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.

 

Megalithomania Conference Video (Amazing Pictures)

page: 1
9

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 02:15 PM
link   
I found a link to this video through another forum, there was a discussion going on about one of my favorite ancient sites Baaelbek in Lebanon. It was suggested that if you wanted to be amazed and see most of the worlds megalithic structures to watch this video.

Well I did and I'm definitely awe struck, I've heard of a few of the sites mentioned in the video but many are totally new to me. The man presenting his pictures is David H. Childress, an author and historian, he has traveled all over the world documenting evidence I guess but he really doesn't come to any conclusion in this. He isn't trying to prove anything, which is good because I think anyone with an open mind will come to a similar conclusion anyway.

I can really get into a rant and speculate up and down what makes sense to me but I don't want to go too off topic so I'll just say, after watching this presentation I believe it shows fairly clear evidence of a master race/races fairly advanced, unbelievable builders of structures of huge scale, and it is my opinion that the ancient ruins we do find today are mere foundations of what once was. There is an undeniable similarity between ruins found all over the place that IMO cannot be attributed to anything but:

A)The theory that there once "may" have been 1 or 2 additional continents one in the pacific and one in the atlantic, which ultimately would have lead to easier intercontinental traveling thus the spreading of knowledge.

or

B)Perhaps there was as I said a "master race" one of if not the first in a much longer timeline than we are told by modern archaeologists. Maybe this race/civilization was super advanced, maybe they were born enlightened or maybe they were taught, who knows. The influence of such a powerful people would spread across the globe whether directly or by means of emulation and legends.

This video is from 2008, I haven't checked to see if there are any more current ones, I welcome all comments and opinions, I would like to see some deep discussion started from this (even from Byrd
)

For some reason the Google Video embed button won't work so here is the link
MEGALITHOMANIA 2008: David H. Childress : Lost Cities of S. America & the Pacific

[edit on 3/31/2010 by JKersteJr]




posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by JKersteJr
 
Childress is always interesting...the video is a tour de force of all that 'forbidden archaeology' and ancient astronauts stands for. In my view, he sings from the same hymn sheet as Von Daniken, Dona (active thread), Sitchen, Herschell and Hancock.

His Easter Island Moai is typical as he ignores, overlooks and dismisses good explanations and focuses on the unknowns. He does this to buttress his overall contention that a lost civilization was responsible for all the major stone megaliths and dolmens across the world.

He's genial, friendly and conversational in his approach. At the same time, he throws in a few digs at science. He's a master of the argument from ignorance and argument from incredulity.

Childress compares diverse monuments from across the globe. He draws our attention to their similarities to support his lost civ theory. What he doesn't do is share the dates with his audience.

The established model of human migrations and the development of civilisations is supported by haplogroups. Genetic studies connect each population to other populations. From these we can work our way back in time. The timelines and dates he doesn't provide are convincingly provided by the collective efforts of the science community.

He makes the claims that a lost civilization was global and advanced enough in technology that they engaged in atomic warfare, flight and space exploration. It's BS IMO.

Hundred flags for this thread.



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 06:35 PM
link   
So he's just another fraud? He can't just be someone who maybe thinks his theory is right and wants to share it with everyone?

Just answer me this, why did Egyptians, Olmecs, and countless other peoples band their .s like that? Where did that idea originate? IMO emulation is the most likely reasoning.

What about the keystone cuts, some identical to one another, found all over the world? You think the multi thousand ton stone slabs at Baalbek were moved on rollers or with ropes? Nothing odd about the Easter Island statues being buried chest deep in some places already? And I'm sure you think Yonaguni is a natural Basalt column like formation right?

Can you answer any of those "unknowns" you claim he focuses on(as opposed to focusing on things we already know...?)



posted on Apr, 1 2010 @ 01:17 AM
link   
reply to post by JKersteJr
 
Hiya JK, I don't have the time to make a long or detailed response. I'll be offline for a week after this.

