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.

 

Five Mysterious Artefacts

page: 2
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 08:57 PM
link   
Are we saying dinosaurs in Mexico a couple thousand(not hundreds of millions) of years ago? Oh boy that's gotta shake a few cages. Maybe they were time travellers




posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd

#4 - ...a real giggle. I work in a museum paleontology lab, and can say beyond a shadow of a doubt that the statement " (all of varied but known dinosaur species) " is hysterically funny and just plain wrong. They DO look like cartoon drawings of dinosaurs, but no dino ever looked like those!

Hoax.


While i pretty much agree with most of the assessments made above (possibly excepting the "stylized birds/insects"...that is something that is still a "maybe" for me), I do take exception to the above.

You are correct that there isn't much that we have found that looks like those "dino's". But one does look surprisingly similar to a stegasaurus.

And it would not discount unfound species of dinosaur.

But you pretty much summed it up. Another example of strangeness with stone/mineral is "Stuckie", the dog that got petrified in a tree stump.

As well, with you being a fellow Texan you are likely familiar with the boot found near Ozona with a petrified foot found in it.



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 10:15 PM
link   
In regards to the Acambaro figurines. This talk origins site covers the controversy very well

The figurines



If authentic, the figurines imply even more archeological anomalies:

If the figurines really were based on actual dinosaurs, why have no dinosaur fossils been found in the Acambaro region?

Why did no other Mexican cultures record any dinosaurs?

What caused the dinosaurs to disappear in the last 1,100 years?




posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 12:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune
In regards to the Acambaro figurines. This talk origins site covers the controversy very well

The figurines



If authentic, the figurines imply even more archeological anomalies:

If the figurines really were based on actual dinosaurs, why have no dinosaur fossils been found in the Acambaro region?

Why did no other Mexican cultures record any dinosaurs?

What caused the dinosaurs to disappear in the last 1,100 years?




if i may try to suppose a little...


If the figurines really were based on actual dinosaurs, why have no dinosaur fossils been found in the Acambaro region? Where is the missing link that would support evolution? Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

Why did no other Mexican cultures record any dinosaurs? OK, so maybe it is further south to some degree...but the Ica Stones are another recording of said dinosaurs

What caused the dinosaurs to disappear in the last 1,100 years? what caused the Dodo or Kiwi to disappear? A population in decline 3000 years ago may have gone extinct 1100 years ago. Or perhaps it hasn't, yet. There ARE legends of prehistoric creatures in less accessible regions of South and Central America (the giant sloth comes to mind).

So, i would be interested to hear what you think they were representing.



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 12:53 AM
link   
4 out of 5 are proven to be hoaxs... I'm not sure about the map, but I read about all those before. A guy paid people of a village in Mexico to bring him them scultures of dinosaurs. Of course they were going to make them up.



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 01:11 AM
link   
reply to post by suziwong
 


Very Kewl post Suzie! I had seen all of these before except the axe. Star for you!



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by alundaio
 


if you could provide some dcoumentation to support this, it would be greatly appreciated.



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 08:43 AM
link   
Regarding the dinosaurs...



Circumstances of the Figures' “Excavation”

The very circumstances from which the figures first appeared are cited as dubious. Julsrud claims that he paid the farmers for every figure they brought him, which would have given the farmers motive to create their own figures and disguise them as ancient artifacts.

Condition of the Figures and the excavation

According to DiPeso, the surface of the figures was practically brand new and they showed no characteristic evidence of having been in the ground for at least 1500 years. If they were authentic artifacts, they should be scratched and marred from the rocky soil, which is characteristic of artifacts found in that area of Mexico. Also, while people were digging up the artifacts, DiPeso observed them crush through authentic artifacts to reach the figures, yet none of the figures themselves displayed any marks of damage. Other evidence includes fresh manure and fingerprints found under the ground, and black fill from other strata which was discovered in sterile red earth, all of which is evidence of tampering with the site.

The Number of Figures and their Condition

The sheer number of perfect figures found is cited as evidence for a hoax. Over 32,000 figures were found, and all of them in perfect condition except for a few that were cleanly broken, perhaps to create the illusion of antiquity. If these were authentic antiquities, they would not be preserved with such perfection in such an inhospitable environment. Pottery is almost always uncovered as fragments called sherds; nowhere have 32,000 unblemished ceramics been uncovered with none of them in fragments and all of them in perfect condition (cleanly broken in two does not count as fragments).

Evidence?

Don Patton has provided what he claims to be accurate radiocarbon dates for the figures ranging from 6500 years to 1500 years.The laboratories that produced these dates have stated that they were inconclusive, but Dennis Swift claims that once the laboratories discovered what they were dating, they retracted their original dates. The claim is strange because radiocarbon dating can only be performed on items which possess carbon: living or formerly living things, of which pottery or ceramic is neither (see radiocarbon dating).

Source [2] [3]

This information wasn't terribly difficult to find.

[edit on 29-8-2008 by OnionCloud]



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by truthseekerpeacemaker
what about the Antikythera Mechanism

strange aritfact


Well, it's legit. I believe a similar one was just found as well. But accompanying link gives you the latest on the mechanism and what they are finding out about its uses. Seriously creepy avatar you have, btw.
www.antikythera-mechanism.gr...



