to finance yet another expensive expedition. Burney thus decided to loan him the money, in return for the skull, which he returned to Mitchell-Hedges when the latter repaid the loan to him, though only after Burney had threatened to sell it at auction.
Nickell, however, remains sceptical. Mitchell-Hedges was a famous adventurer, who published his auto-biography in 1954, entitled Danger My Ally. It is the first time he speaks about the skull. Throughout the 1930s, in the various newspaper articles, he never mentions the skull. Why this silence for more than two decades? It is a major mystery why he would not mention what was one of his most intriguing discoveries.
Though Nickell has made clear that the accepted “facts” about the discovery of the skull are largely invented, the question remains as to who discovered the skull. It had to come from somewhere. In the reconstruction of events, Burney bought it from an Englishman, which is what he writes in the 1933 letter that Nickell uncovered, who had it in his possession for several years. “I did not discover anything more.””;

www.philipcoppens.com...

(The link above contains a lot about the theories over the skulls origins BTW)


So basically, there is a serious amount of well-founded speculation over Mitchell Hedges and his skulls- at the end of the day, you simply cannot trust his story of events completely even if you believe in the skulls being real, it is all very suspicious, there are many holes and unanswered questions in his story of events and a lot of evidence that are against much of what he has claimed in his story of events etc. If you type in “Mitchell Hedges auction” into Google.co.uk search you will turn up hundreds of results, I have decided to select the best one at first glance (as not to crowd the entire post up with links etc).

The main link to the recent news that according to the latest dating techniques and research, the skulls are fakes;

news.bbc.co.uk...




posted on May, 27 2008 @ 02:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Mad_Hatter
 


Wonderful! Many thanks for those links! I will start digging into them first thing in the morning.. Getting late here.. And Im fading fast!
But just a quick note here to thank you for those links, and check out my post above, I made an edit, about how I personally feel about the skulls.
I agree, I dont belive they hold super natural powers.
They are a metaphore to what we hold within our minds.
We hold the powers within these brains of ours.. Hence thats where I belive the energy, or powers of the skulls truely come from is within us.
Not an external source.. But from within..


Reply to Tokis Phoenix--
Thanks for that post.. Yes I will get back with you all tommorow on this subject.. I think we can move forward here, as we are all on the same page pretty much.. As Im not one to fall into smoke and mirrors, and cheap artifact tricks.. I know the true energy and powers come from withint our own minds!
And not these external crystal skulls.
But all the same its truely a passionate debate, and many great ideas!
Thanks for sharing!

[edit on 27-5-2008 by zysin5]



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 02:32 AM
link   
Cool, if you can prove to me that they are in fact linked to the Aztecs or Mayans for real, then I would really be interested in that information and so would alot of others, I'm sure, since that seems to be the main issue in the authenticity of these skulls.

I personally think that if they were shown to have a REAL solid connection to the time period that people claim they come from, then it wouldn't matter whether or not they were created with "modern" technology. And really, it wouldn't surprise me for the Mayans to have created something like this because they have already proven themselves to be a very advanced civilization in my opinion. But since there is no evidence to support this link, I have to default to the evidence that I do have, which points to the skulls bieng fakes created for profits from tourism and cultural interests which seems more logical.

Once again, I'm not discussing the issue of whether or not these skulls have "powers" or whatever you wanna call it. If that's your thing don't let me ruin it for you.



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 02:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by zysin5
Reply to Tokis Phoenix--
Thanks for that post.. Yes I will get back with you all tommorow on this subject.. I think we can move forward here, as we are all on the same page pretty much.. As Im not one to fall into smoke and mirrors, and cheap artifact tricks.. I know the true energy and powers come from withint our own minds!
And not these external crystal skulls.
But all the same its truely a passionate debate, and many great ideas!
Thanks for sharing!

[edit on 27-5-2008 by zysin5]



Cool, it was good debating with you too, it is always good to meet people who value evidence/facts etc and are for the progress of the understanding of such issues like these crystals skulls
.



Originally posted by Mad_Hatter
Cool, if you can prove to me that they are in fact linked to the Aztecs or Mayans for real, then I would really be interested in that information and so would alot of others, I'm sure, since that seems to be the main issue in the authenticity of these skulls.

