This post takes you to the year 12,008 AD, where we will speculate.....

The world we knew ended abruptly in 2025, disease wiped out 99.99% of mankind.

Much was lost, civilization was lost...

Now in 12,008 much has been recovered and an archaeologist of that time period is discussing with another person the dig at a city they think was called Rome. The imposing ruins of a Basilica stand before them.

Archaeologist: We think it was the burial place of a Saint Peter

Other person: No, no its the largest cathedral in the world, how could those people have built it when they had no engines? Its over 135 meters tall - when people were living in wooden huts, impossible it was built by aliens! Its not a tomb.

Archaeologist: Well yes it wasn't just a tomb it seemed to be the center of a whole series of temples and religious buildings. It was the largest of the four cathedrals.

Other person: No, no it had no religious function. It was a focus of ley lines for concentrating energy for immortality. The aliens built it.

Archaeology: Ah, well no, we found inscriptions in it, TV ES PETRVS ET SVPER HANC PETRAM AEDIFICABO ECCLESIAM MEAM. TIBI DABO CLAVES REGNI CAELORVM...which means

Other person: No, no that was added by archaeologists to bloister their claims. They are fake, It was made by aliens

Archaeology: I don't think so, we have C14 dates from materials we've found in the ruins, including the burial of this Saint Peter, they go from 12,000 to 10,000 years ago.

Other person: You see, you see those dates are inaccurate. The basilica was made over 20,000 years ago, by aliens

Archaeologist: How do you know that?

Other person: It was channeled, we know it was built by aliens also because of the shape.

Archaelogists: Its shape? It in the form of a cross - which in the ancient religion the cross......

Other person: No, no the religion doesn't matter, we never consider that. Its shape is that of the star pattern known as the southern cross.

Archaeologists: Ah, you cannot see the southern cross from here why would they build it to look like a star pattern they couldn't see?

Other person: Crustal shift, yes, yes, the whole world shifted

Archaeologists: Well Saint Peter......

Other person: There is no Saint Peter, there was no burial here.

Archaeologist: There is a tomb

Other person: Was their a body in it?

Archaeologist: Well no, it had been looted and destroyed, but there was a sarcophagus.

Other person: Nope, No body no tomb - why would anyone bury someone in the worlds most perfect building, nope not a tomb....It must have taken twenty thousand guys forever to build this thing. look at the math involved!


To be continued

continued

Archaeologist: So who built this complex stone structure 20,000 years ago?

Other Person: The aliens

Archaeologists: There lots and lots of evidence of people and a large culture - a huge city here in the dates we have. For your time period there are a few groups of hunter-gathers. How could they have built this?

Other Person: The humans who helped the aliens build it all lived on the coast line and when the sea levels rose all the evidence of their existence was lost.

Archaelogist: You do know the water rise wasn't that fast and anyway, somebody must have survived or lived on higher ground. We haven't found any evidence of those cultures.

Other Person: Well yes we have lots of evidence of these ancient people who helped to build the basilica - helped by the aliens of course.

Archaeologist: Indeed

To be continued

10,000 years is a pretty long time to expect a domed cathedral to be around.

Howdy Alaska

Yes, but in this speculative thread, it did.

Great thing about speculation!

I see where you're going with your logic. Very interesting. I kind of see something very similar happening now (which I know is what you are getting at) but in a different area.

nice try... A cathedral has no (NO) comparison to the pyramids or moving 1000 ton stones miles away 5000 years ago. we have nothing that is that remarkable, sorry!

reply to post by JaneFonda

---

Howdy Jane

Actually a Cathedral is far far more difficult to make. The Ancient Egyptians couldn't have gotten close. Arches and domes were not possible for them. The Egyptian did rather crude work very, very well and they did a lot of it.

The basilica is a remarkable piece of work, and ten thousand years from now it could be considered something which it is not.

ok... but being interpreted differently and means of construction are two very different things. Tell me... how could ancient Romans lift and move 1,000 + stones? When modern cranes can only hoist 1,000 tons and remain stationary??



also, what do arches and domes have to do with anything? Big whoop, arches were around looong before Cathedrals were built. When something is built that shouldn't exist given the technology of the time period, I question the construction methods the history channel says, thats all i'm saying

[edit on 18-12-2008 by JaneFonda]

I highly doubt the Cathedral was more difficult to make than the Pyramids at the Giza Necropolis. One only has to look at how theyre systemically aligned to constellations, how each stone is tuned to the rhythm of the human heart... i could go on and on.

But like someone else said, i dont think the Basically could survive 10000 years without human help.

Hans: Not in a thread that is meant to be facetiously.




Hans: Very slowly and the heaviest they moved were at Baalbek and those were only 800 tons. The big one they didn't try.