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 09:42 AM
link   
reply to post by OnionCloud
 


Excellent, thank you Onion. It is good to hear that it wasn't hard to find.
I would hate to see someone end up with carpal tunnel from backing a claim.

My point was more that ATS generally follows a rule that if you make a claim, you provide support so that it can be verified. Call it "standards", call it "courtesy"...whatever, but it is generally what is done.



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 11:09 AM
link   
Howdy Texas



Where is the missing link that would support evolution? Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence


Hans: We are straying from the subject, but that is easily answer there is no missing link. "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" so I guess we can believe in the tooth fairy, snow white and unicorns too! That phrase is overly used to coverup the lack of any evidence and to overlay evidence of a contra-indication for many things.




Why did no other Mexican cultures record any dinosaurs? OK, so maybe it is further south to some degree...but the Ica Stones are another recording of said dinosaurs


Hans: The Ica stones are also faked, rather badly faked.



A population in decline 3000 years ago may have gone extinct 1100 years ago. Or perhaps it hasn't, yet. There ARE legends of prehistoric creatures...


Hans: Yes legends but no evidence of dinosaurs in Mexico into historic times



So, i would be interested to hear what you think they were representing.


Hans: Smart people getting money from a naive archaeologist.



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

You are correct that there isn't much that we have found that looks like those "dino's". But one does look surprisingly similar to a stegasaurus.


No, seriously... it doesn't. It looks like a cartoon stegosaur. Nothing like the real beast (which can't move its neck much (lots of cervical ribs that acted like rebar in concrete in the neck area), huge fat body, TINY head.)


And it would not discount unfound species of dinosaur.

I would. Seriously.


As well, with you being a fellow Texan you are likely familiar with the boot found near Ozona with a petrified foot found in it.

Another concretion, and the bones are those of a pig or cow and not human (seriously... look at them and then look at a human skeleton. Nothing like human.)



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 11:33 AM
link   
I remember that someone had looked up the types of books available to children in the area and one of the Mexican text books of that era had some rather poor drawings of Dinosaurs in it, for something like the fifth grade or somesuch.

Needless to say this was before TV cartoons could be seen.

Probably a stretch to say they were using those as a model but then Hapgood thought they were real! So one can believe almost anything.

Texas just to clear up something, is your point of debate from a science view point and looking at possibilities or are you arguing from a basis in a belief of creationism?

[edit on 29/8/08 by Hanslune]



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by C.C.Benjamin
reply to post by Byrd
 


I have to say I agree with you on all but point 1. I thought these artifacts were ancient? Or at least, pre-airplane, anyway, how could we have spoken to the makers if so?

Also, if those are "birds" they are either terrible artists or very, very abstract.


"ancient" is "past 800 years or so (pre-Columbian). This is a traditional art form and wasn't just made for 50 years and then abandoned. These designs continue in other forms ... not just jewelry.

And yes, they have cultural abstractions. You might not recognize some of the forms for what they are.



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 


I am Buddhist by faith. I think that "creationism" is a badly defined theory, and that at its heart "creationism" involves all manner of mechanisms, including evolution (or genetic drift). It is a means to an end, i guess.

I am not wanting to seem argumentative. Just wanting to challenge your ideas a little to see what comes out of it. That is all. A learning tool, if you will.

Byrd - i didn't really bother to look at the bones to see if they were human or not. I just assumed that it was concretion at work, and some poor old cowboy somehow lost his foot post mortem (otherwise i am sure it would not lay unclaimed, as the boot would have had some kind of value to a cowboy). I agree that many of our OOPARTS are related to either poorly described or poorly understood processes.

I disagree that the Ica Stones are faked, however, due to the logistics of how they could have been created so quickly if they ARE fake. Perhaps you can disillusion this concept.

[edit on 29-8-2008 by bigfatfurrytexan]



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 01:16 PM
link   
Howdy Texan

Challenging is always good! Your questions are well based. I asked about the basis of your questioning as it makes it easier to understand where you were coming from and to answer them.



I agree that many of our OOPARTS are related to either poorly described or poorly understood processes.


I would add "hoaxes" to your otherwise excellent desription of the state of ooparts.

ICA .......I'll let Byrd answer that one.



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 07:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by C.C.Benjamin
reply to post by Byrd
 


I have to say I agree with you on all but point 1. I thought these artifacts were ancient? Or at least, pre-airplane, anyway, how could we have spoken to the makers if so?

Also, if those are "birds" they are either terrible artists or very, very abstract.


"ancient" is "past 800 years or so (pre-Columbian). This is a traditional art form and wasn't just made for 50 years and then abandoned. These designs continue in other forms ... not just jewelry.

And yes, they have cultural abstractions. You might not recognize some of the forms for what they are.


I'm afraid I'm still not convinced. I don't have a better explanation (aliens!) but they lack the characteristics of fish or birds, to my eye.



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 08:56 AM
link   
The link in the OP does not work for me (maybe because I am in Europe?).
Could someone please post the pics for me?



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by C.C.Benjamin
 


Howdy CC

In cases of "looks like" its best to go to the next level. ie what other evidence do we have that aircraft were flying around in that area in 'x' year.



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 


The Nazca lines? Vimana's?

[edit on 1-9-2008 by bigfatfurrytexan]




top topics



 
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join