You ask about skull binding? The practice continued until at least the latter years of the 20th Century. Communities in Northern France practised it until the late 19th Century. There's a study from the asylums of northern Europe that illustrates the frequency of skull-bound patients...whites.

I point this out to add more normality to the practise. It was and remains unusual...hence our discussion...but shouldn't be viewed as just relating to a few places. It's occurred in N & S America, Europe, Africa, China and the Middle East. A couple of crucial sources...

Dingwell's Artificial Skull Deformation

French Thesis: Cranial deformation...

So we have people binding their .s across five continents. That leads some people to wonder how unconnected peoples could have the same bizarre practises? They then come to certain conclusions...

* These peoples must have been connected
* There must have been a global civilisation
* There must have been advanced technology to be connected e.g. flight
* The technology must have been given by aliens or ancient astronauts
* The skull binding is emulation of the ancient astronauts

This is how Childress has interpreted the evidence he sees. It's also very similar to the others I mentioned in the previous post. For people that choose these conclusions, it's very, very hard for them to understand why the science community doesn't share their ideas. This leads to the other familiar conclusions...

* Science is stuck in a paradigm
* Science can't 'think out the box'
* Science hides the 'truth'
* Science only looks to support old ideas
* Science is a conspiracy to stop us knowing about 'real' beginnings

Using a deeper knowledge of the evidence and the anthropology surrounding the tribes, cultures and artifacts...science comes to a different conclusion. It favours the concept arising through aesthetics. tribal identities and social hierarchies. Naturally, there are probably other reasons too. If you read the papers above, you could find the science around the research interesting. I have a few more papers I can send by email.

These two images illustrate how different peoples can and do exhibit body modification that are highly similar...why aren't the Childress' of the world wondering about these guys?

South America


Africa


The abiding problem I have with ideas of lost civs and secret technology is the lack of them in the historical record. No bodies, infrastructure, roads, no productions centres. Technology requires alloys, fractioning towers, screws, gaskets, steel presses. It requires incremental steps as knowledge is built upon. Most importantly the written language is crucial in embedding knowledge in cultures and developing civilisations.

Take it easy



posted on Apr, 1 2010 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Kandinsky
 


Thank you Kandinsky for you're feedback, good information overall and I understand your overall feeling on the general subject at hand. However, you didn't really answer any of my specific questions, I'm not so much interested in what the general consensus is, I wanted your personal opinions on my few specific questions.

I know about skull binding and I realize how widespread it was and how long it lasted, Childress even says in the video that the practice lasted until the 60's, they showed an actual photo of a baby with a coned ..



So we have people binding their .s across five continents. That leads some people to wonder how unconnected peoples could have the same bizarre practises? They then come to certain conclusions...

*These peoples must have been connected
* There must have been a global civilisation
* There must have been advanced technology to be connected e.g. flight
* The technology must have been given by aliens or ancient astronauts
* The skull binding is emulation of the ancient astronauts


Honestly I don't come to any of those *conclusions* based purely on . binding, I would say the last point is a plausible *theory* perhaps. I just wondered, in your opinion, where do you think the idea originated and who started it, WHY that particular shape predominately?



* Science is stuck in a paradigm
* Science can't 'think out the box'
* Science hides the 'truth'
* Science only looks to support old ideas
* Science is a conspiracy to stop us knowing about 'real' beginnings

* I do not agree with that premise.
* I don't think they are incapable but perhaps at times, purposefully choose not to?
* I'd say it's a good possibility, not across the board, but certain select information, can you prove they don't?
* I would mostly disagree, but modern archaeologists and historians are indeed IMO, very by the book and rely on what they have been taught by the establishment...set in their ways kind of.
* I wouldn't say Science was created for that purpose, but you must admit, in the right (or wrong depending on what side you're on) hands, it is a devastatingly powerful tool.