Hans: Not really modern cranes can lift far heavier loads and also move. A CC8800-1 Twin is both mobile and can carry 3,200 tons. LAMPSON'S TRANIS-LIFT Series II A can pick up 4,000. Others stationary cranes can pick up much more.

external image

Hans: Your link doesn't seem to work




Hans: Its call architecture. Big empty spaces are more useful that a big block of stone. You can get 60,000 people into St Peters - maybe two hundred + inside the pyramid




Hans: Yes but the Egyptians didn't know how to make them, just corbel arches. True arches show sophisticated planning and design. Remember the limestone blocks in the pyramid were 'cut' out using stones to bash trenches between them, not particularly a smart way to do it.



Hans: I understand you, but the reason you think that is because you've been told to believe it by fringe writers, it just isn't true.


[edit on 18/12/08 by Hanslune]

Hans: Indeed? eye brow raised significantly.

On and the Taq-i Kisra has survived 1,800 years. Could the basilica be there in 10,000 years? Maybe, maybe not. But the ruins would be.

[edit on 18/12/08 by Hanslune]

Continuing from above



Other person: Yes there is tons of evidence but it is all being supressed.

Archaeologist: Supressed? By who?

Other person: You are - the whole scientific community, you are hiding the evidence from us.

Archaeologist: What are you nuts?

Other person: You see the mocking! The not taking us serious, the ridicule!

Archaeology: Okay, okay give me the evidence that the entire scientific community is involved in this, who is head of this conspiracy? When did it start?

Other person: Well, ah, I don't know, but you can see how every piece of evidence we find is debunked immediately. The media makes fun of us and ...

Archaeologist: That happens because the evidence is weak, not compelling, misinterpreted or just not what you think it is.

Other person: No, no its great evidence it proves everything, its just you guys won't believe it.

Archaeologist: So tell me about your best piece of evidence.

Other Person: The basilica itself.

Archaeologist: How is that?

Other Person: It was built first, and is the biggest and best, it cannot have been made by men, its all made of Granite and Marble - look at the details. All the other Cathedrals are poor copies of it.

Archaeologist: Hmmmmm, no. The Basilica wa built after a long history of development, yes it is the largest but the builders had centuries of practice in building before they took it on.

Other Person: Then why didn't they build bigger and better ones? Today we couldn't possibly build this Basilica, it is way beyond of technology.

Archaeology: We could build such a project but why? We don't beleive in the religion that drove this construction.

Other Person: You see, you cannot explain why they built only one. It was aliens, it was there landing zone marker.

Archaeologist: 'Landing zone' but you said earlier it was an energy...

Other Person: We allow for multiple realities, the only important consideration is to accept that the Basilica wasn't made by men, it was aliens.

Archaeologist: How can you support having different theories for the origin of the same object?

Other Person: We don't judge, we are open minded.

Archaeologist: Indeed?

To be continued

Hanslune

An interesting thread.

And points out a conclusion i often question;why must the building of mega structures nearly always lead to aliens?

For some people,'aliens did it' is the immediate answer.Why?
We know that our distant ancestors built some amazing things,that they had amazing technology so why must there have been an outside influence?

I'm not saying that an alien influence isn't possible,but it cannot be the answer for every mega structure built in the past.

We know that just one man can change/influence things,Hero of Alexandria,Archimedes,Leonardo da Vinci,Abbas ibn Firnas,Nikola Tesla to name just a few.Were they contacted by aliens and given knowledge?




JaneFonda



Of course it compares.
Engineers today still find the building of domes highly difficult.The Pantheon in Rome has a dome that weighs over 4,535 metric tons.What makes this an even greater feat of engineering is the fact that the dome is free standing,unlike most cathedral domes.

HowdyDante

Good comments, the Pantheon is my one of my favorite buildings. Each time I go to Rome I visit her and usually try to have lunch in one of the touristy places across the plaza from that wonderful building.

Yes, why aliens? Mental laziness I guess. Humans like to imagine things I imagine! Probably the same reason so much is acredited to 'god and gods.
Humans did some incredible mental leaps to get civilizations started. Some things that amaze me still

Who figured out a bow and arrow?

Who figured out you could make butter and cheese out of milk!

Kilns

Ate a mussel - two points for courage on that one

The ability to use language to project ideas

Writing

I could go on and on

[edit on 22/12/08 by Hanslune]

Hi.

Yes,mental laziness is a good way of putting it.
Along with the fact that there is this belief that in the past humans were just 'simple hunter-gatherers' and therefore could not have achieved anything.Its the arrogance of the present projected onto the past.



So simple,yet so amazing.
Too many people focus on the large things and forget the small things.No doubt because in this day and age we take them for granted.

reply to post by DantesLost

---

What is more amazing is that the ability to eat and digest cow milk arose out of (probably) a recent mutation and somebody retried milk at some point and found it could be good. Most of the Asian population still cannot eat it (note the lack of cheese products in Asian food).