Originally posted by blocula
Which more or less proves that during those almost incomprehensibly vast expanses of time that has passed by on earth,while realizing that our history
is nothing but a fraction of a fraction of that time,more or less proves that we really dont know how many technologically advanced civilizations have
come and gone before us and they certainly have had more than enough time to have risen and fallen more than once,long before modern humans arrived
upon the evolutionary scene...
Keep in mind and realize that we have gone from using horse drawn carriages and wagons in 1900 to the first nuclear powered aircraft carrier in
1961...in just 60 years...
Well, the problem with this is that as we have transitioned from horse drawn carriages to aircraft carriers, we've left behind massive architectural,
anthropological, and archaeological traces. An advanced race 10,000 years in the future will see traces of our existence in the fossil record: they
will find layers of plastic debris, steel artifacts, the whole lot.
If you were to dig up our civilization you would find all the requisite technologies for creating aircraft carriers. Power plants. Steel refineries.
Strip mining operations. Oil wells. Offshore drilling platforms. Factories. All of this would leave conclusive traces in the fossil records and all of
these things are necessary for our civilization to create advanced technology that relies upon computers, advanced metallurgy, and sophisticated
engineering methods (involving higher math and physics knowledge.)
When we dig up civilizations of the past, what do we find? Stone masonry, and metallurgy (furnaces, forges, mines) entirely consistent with
civilizations that knew first how to refine copper and bronze and then iron. Literally everything
we've found to date fits this mold. And no,
we've found no ancient deposits of plastics or advanced metals (although I'm sure you're aware of this fact, somehow).
If, for example, the ancient egyptians had knowledge of electricity, we'd expect a few facts to be apparent:
1) The greek historian Herodotus would have recorded this phenomenal application of a then-mysterious energy source. Or Strabo. Or Ctesias. Or
Aristotle. Or the Egyptians themselves. Or Plutarch.
2) We would have found evidence of massive infrastructural works, in the form of generator plants, power distribution centers, power lines in the form
of massive deposits of refined metals, and the like. (hint: nothing whatsoever to date even resembles these discoveries in the slightest)
3) Infrastructure in the form of large-scale mines and refineries required to produce advanced metals on a massive scale. No, ancient limestone
quarries do not even come close to what is required to produce titanium or even steel.
4) Evidence of massive transport infrastructure in the form of highways, transport channels, rails, and seaports.
Some people do in fact claim that the Egyptians had all of the above technology, based not on the fact that they've dug any of it up, but just on the
basis of one inscription in one tomb on the far upper side of one lintel in one
piece of an osbcure temple that appears to show what we, as modern, Western humans, interpret as a helicopter
. The Egyptians, apparently having
constructed or viewed one of the marvels of modern avionics, apparently saw fit to relegate it to one minor mention in one half-obscured glyph in the
far corner of a single temple, and nothing more. Never mind having created the entire manufacturing infrastructure necessary for the creation of such
a mechanical achievement, while leaving exactly zero archaeological evidence to the fact otherwise.
This has all been something of a divergence. If the ancients indeed possessed technology on par or in advance of our own, I ask you: where are the
power plants? The power distributions sites? The mines? The urban hubs? The factories? The refineries? The seaports? The remains of countless
mechanical, metal vehicles? The deposits of plastics in the geological records? The sunken wreckage of ships? The power lines? The roads? The rails?
Why is it, that every ancient site we dig up doesn't show evidence of advanced metallurgical or technological knowledge, and instead is the product of
advanced masonry, relying on the cutting and placing of stones?
PLEASE answer the questions I've posed in this post. I've spent a good ten minutes or more on it and I hope you think about it.
23-3-2012 by wirehead because: (no reason given)
edit on 23-3-2012 by wirehead because: (no reason given)