The pictures of the tribesman's lip dishes are really not important, I get what you are trying to say and I agree for the most part but this thread isn't about modern indian/african tribes' body modifications. The focus for me is the striking similarities in the actual structures. I wanna see documented evidence on techniques used to cut a 2000 ton stone, drag it over a mile, lift it 20ft into the air and set it with exact precision. Then I would like to see it being recreated by us modern humans with all of our stupendous technology.



The abiding problem I have with ideas of lost civs and secret technology is the lack of them in the historical record. No bodies, infrastructure, roads, no productions centres. Technology requires alloys, fractioning towers, screws, gaskets, steel presses. It requires incremental steps as knowledge is built upon. Most importantly the written language is crucial in embedding knowledge in cultures and developing civilisations.



First off, only modern technology requires those things. What about technology like archaeo-acoustics, you seemed to like the recent thread on ATS about the subject.

So are you implying that we have left no stone unturned? That the entire face of the Earth has been picked clean of evidence? That we know all there is to know? It's Science that explains things like plate tectonics, ice ages, and other potential Earth cataclysms and the Astronomers at NASA make sure we know damn well that the dinosaur era was ended by an asteroid and that we could suffer the same fate at any time.

So why pretend that something couldn't have happened and wiped out most traces? Are there not submerged cities/ruins/traces of human life scattered at the bottom of both oceans? What about the once coastal areas where people started towns/cities(India in particular), the sea level has risen and submerged most if not all of these potential sites.

If you have hard evidence to directly refute any remote idea of a lost race or civilization than I would love to see it, I'd welcome an actual critique of the material in the video.

Peace



posted on Apr, 4 2010 @ 03:45 PM
link   
It is really fascinating to witness all the evidence presented in this video. Evidence that clearly prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that a global civilization once existed on the planet (and most probably beyond it).

Let's recap the evidence and apply the mindset of "out of the box" thinking


All around the globe people build in huge blocks of stone - that has to be the most strong piece of evidence. Why stone and why so huge slabs of it? Who cares about relative dates? Who cares about the material of choice and its abundance?

All around the globe people bound their .s to deform them - this has to be a solid piece of evidence that a global civilization once existed on the planet. What if the people in various places do so for different reasons? What do THEY know about the reasons? WE know and we're here to tell them!

All around the world people are depicted, in statues, in the unusual position of kneeling! Now this one takes the cake, if the previous pieces of evidence left you in doubt, this one has to be the point that clears the air. since a position so unusual as kneeling (and with the hands placed on the knees) is replicated in statues the world over then a global civilization MUST have existed, period!

Marsupial animal species exist not only in Australia but in North and South America too. Now this is not direct evidence of a global civilization (TG!) as evolution may take millions of years and in the span of millions of years lots of things can be rearranged tectonically speaking (Antarctica, South America and Australia were parts of the same lands mass many millions of years ago so animal species with similar qualities could exist in all these lands back then and have survived, at some degree, in some of them today - no need to assume a lost land mass in between!). It can give some "weight" to those rejected theories about lost continents in the Indian/Pacific oceans though, if those ancient texts that state these lands existed are correct, then a global civilization must have existed (this is a bit complicated, it is through what in Greek is called "Es atopon hapagoge". I make a hypothesis, base some theory on that hypothesis, prove the theory to be wrong thus the initial hypothesis must also be wrong. In our case, mainstream science discards most ancient texts as myths or religious texts, not scientifically accurate, if this is correct there was no land mass in the Indian or in the Pacific ocean, if there was however then the mainstream science is wrong, and it denying a global civilization existed is also wrong thus a global civilization did exist! Does this make any sense?)

At 1:06:30 (give or take 1-2 seconds) in the video a photo was shown, probably by mistake, of native islanders in Indonesia somewhere, carrying around a megalithic block of stone sometime in the 1920s. Why by mistake? Well, think about it


3 steps of stone blocks makes a pyramid (in Tonga), pyramids are found all over the world, there must have existed a global civilization at some point!

Having used above half of my allowed maximum characters I will continue on a follow up post.



posted on Apr, 4 2010 @ 04:24 PM
link   
The parts I left out in the first post were not omitted deliberately, they are in fact the parts that are indeed peculiar, to say the least.

