Hidden Artifacts! (pics), page 9

privacy

Pages: << 6 7 8 9 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 210 times

reply posted on 28-10-2010 @ 05:16 PM by darthdescendent

reply to post by polarwarrior

great pictures, is it just me or the pic of the bottom of that pyramid does that second symbol from the left look like a compass similar to what the freemasons use as their society symbol??? just looked that way to me... great post

reply posted on 31-1-2011 @ 04:06 PM by lonegurkha

reply to post by polarwarrior

Wow ultra interesting I love this stuff.It has always fastinated me how mainstream science will sweep anomolis artifacts under the carpet cause they don't fit "the facts" as they see them.I haven't seen these before thanks for the post.

reply posted on 31-1-2011 @ 04:12 PM by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by lonegurkha
It has always fastinated me how mainstream science will sweep anomolis artifacts under the carpet cause they don't fit "the facts" as they see them.

There is always the issue of 'mainstream science' requiring high standards of proof before re-writing history. As I always say, to endorse anything less is to promote an idiocracy. And there's far too much stoopid on the loose as is.

reply posted on 7-2-2012 @ 11:45 AM by Logiciel

Hi

All these artifacts do sound terribly seducing.
I believe a lot of us feel the need to understand life. Why we are here. What we should really do...
But I find all this very suspicious. Even though "I want to believe", I do not want to be manipulated by lunatics.
By delusional pseudo-archeologs that start creating their reality.
To be honest I would have been convinced by some artifacts untill it became a throw-it-all-in multi-purpous artifact burrito...
If you take the pyramid artifact, with the magnetic "jade" cups...
- is this a known hoax?
- Has any of these objects been submitted to "hard" science? (carbon dating...)
- The phosphorescent material used for inscriptions is highly suspicious to me.

peace,

Logi_ciel

reply posted on 7-2-2012 @ 09:49 PM by Hanslune

reply to post by Logiciel

Be glad to help but not sure what you are referring to. If you could please link to the post containing the claim

Thanks

Well said JohnnyCanuck

There is always the issue of 'mainstream science' requiring high standards of proof before re-writing history. As I always say, to endorse anything less is to promote an idiocracy. And there's far too much stoopid on the loose as is.

edit on 7/2/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 7-2-2012 @ 11:24 PM by coredrill

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck

Right O.
People dont use their brains that much anymore. did anyone of those who Starred and Flagged the OP, think for a second and check for other references to the items posted? just a double check at least?
"Oh, its posited by some researcher, so he must be brilliant and his ideas must be true...."
Why does the OP use the word "Pre Sanskrit"?? if he is so well aware, he would have known that it is Proto Indo European Language or PIE. he doesnt know that.

I did watch 'IIdiocracy" last week. Seeing the current standard of intellect on the boards and in real life, i think we are going to reach the station earl;ier than we thought. The movie is a real satire.

reply posted on 9-2-2012 @ 02:35 AM by mikefromspace

Has a youtube vid been made about this? Is there a link to more data? What about the rock, analyzed or not? compass readings could be shown on video to describe what you only say as it being magnetic.

reply posted on 9-2-2012 @ 03:41 AM by reddpill

Originally posted by mikefromspace
Has a youtube vid been made about this?

As requested.

YouTube Link

edit on 9-2-2012 by reddpill because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 9-2-2012 @ 04:32 AM by micpsi

Originally posted by Hanslune
reply to post by Logiciel

Be glad to help but not sure what you are referring to. If you could please link to the post containing the claim

Thanks

Well said JohnnyCanuck

There is always the issue of 'mainstream science' requiring high standards of proof before re-writing history. As I always say, to endorse anything less is to promote an idiocracy. And there's far too much stoopid on the loose as is.

edit on 7/2/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)

But beside the point. The obstinate refusal of mainstream archaeology to take anomalous artefacts seriously has nothing to do with maintaining standards of evidence and everything to do with preserving tired, old scientific paradigms that their custodians realise are shattered by these artefacts.

reply posted on 9-2-2012 @ 11:04 AM by Harte

Originally posted by micpsi

Originally posted by Hanslune
reply to post by Logiciel

Be glad to help but not sure what you are referring to. If you could please link to the post containing the claim

Thanks

Well said JohnnyCanuck

There is always the issue of 'mainstream science' requiring high standards of proof before re-writing history. As I always say, to endorse anything less is to promote an idiocracy. And there's far too much stoopid on the loose as is.

edit on 7/2/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)

But beside the point. The obstinate refusal of mainstream archaeology to take anomalous artefacts seriously has nothing to do with maintaining standards of evidence and everything to do with preserving tired, old scientific paradigms that their custodians realise are shattered by these artefacts.

Straw man.

There are no "anomalous artifacts" that aren't taken seriously.

In fact, there are very, VERY few anomalous artifacts in the first place.

Harte

reply posted on 9-2-2012 @ 07:45 PM by Hanslune

Originally posted by micpsi

But beside the point. The obstinate refusal of mainstream archaeology to take anomalous artefacts seriously has nothing to do with maintaining standards of evidence and everything to do with preserving tired, old scientific paradigms that their custodians realise are shattered by these artefacts.