Swiss Watch found in 400 year old tomb, page 5

privacy

Pages: << 2 3 4 5 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 3 times

reply posted on 21-12-2008 @ 10:40 AM by Hanslune

Originally posted by Skyfloating
It doesnt look like a watch but like a replica of a watch. Someone who did not have the technology to make a watch but saw someone wearing a watch and tried to copy it.

I wonder how many more OOPARTs have to be found for archaeologists to wake up.

Howdy Sky, they woke up long ago when they broke out of the box of religious faith based world view.

Finding what you think is an oopart and finding one that is actually real is what separates believers from scientists.

You appear to be trying to recreate that religious based box for us to all live in again. That we live in a world we cannot understand hounded and controlled by 'elites' (read demons)...its sounds Sky just like the old stuff just with new names. Seriously think about.

Oh my the elite theory again - ah what happens when the elite is replaced by revolution - then what happens? Was Mao 'in on it'? Mugabe? Hitler? Mussolini? Napoleon, Stalin these are all guys who came from what you call the eaters?.......I think your theory needs some work.....or are your elites all hidden dudes?

[edit on 21/12/08 by Hanslune]

reply posted on 21-12-2008 @ 10:57 AM by Skyfloating

Originally posted by Frogs

I've been looking but haven't found anymore on this yet.

In the last two years there have been a lot of oddities coming out of China which are underreported in western media. Despite their suppression of info politically, they seem to be open to alternative archaeology, without immediately ridiculing or hiding the OOPARTS.

reply posted on 21-12-2008 @ 12:04 PM by Hanslune

reply to post by Skyfloating

Yes lots of good stuff coming out of China, also a lot of fakes and frauds, even old NatGeo fell victim to one back in 2000 - the infamous feathered dinosaur.

"For they are the givers of falsehoods, be wise and refuse their tainted gifts"

From a Japanese translation of the Zizhi Tongjian I do believe, called the Houlongjing.

reply posted on 21-12-2008 @ 12:11 PM by TheWayISeeIt

reply to post by Hanslune

Hi Hans -

Could you please link to some of the oopart that is the 'good stuff' coming out of China in your opinon? It would be much appreciated.

reply posted on 21-12-2008 @ 12:16 PM by Hanslune

Originally posted by TheWayISeeIt
reply to post by Hanslune

Hi Hans -

Could you please link to some of the oopart that is the 'good stuff' coming out of China in your opinon? It would be much appreciated.

Howdy TWISI

Long time no read, I was referring to the discovery of fossils, paleontological and archaeological materials. Sky might be better equipped to list any new oooparts coming out of China. Sorry to have given the impression (having re-read what I wrote) I was referring to Ooparts.

It might be interesting indeed to see what new ooparts have come up in the last five years. Mostly what we see are decades and decades old that constantly recycles.

Corliss might be a source, he usually keeps track of this kind of material.

[edit on 21/12/08 by Hanslune]

reply posted on 21-12-2008 @ 12:39 PM by Anonymous ATS

reply to post by Dreemer

I hate to say this, but you need to check your sources a bit more closely.

Point 1: The article states 1713 is when he built the first clock of his career. As your own post notes, the award winning H series chronometers weren't constucted until the 1730's. The prize itself wasn't offered until 1714.

Point 2: You appear to be basing your entire portability argument off one badly worded sentance. Your quote says accurate or portable, which clearly implies one or the other.

Point 3: Your assertion contradicts Wikipedia's own article on watches

Not to mention Historical examples of clocks in general

3 strikes, you're out.

That said, I think watches of the size and type being discussed were still quite a bit out of anybody's league for the period, so the basic idea was right.

reply posted on 21-12-2008 @ 09:46 PM by Dreemer

reply to post by Anonymous ATS

Thanks for proving that was was correct in my assessment - though wrong in my grammars

So you admit (anonymously) that there were no portable clocks (ex marine chronometer) until well into the 1700's...