The two almost identical writing systems, in the Easter Island and Indus Valley, are indeed beyond mere coincidence. It is one thing to coincide in a few "letters" and a completely different thing to be almost identical in about 25-30 of them. This one is a good indication of at least "cultural exchanges" in some past time (this is the simplest explanation I can offer).

Polar shift is not verified so any speculation on it is just that, speculation. Without major outside influence, Earth's geology doesn't work as fast as it should to accommodate theories of sudden, global-wide destructions and/or moving of tectonic plates at paces that resemble a fast moving boat.

The megalithic "wall" in New Zealand is also peculiar and it looks like it is man made (nature is very "bad" at creating such straight lines on rocks). One explanation that could hold some water is that NZ was visited and inhabited by humans much earlier than previously thought BUT the lack of additional evidence makes even this theory a bit unsubstantiated. Are there any similar structures there?

Colonizing the Pacific islands is not exactly that far fetched. Australia was reached at a very early point (around 60,000 years ago, as estimated by comparing climate data that would have lowered the sea levels enough to make the journey more manageable and DNA tests among local aboriginal people), while Indonesia was pretty much one continuous land mass along with New Guinea. From there on, humans residing there for 1000s of years could make the open sea journey towards Polynesia (if an open sea journey was what it took, they could have gone there by island hopping if the seas were lower than today, still a sea journey but much easier). Same thing goes for Ponape and the wonder that is Nan Madol. Once you have humans settled there, all possibilities are open (they can start erecting monuments, walls, making harbors and temples, all things that humans do when they live on islands).

Making a claim about Egyptians reaching the south Pacific at an undetermined point in the past is a bit "dangerous". Where is the record for such journeys? Egyptians were meticulous about such things and they kept records. Have we found anything Egyptian in Polynesia? Just the syllable "Ra" in local names is no proof, this one could very well be a coincidence!

Melanesia being inhabited by "Africans"? Come on now, we are ALL Africans in origin, it all depends on how long we have lived outside the tropic environment that was our birthplace in East Africa to acquire our special characteristics, appearance wise. Asian characteristics are attributed to cold climates, European characteristics ("Caucasian") to a combination of cold climate and limited sunlight exposure (the skin turns much lighter to make more vitamin D by absorbing more sunlight, a darker skin is needed to protect from increased sunlight while it is aided by it in creating the vitamin). If we follow what DNA traces and markers show as the route out of Africa, India, Indochina, Indonesia and eventually Australia were reached much earlier than Europe and perhaps even Mesopotamia (this one is not verified yet for all the mentioned places) for a simple reason, climate! Early humans followed the climate they were accustomed to in Africa. There are tribes in Indochina that are almost identical to modern Africans today, these tribes are thought to be the "vanguard" of the rapid expansion east/southeast, following the tropical climate. It would come as no surprise, to me at least, if evidence was found that Polynesia was inhabited 30-40,000 years ago, about the same time humans (Homo Sapiens Sapiens) entered Europe (estimated at ~42-44,000 years ago).

When dealing with supposedly "lost" civilizations, or "impossible" journeys we need to remember a few basic things.

1. 1000 years is a very LONG time and many things can be accomplished in its span.
2. Human ingenuity is virtually limitless, especially when under "pressure" from environmental/climatic factors (heck, humans entered Siberia more than 40,000 years ago and faced the onset of Ice Ages - yes, that's plural - there before eventually retreating to more warm areas in what today is China)
3. Many things are done similarly because this is the easiest way to do them, it doesn't have to be a common origin all the time!
4. We cannot explain WHY many things were done in ancient times because we don't THINK like the ancients did back then! For us it may be incomprehensible to devote one's life (and probably more than that, to devote quite a few generations) in creating something "for the Gods". We say "this cannot be done" yet someone did it because "this" is there, looking us in the face. Before we employ the answer to all things, aliens, let us explore the possibility that some of us, 1000s of years ago, though of and devoted their whole lives in creating magnificent monuments that defy or challenge even our "advanced" technology.