I personally think that if they were shown to have a REAL solid connection to the time period that people claim they come from, then it wouldn't matter whether or not they were created with "modern" technology. And really, it wouldn't surprise me for the Mayans to have created something like this because they have already proven themselves to be a very advanced civilization in my opinion. But since there is no evidence to support this link, I have to default to the evidence that I do have, which points to the skulls bieng fakes created for profits from tourism and cultural interests which seems more logical.

Once again, I'm not discussing the issue of whether or not these skulls have "powers" or whatever you wanna call it. If that's your thing don't let me ruin it for you.



Hm i think at the end of the day, no-one can really prove that these are real Aztec or Mayan artifacts; people have been trying to conclusively prove that these are real ancient artifacts for generations now, yet if anything the more we find out about these skulls the more the evidence/research points to them being modern fakes rather than ancient artifacts etc.
The only way to really prove such a thing would be for more skulls to be found by qualified trustworthy archaeologists on accepted Aztec/Mayan sites etc. But i personally don't think this is likely to happen, as i have serious doubt over these skulls authenticity.
I also believe too that the Aztecs and Mayans were very advanced people and created and invented some amazing stuff, however there's just no reliable evidence over these crystal skulls being the real deal etc. However i'm sure as time goes by, people will discover far better and more authentic artifacts from ancient civilizations that will put these dodgey skulls in the shade
.



[edit on 27-5-2008 by Tokis Phoenix]



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 09:44 AM
link   
What a truly interesting read. I'd seen pictures of the Crystal Skulls before, but honestly had never really researched them, and I wasn't familiar with the legends.

I'm going to see this movie at some point this weekend, and I'm glad to have found this thread with some background on the story first


Star for you Jkrog


-WFA



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 07:45 PM
link   
Okay,since the skulls CAN NOT BE Carbon dated there is NO way to to definitively know how old they actually are.Now as far as proof if they actually came from Central America theres a couple things I should point out.1)Why would the locals around the Mayan temples lie about the skulls authenticity,there is nothing to gain from it-as it is not like there arn't other skulls in other parts of the world and it's not like they are getting anything in return for claiming the skulls are real.2)Mayan legend(actual written text)tells of the skulls and we KNOW that that text wasn't written in the 18 or 1900's.3)The skull found in the 20's was only brought to attention AFTER F.A. Mittchell(a renowned explorer)returned from Belize(Why go through all that trouble going to another country and all just to bring back a fake skull when there was nothing in it for him or his daughter),yes at first it was thought to be a total fabrication,but after he let researchers test it, peoples mind began to change.....

Researchers found that the skull had been carved against the natural axis of the crystal. Modern crystal sculptors always take into account the axis, or orientation of the crystal's molecular symmetry, because if they carve "against the grain," the piece is bound to shatter -- even with the use of lasers and other high-tech cutting methods.

To compound the strangeness, HP could find no microscopic scratches on the crystal which would indicate it had been carved with metal instruments. Dorland's best hypothesis for the skull's construction is that it was roughly hewn out with diamonds, and then the detail work was meticulously done with a gentle solution of silicon sand and water. The exhausting job -- assuming it could possibly be done in this way -- would have required man-hours adding up to 300 years to complete.

Under these circumstances, experts believe that successfully crafting a shape as complex as the Mitchell-Hedges skull is impossible; as one HP researcher is said to have remarked, "The damned thing simply shouldn't be."
link

I will have some more information for you all shortly-this was just a quick summary,as I have other matters to attend to at the moment




[edit on 5/27/2008 by jkrog08]



posted on May, 28 2008 @ 12:41 AM
link   
Wouldn't it be great to own a real crystal skull. Can you imagine how much it could raise your consciousness. Perhaps to enlightenment if you knew how to activate it right.



posted on May, 28 2008 @ 07:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by jkrog08
Okay,since the skulls CAN NOT BE Carbon dated there is NO way to to definitively know how old they actually are.



The skulls can't be carbon dated, however they can be dated using other techniques. I will tell you in a moment;


Originally posted by jkrog08Now as far as proof if they actually came from Central America theres a couple things I should point out.1)Why would the locals around the Mayan temples lie about the skulls authenticity,there is nothing to gain from it-as it is not like there arn't other skulls in other parts of the world and it's not like they are getting anything in return for claiming the skulls are real.


Actually they do get something from these skulls (especially with the advent of the new Indiana Jones movie) and that is tourism- tourism is vital to these sorts of communities and the interest around the skulls will help bring lots of tourism into their area- so they do have stuff to gain.