...Over One Hundred Years after the ringwatch went into the Tomb!!!

Your ignorance astounds me. All of you.

reply posted on 21-12-2008 @ 10:23 PM by beaverg

Would the watch that Peter Henlein made between 1504-1508 qualify as a portable watch? It could apparently run forty hours without rewinding; But I may have missed what you mean by portable between pages 3-4.

[edit on 21-12-2008 by beaverg]

reply posted on 21-12-2008 @ 10:27 PM by Dreemer

reply to post by beaverg

"It could apparently run forty hours without rewinding; But I may have missed what you mean by portable between pages 3-4. "

Portable in this case means a clock that can remain accurate whilst on the move in a ship...

No such clock existed until the first one was invented in the 1730's by John Harrison.

So tell me - why didn't the King of England just purchase a Swiss watch for each of his ships?

reply posted on 21-12-2008 @ 10:41 PM by beaverg

reply to post by Dreemer

"

I must have missed quite a few posts because I didn't think my simple question could have warranted mocking. I'll go back and find out what a ship worthy watch in the 1700's has to do with the topic at hand.

reply posted on 22-12-2008 @ 01:38 PM by Anonymous ATS

reply to post by Dreemer

From your subsequent posts, It seems you're using "portable" when to you mean "accurate" in which case there's no way I or anyone else could've been reasonable expected to know that, so It appears ATS's motto is working in our defense, not yours.

Pendulum clocks are unusable shipboard, but many clocks and all watches of the period would've used other mechanisms which are less dependent on gravity or they wouldn't even function. The problem was all such mechanisms prior to Harrison were wildly, wildly inaccurate and thus entirely useless for navigation purposes. Some would've probably worked on a ship but not much better then they worked on land, which was very poorly.

None of which explains how you managed to get the construction date wrong 3 times with 3 articles right there in front of you.

Again, you're emminantly correct in that there were no comparable fully functional timepieces 400 years ago, although there were watches of a sort being made in switzerland and elsewhere. However, the matter of the longitude prize is also entirely beside the point as nowhere did anyone say the chinese find was a chronograph. (or if they did I missed it)

(BTW, I'm only using the anon to post at the moment since I'm not a member. I'll be remedying that shorty when I have the oppotunity to devote my...full attention to this forum)

reply posted on 23-12-2008 @ 07:36 PM by Anonymous ATS

This is obviously a Hoax, how did they know it was Am or Pm? there's no 24h indicator on that small tiny piece of crap, and have you noticed that no any major newspaper or broadcasting channel has reported this, ananova is well known for its crappy exclusivities like "aliens stuff" and so on, in my opinion this is just a waste of time, no need to think too much about it, those chinese are capable of anything to make themselves famous, i live with them and i know them well

reply posted on 29-12-2008 @ 05:41 AM by Exuberant1

reply to post by Anonymous ATS

"This is obviously a Hoax, how did they know it was Am or Pm?"

I can see why you post anonymously...

"...in my opinion this is just a waste of time"

Ziiiinggggg! The debate is over!

[edit on 29-12-2008 by Exuberant1]

reply posted on 5-1-2009 @ 06:02 PM by lupusyonderboy

Many mechanicals do not have any am/pm indication. There is a sort of am/pm with a date complication but only when the date is changing over. Still it's a hoax.

reply posted on 5-1-2009 @ 06:11 PM by Alienmindflare

Dont know if anyone has wrote this one but when I see an old friend sitting on a bench 3 weeks after he died as a normal living being it made me think,well if they can do that then they can materalize whenever.

Ive had things disappear from my house,,,and things appear that wasnt even mine or my daughters,,and Ive seen flies and moths materalize and no,,I wasnt drugged up,,,just in touch with my spiritual side.

Someone put it there,,a ghost,,for a reason,,,confusion is the worse emotion and gets people thinking.

reply posted on 11-4-2009 @ 07:09 PM by Sargoth