I hope that I didn't offend anyone with my previous post, it was meant as a sarcastic (perhaps beyond sarcastic, caustic maybe) way to debunk some obvious flaws in the way some people think, combine "evidence" (or the lack thereof) to arrive to theories that pretty much debunk everything we have come to accept in mere minutes. Let us give science some credit, if enough evidence are at hand, it WILL come around (it that is what the evidence is forcing upon our views and theories). Science is not some egotistical child that sticks to a barren denial of any new thing - if it was we'd be still living in caves!

I also hope some of my "explanations", even though totally undocumented, make sense enough to not be discarded altogether as idiotic and/or unfounded.

P.S. the DNA tests that show what the main routes of expansion out of Africa were were mentioned in the BBC documentary series "The Incredible Human Journey". It was available for download through isohunt.com. Search it with the whole title. If it is not still available there and you absolutely must have it, send me a U2U and I will upload it for you



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 07:30 AM
link   
reply to post by JKersteJr
 
Hiya KK,


Honestly I don't come to any of those *conclusions* based purely on . binding, I would say the last point is a plausible *theory* perhaps. I just wondered, in your opinion, where do you think the idea originated and who started it, WHY that particular shape predominately?


I was throwing those conclusions out towards Childress. It's my experience that everyone who entertains ideas of a lost, advanced civilisation will identify with at least one of them. I'm also guilty of the same thinking years ago.

Where did the skull-binding come from? How did it start? Good questions. People who used the practice in the 20th Century explained it was beauty and identity. Historians believe that going further back in time it was a combination of beauty and hierarchies...it makes sense to me. I posted the guys with the lip plates to highlight the things we do for status and beauty and specifically how what we view as bizarre can originate without contact.

How did the skull-binding start? Cradle-boarding has been demonstrated as one known method. In my opinion it may also have been an outcome of carrying . baskets using plant ropes across the brow and down behind the ears. As the skull of teenaged individuals became deformed, it was seen as attractive or symbolic of one of their gods of foodstuffs (Mayan maize god?)



If you have hard evidence to directly refute any remote idea of a lost race or civilization than I would love to see it, I'd welcome an actual critique of the material in the video.


You're asking me to prove a negative...it's like asking someone to prove God doesn't exist. I've watched the video and it irritates me on quite a few levels. Maybe a year ago, I'd step up and critique the major points of the video. Regrettably, myself and others have covered all of his material across many threads on ATS...many times. Machu Pichu, Easter Island, Baalbeck Trilithon, Yonaguni etc etc

It's good that you're interested in some aspect of history. All I'd suggest is that you choose a specific subject covered by Childress and research the hell out of it. Machu pichu is a very good place to start. Try to focus on archaeology departments, Universities and academic papers etc.

I used to recommend this site a lot...Atlas of the Human Journey, it charts the progress of humans since we left Africa in those early waves. It uses artifacts and haplogroups to explain the scientific position...video included.



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kandinsky
I've watched the video and it irritates me on quite a few levels.

I honestly cannot imagine how this video irritates you that much, maybe you're analyzing it too much. Sure the guy leaves out some dates and maybe makes a few slight insinuations, but it really didn't seem like he was clearly strongly suggesting any theory...I just took it as a slideshow of sorts *shrug*.



Maybe a year ago, I'd step up and critique the major points of the video.

So in a year you have reviewed so much material, and solved every mystery to the point where you no longer feel obligated to address the the specific points of the video? You sound like Zahi Hawass!



Regrettably, myself and others have covered all of his material across many threads on ATS...many times. Machu Pichu, Easter Island, Baalbeck Trilithon, Yonaguni etc etc

Regrettably huh?
I've been registered on this site since 2005 and been visiting it since before then, and I have not seen you or any of the other "experts" explain clearly, without a doubt how the Baalbek Trilithon stones were moved/set it place or any proof that Yonaguni is natural. As for Easter Island, I had no idea that a majority of the statues were buried chest deep, perhaps that has been covered on ATS but I didn't know about it until watching the video. Machu Picchu is without a doubt extremely significant in my mind but I wasn't really inquiring about that in particular.