Originally posted by jkrog082)Mayan legend(actual written text)tells of the skulls and we KNOW that that text wasn't written in the 18 or 1900's.3)


Like a lot of cultures in the world, skulls are very symbolic in Mayan/Aztec society- however while there is a lot of writing on skulls in general, there is nothing specifically written about any crystal skulls.


Originally posted by jkrog08The skull found in the 20's was only brought to attention AFTER F.A. Mittchell(a renowned explorer)returned from Belize(Why go through all that trouble going to another country and all just to bring back a fake skull when there was nothing in it for him or his daughter)


There was a lot in it for him and that was the fame the skulls brought him- plenty of people in history have faked artifacts for fame rather than money, and its certain that these skulls did make him very famous.


Originally posted by jkrog08,yes at first it was thought to be a total fabrication,but after he let researchers test it, peoples mind began to change.....


Actually its the other way around. Also in your link that you gave it acknowledges this;

"It now appears that this tale of the skull's discovery was entirely fabricated. Mitchell-Hedges apparently purchased the skull at an auction at Sothebys in London, in 1943. This has been verified by documents at the British Museum, which had bid against Mitchell-Hedges for the crystal artifact.

This revelation is consistent with the known history of Mitchell-Hedges's involvement with the skull. There are no photographs of the skull among those that were taken during his Lubaatun expedition, and there is no documentation of Mitchell-Hedges displaying or even acknowledging the skull prior to 1943.



Originally posted by jkrog08

Researchers found that the skull had been carved against the natural axis of the crystal. Modern crystal sculptors always take into account the axis, or orientation of the crystal's molecular symmetry, because if they carve "against the grain," the piece is bound to shatter -- even with the use of lasers and other high-tech cutting methods.

To compound the strangeness, HP could find no microscopic scratches on the crystal which would indicate it had been carved with metal instruments. Dorland's best hypothesis for the skull's construction is that it was roughly hewn out with diamonds, and then the detail work was meticulously done with a gentle solution of silicon sand and water. The exhausting job -- assuming it could possibly be done in this way -- would have required man-hours adding up to 300 years to complete.

Under these circumstances, experts believe that successfully crafting a shape as complex as the Mitchell-Hedges skull is impossible; as one HP researcher is said to have remarked, "The damned thing simply shouldn't be."
link

I will have some more information for you all shortly-this was just a quick summary,as I have other matters to attend to at the moment



Whatever results the HP laboratories found out about the skulls in their results though are now very out-dated, and according to much more recent research, the old results are not very accurate (and probably based on many assumptions). If you read the main recent news link, the latest results using high tech dating methods etc shows that the skulls were made using modern rotary wheel technology and modern synthetic materials;

news.bbc.co.uk...


I prefer to believe the most recent results on the skulls than ones which were done decades ago, our technology and understanding is a lot better now days for stuff like this and the most recent results make a lot more sense in filling in the holes in the puzzle of the Mitchell Hedges crystal skull mystery.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 04:09 PM
link   
Phoenix-I can't present you with any definitive information to make you or anyone else believe,all I am doing(like I stated)is putting the information out 'there' for all to see!I guess it is kinda' like the "Roswell Crash",alot of information,but nodefinitive evidence,what do you think happened in 1947?I think a extraterrestrial spacecraft crashed,you?As far as the 'Crystal Skulls',I dunno',it may be true,it may not....more information is needed.


This thread is simply for informativepurposes.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 04:43 PM
link   
An alien skull in human shape?

If you are a believer of Gray or Reptilian, do you think their skull looks like this?




George Lucas and Steven Spieldberg made a good mistake but it was a good decision. A debunked topic, but a good topic, money flows in.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 09:42 PM
link   


Check this out aswell............Atlantis



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 05:43 AM
link   
It's interesting to note that the original "crystal skulls" are regular human skull shapes, yet in the new Indiana Jones "crystal skulls" are shaped like alien heads with alien eyes. Is this a mere coincidence in timing with the Vatican's annoucement of it being acceptable to acknowledge alien existence, or are George Lucas as well as Steven Spielberg just trying to mess with the public with their own views of aliens/sci-fi?



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by jkrog08
Okay,since the skulls CAN NOT BE Carbon dated there is NO way to to definitively know how old they actually are.


Actually, as many articles have pointed out, there is a way to know... this includes microscopic evidence about the polishing as well as some of the mineral content of the quartz. And, of course, the shape isn't correct for Mayan artifacts.


