Originally posted by Gawdzilla

The Baghdad battery is interesting. What's more interesting is that there was no infrastructure in place to use electricity. So why have it? Probably as a "stand-alone" device of some sort. Speculation is fun, but without support any conclusions are just guesses.

The Delhi iron pillar is most probably a metalurgical accident. The founders just happened to produce a slightly different type of iron, one that is resistant to rust. (It has been analyzed, btw, and it's not miraculous. The chemical nature is clearly understood, even if the means by which it got to that state is still under investigation.)

All I can say is...WOW, you just gave me a migraine with your hipocracy.

Oh and...

The Baghdad battery is interesting. What's more interesting is that there was no infrastructure in place to use electricity........

Are you freaking kidding me?!?! Your reasoning is that there was no infrastrutre? Of course! Because before electricity was discovered, we had all this infrastructure just waiting for it, people always wondered what those large metal towers and all that cable was for, until they plugged it up to the first generator and lo and behold, we have a national grid!

And people say I lack logical reasoning for some of the things I believe in! LMAO

It makes no matter if Von Daniken or Hancock make this stuff up, the very fact that it is being taught as a hoax to first years is disgusting IMO. Feel threatened much?!?

It's like astronomers/Cosmologists teaching the Electric Sun model, or plasma cosmology as a hoax, it's an alternative point of view and one which encompass' more than the previous (which tend to ignore the inconvenient stuff), although I admit, it lacks alot more evidence. This does not mean it has none, it only has less.

Honestly, do you see any other subjects doing this?!? Catch them early, make sure they won't believe it before they even see it.

And I'd like anyone here to prove Von Daniken and Hancock are frauds, heck, I'll ask the university that is propagating this nonsense to prove it, afterall, that's what everything is based on right?

EMM

The main reason Erich Von Daniken is vilified is because he lied that he had been in some of the places he wrote about in some of his earlier books. He also had a few fake artifacts, which didn't help his case.

He seems to have cleaned up his act, but the past mistakes are unforgivable in the archeology community.

I do agree with him there are many mysteries out there, and he did raise a lot of good questions. Unfortunately, his shoddy work in the past and in a few areas has put the taint on anything he states. And that is too bad.

Daniken is a hero and in the distant future history will acknowledge him as such.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Daniken is a hero and in the distant future history will acknowledge him as such.

von D. is a criminal and a con man. His books are filled with fantasies and they cater to people with a weak grip on reality.

Originally posted by rapunzel222
also textbooks like Fagan 2007 have blurbs which ridicule authors like graham hancock and go on to state that

Pay close attention to the words that are being used to ridicule, many times they are calling themselves "nutjobs" by definition and not know it. An "alternative theory" would be the growth of civilizations and knowledge as a linear progression when everything else observed in nature is cyclical. It's not difficult to find evidence of a dramatic loss in knowledge up to around the renaissance period where it started progressing again.

Originally posted by Lebowski achiever
I believe I read somewhere that they accept that the mound of rock the Sphinx is made of, is ancient but that it is a natural formation; naturally sphinx shaped if you will. The addition of carving the face came much much later.

The body of the Sphinx was made by removing granite out from around it creating a pit. The blocks that were removed are found around the temple area.
The Sphinx head is the rock mound that you might be thinking of that is thought to have originally been there and carved into a head shape then later reworked to look like it does today, what the original carving of the head looked liked is unknown.
The geological evidence that was used to date the Sphinx pit area and the blocks that were removed looks solid and I don't know of anything that debunks it.

Archaeologists are not astronomers nor geologists and they seem to outright dismiss ancient astrology and mythology which together limits their field of view. It's because of this limited view that has caused them to look like fools many times before.

Originally posted by Devino
Why is it that theories for ancient advanced technologies are dismissed from the lack of evidence of infrastructures like an electrical grid and roads/highways. Is it so hard to imagine broadcasting electricity without wires and transportation without the automobile?

No its not, that's why we have something called science fiction (and we have wireless electricity too, even though it works like crap, haha).

However, all technology assumes progress and transition. Why didnt Henry Ford make 2010 Ford Mustang GT as a successor to T-Ford? Well because he couldnt. Are we to assume that they went from being a farming society one day, to having hover cars and wireless electricity the next? That's why its dismissed and hard to imagine: its impossible by any definition of technological advance.

Unless of course, aliens gave it to them

And WTF is wrong with the forum? Why the hell do I have to write 400+ characters to submit a bloody reply?

[edit on 12-4-2009 by merka]

Originally posted by Devino
Why is it that theories for ancient advanced technologies are dismissed from the lack of evidence of infrastructures like an electrical grid and roads/highways. Is it so hard to imagine broadcasting electricity without wires and transportation without the automobile?