It's good that you're interested in some aspect of history. All I'd suggest is that you choose a specific subject covered by Childress and research the hell out of it. Machu pichu is a very good place to start. Try to focus on archaeology departments, Universities and academic papers etc.


That first line sounds a bit condescending, I'm not "interested in some aspect of history" I've been utterly obsessed with it since I can remember. I know this may start the whole "deny ignorance" spiel again, but this is a conspiracy site, I'm interested in the unknowns, or alternate theories to questions not sufficiently answered or proven by modern archaeologists.

It just seems that for lack of a better word, you and others here, parrot what you are told is right, or what is most widely accepted. I want to know what YOU think, not what historians think. For instance, would you quickly summarize, without necessarily posting some link, how you think the foundation stones at Baalbek were erected?



I used to recommend this site a lot...Atlas of the Human Journey,


Thank you, I will check that out.

Peace



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by JKersteJr
 
Hiya JK, this is standard forum behaviour. You watch a video and ask for opinions on the content rather than go out and look for your own answers. You criticise the opinions as 'parroting' instead of checking for yourself. Your 'utter obsession' with history apparently falls short of investigating anything you watch on video. Some call it trolling...I'd call it something else


Get off your ass and spend some time reading about history before expecting others to be a search engine for you.



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by JKersteJr
 
Hiya JK, this is standard forum behaviour. You watch a video and ask for opinions on the content rather than go out and look for your own answers. You criticise the opinions as 'parroting' instead of checking for yourself. Your 'utter obsession' with history apparently falls short of investigating anything you watch on video. Some call it trolling...I'd call it something else


Get off your ass and spend some time reading about history before expecting others to be a search engine for you.




Wow, I can honestly say you have me all wrong man, it's nothing like that. I ask for your opinion because I'm generally interested, like if you and I were to meet at one of these sights and I overheard you speaking about the history, I may ask you "In your opinion, how was this built" does that mean I'm fishing for knowledge because I'm too lazy to theorize some method myself!?

You didn't really give me much personal opinion to criticize, go a. and read what you wrote, you didn't answer half my questions. You gave me nothing I couldn't go and look up myself. I have done some minor reading, but ya know I'm an average guy, with an above average interest in the truth of things, I'd like to be able to research everything but I don't have the means/time unfortunately.

When I think someone may have some insight and can give me his opinion "off the record" so to speak I jump at the chance to ask questions. I worked with a man from Lebanon once, he spoke broken english, worked as a janitor(the hardest working one I've ever seen btw) and came to the US to get a job and send money back to Lebanon for his daughter in college. He came from the Bekka Valley, and I knew beforehand that Baalbek was in that area, so before we really even knew each other I found myself asking him about it. His vocabulary was limited so he really couldn't give me any answer but he did indicate that he could not imagine how those blocks would have been moved. I valued his opinion because he lived there, I value yours because I can't deny that you are very knowledgeable about the subject in general.

Almost 10 years ago something happened in this country that forever changed me, I'm not being dramatic, but it really sparked in me a thirst for knowledge, in any category I could find, which I guess is why ATS was where I ended up and I have been reading and seeking ever since, it's all I do, like many others here, I check ATS several times a day almost every day so don't tell me I'm "using" you as a search engine, and please don't insult me by grouping me together with the trolls and rif-raf on this forum, I'm above things like that man.

Again, all I'm looking for is plausible theories, personal thoughts, opinions, not text book answers, because when you think about it, is anything really relating to ancient civilizations really 100% provable? All we can do is make educated guesses based on what little there is left, and just because scientists have degrees and read a lot of books doesn't mean they are incapable of error.




top topics



 
9

log in

join