Why would the locals around the Mayan temples lie about the skulls authenticity,there is nothing to gain from it-as it is not like there arn't other skulls in other parts of the world and it's not like they are getting anything in return for claiming the skulls are real.


Well, it's a good story and it's one that the tourists want to hear, as others have said... but check your source on Mayans saying the skulls are authentic. If you track it down to its sources, you'll find that you won't come up with actual names of people who can be contacted.


2)Mayan legend(actual written text)tells of the skulls and we KNOW that that text wasn't written in the 18 or 1900's.

No Mayan legends speak of crystal skulls... or of skulls. Skulls and death are an important motif in art, but they don't look very realistic. They're stylized.

Could you point to the "actual written text" (we can search for it in the original Spanish language and see where it was preserved)?


3)The skull found in the 20's was only brought to attention AFTER F.A. Mittchell(a renowned explorer)returned from Belize(Why go through all that trouble going to another country and all just to bring back a fake skull when there was nothing in it for him or his daughter),yes at first it was thought to be a total fabrication,


...and this impression was helped along by his removing this paragraph from his books:

“it is at least 3,600 years old and according to legend was used by the High Priest of the Maya when performing esoteric rites. It is said that when he willed death with the help of the skull, death invariably followed”.
www.mitchell-hedges.com...


That's an idea straight from the pulp magazines. Archaeological evidence (and written evidence from the Maya themselves) poke holes in the statement. I think that someone confronted him about his error and he and the publisher removed the text to make the story more believable in later editions of the book.



Modern crystal sculptors always take into account the axis, or orientation of the crystal's molecular symmetry, because if they carve "against the grain," the piece is bound to shatter -- even with the use of lasers and other high-tech cutting methods.

Not really. It's done all the time. You do have to be careful and you do have to make sure the crystal is clear and not full of hidden cracks. Look up "quartz sculpture" sometime and you'll see bazillions of pictures that show quartz being carved along all the axes with drills, polishers, and lasers.


Under these circumstances, experts believe that successfully crafting a shape as complex as the Mitchell-Hedges skull is impossible; as one HP researcher is said to have remarked, "The damned thing simply shouldn't be.


Actually, no. Experts know that this kind of object (and far more complex ones) are not impossible. And in the Hartz Mountains of Germany (where the crystal comes from), they've been carving this stuff (including skulls) for a very long time.

But note that the owners of the Hedges skull won't actually let the Smithsonian or other museums investigate it:
www.signonsandiego.com...



posted on Jun, 27 2009 @ 05:11 AM
link   
Come meet the CRYSTAL SKULLS!!!:

MORE INFO USE LINK:
www.crystalskullfestival.com...

World Mysteries Conference

09-09-09

The Awakening

A Meeting Of The Minds

2012 and the Mayan Prophesies

SPEAKERS AND THEIR SKULLS

HUNBATZ MEN "NAGAKU"

CECE STEVENS "BOB"

BILL HOMANN "MITCHEL HEDGES"

KIRBY SEID "SHA NA RA"

DAEL WALKER "RAINBOW"

Jamie Maussan "ROSIE"

Jane Doherty "MAYA"

Sherry Whitfield Merrell "synergy"



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 05:46 PM
link   
Sorry to do this but i have to post 2O posts in order to get a voice...
DID ANYONE HEAR ABOUT THE GATHERING OF THE SKULLS ON 09-09-09???
sounds interesting!!!



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 06:18 PM
link   
IT IS NOT IMPORTANT IF THE SKULLS ARE REAL, OLD, MAYAN MADE OR NOT...
THERE IS THIS OLD PREDICTION THAT WHEN THE SKULLS (NEW, OLD OR WHATEVER) COME CLOSE...
GREAT THINGS WILL HAPPEN...

TAKE IT AS YOU PLEASE, BUT INFO SAYS: SKULLS MEET SOON...

TOM



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 06:23 PM
link   
reply to post by TOM-BOLA
 


I didnt, where did you hear about this "gathering of the skulls"?



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Calon
 


SORRY TO BE SO BRIEF, I NEED TO GET SOME SLEEP...
BUT...
THEY HAVE A WEBSITE!



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 06:29 PM
link   
reply to post by TOM-BOLA
 


Whats the website?



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 09:09 AM
link   
A little embarrassed to admit that I was unaware of how steeped in truth the latest Indiana Jones installment was.


Is there only one left to be retrieved?

(going back to read entire thread, now - wanted to get this on my alerts, ASAP)



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join