You're missing the point. Anomalies aren't the "smoking gun" you might believe. Finding in ONE battery does not mean the ancients had "advanced" technology. It means somebody came on an idea and tried it out. The fact that there is only ONE is a good clue that nobody had a clue what to do with it. Can you imagine finding only ONE cell phone battery?

Nice inflation, btw. "electrical grid and roads/highways"? Where did I mention roads/highways?

Originally posted by OhZoneI found his books fascinating. They lured me on to other info on the subject. Certainly there are areas where no one can make an accurate pronouncement and theories abound. Always one leads to another until certain pieces just fit.

Question: Do you think you'd have been better served by getting into the subject via a book with a reputable set of research behind it and better thinking as to the possibilities of the subject? von Daniken's books as an intro is much like getting into physics via X-men comics. The ultimate goal would be admirable, but the route to that goal with be circuitous to say the very least.

von D. is a smudge on the face of the whole topic, in my not so humble opinion. The good news, as I hear it, is that his "theme park" as gone bust.

I read his and Berlitz' books when I was younger. They sparked an interest in mysteries I have to this day. For that reason, I'm not against Von Daniken.

I began to notice discrepancies in the texts and lost my trust in his interpretations. The biggest thing was I lost my trust in his presentation of 'facts.'

He claims that the Jhoser step pyramid was made of granite and thus impossible for humans to construct. He said the Egyptians had no rope or timber. They imported timber and the ropes samples are on view in the Cairo Museum. He claimed that Easter Island figures were created by flying men and gods. Thor Heyerdahl and subsequent studies have demonstrated that the Islanders did it themselves and the lack of trees is the regrettable outcome of such hubristic monuments.



The Bagdhad batteries have been reconstructed and found to be capable of generating a 1.5volt charge. The problem is that the tops were entirely capped with asphalt and had no outlet for the wires that would be required to utilize the current. Furthermore, there aren't any contemporary artifacts that would necessitate the use of low volt electricity. Daniken and Berlitz usually throw in an image of Ancient Egyptians with what they claim are enormous light bulbs attached to batteries by 'corded industrial cables.' Egypt is some way from Baghdad. The asphalt plugs indicate the vessels weren't used to create electricity. As things stand, nobody knows what they were for. They remain a mystery and the electrical question must remain until a definitive understanding of their use is found.

We don't believe a politician when they've been found dishonest. Daniken has been found dishonest many times in his own writing. There's no PTB to blame for that. His enthusiasm for ideas of ancient civilizations and alien visitors far outreached his interpretations and sources.

Question by gawdzilla: “Do you think you'd have been better served by getting into the subject via a book with a reputable set of research behind it and better thinking as to the possibilities of the subject? von Daniken's books as an intro is much like getting into physics via X-men comics. The ultimate goal would be admirable, but the route to that goal with be circuitous to say the very least.”

****No, because this was relatively new to me at the time. I’d say it was kind of like when you are a child and just learning to read, you read a lot of fairy tales. I don’t remember much of what I read from him - it was a very long time ago. Since I’ve gon on to bigger and better things, I’m not going to go back just to see what all the fuss is about.

Getting into physics via X-man comics could be just what is needed to kick-start someone's mind. Remember that yesterday's science fiction if today's reality.

Buck Rogers - space explorer, anyone? And Dick Tracy’s wrist watch that was also a telephone….

Originally posted by OhZone
Question by gawdzilla: “Do you think you'd have been better served by getting into the subject via a book with a reputable set of research behind it and better thinking as to the possibilities of the subject? von Daniken's books as an intro is much like getting into physics via X-men comics. The ultimate goal would be admirable, but the route to that goal with be circuitous to say the very least.”

****No, because this was relatively new to me at the time. I’d say it was kind of like when you are a child and just learning to read, you read a lot of fairy tales. I don’t remember much of what I read from him - it was a very long time ago. Since I’ve gon on to bigger and better things, I’m not going to go back just to see what all the fuss is about.

Getting into physics via X-man comics could be just what is needed to kick-start someone's mind. Remember that yesterday's science fiction if today's reality.

Buck Rogers - space explorer, anyone? And Dick Tracy’s wrist watch that was also a telephone….

I think neither von D. nor the X-men would be a good basis for a serious inquiry into their respective fields. Both are cartoonish and missing in value.

The Baghdad batteries were recreated so that they would work.
The people who made them work as batteries reassembled them in a way so that they would work, because it seemed like it would work if they adjusted them a bit.
As for the pillar... having worked in metal production for years, I can tell you that the same types of steel can have different rust times.
Occasionally we'd have a bundle of steel that some idiot left outside and we'd sort through it, pulling out what parts were still good and which parts had been ruined.
not on the same scale, to be sure, but this is metal that's made in a continuous production process.
The pillar is the sole remaining pillar of a temple, and each pillar would have been created through a similar but unique process.