Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Who Were the Ancient Megalithic Builders?

page: 20
247
<< 17  18  19    21  22 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 7 2011 @ 12:25 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


I can speculate all day but when I see a place like Sacsayhuamán, and things like the Nazca lines and the Carnac stones.....Speculation keeps bringing me back to the same questions.

Sacsayhuamán: How did they mould those rocks together perfectly?

Nazca Lines: Why did they build such large pictures, only for the whole concept to be fully realised by viewing from the sky?

Carnac Stones: Why did they cut and move such massive stones, so many of them, and align them mathematically? So mathematically that one alignment creates a Pythagoras triangle....the problem with that being the Pythagoras theorem came 2000 years later??? And again, it cannot be fully realised unless viewed from the sky.

It does my head in trying to speculate without including an, either, advanced human civilisation, or, extra-terrestrial origin.

Honestly...I am leaning towards extra-terrestrial. I cannot, personally, explain or understand it any other way.
edit on 7-10-2011 by LightAssassin because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 8 2011 @ 11:14 PM
link   
In my opinion, it all comes down to a lost ancient civilization that was destroyed somewhere around the end of the last ice age. Now, I am not saying that their technology was comparable to ours today as some people would believe but I do believe that they were ahead of their times and were the engineers of all of these megalithic structures. It only makes sense to me that there had to have been some survivors from this civilization that taught the rest of the world how to construct these structures. There is just too much similiarity across all ancient cultures and also the fact of we have no idea how several of the structures were even made without modern equipment.



posted on Oct, 10 2011 @ 04:40 PM
link   
Check this out people.
New Mega Nazca Type Designs
Go to Google Earth
At approx.
40 Deg 22'10.18"N
125 Deg 49'56.13"W
Elev -10268
Eye alt 58.00mi
No mention of it that I could find on the internet. I know the internet is vast, but nothing at all so far.
Anybody interested?
Look all around this ridge area especially above and below the ridge.
lastofall



posted on Oct, 10 2011 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by lastofall
Check this out people.
New Mega Nazca Type Designs
Go to Google Earth
At approx.
40 Deg 22'10.18"N
125 Deg 49'56.13"W
Elev -10268
Eye alt 58.00mi
No mention of it that I could find on the internet. I know the internet is vast, but nothing at all so far.
Anybody interested?
Look all around this ridge area especially above and below the ridge.
lastofall


Great find.

But could it be artifact from when it was mapped?

If it's only from sat pics and not artifact, I'm very intrigued because those are not natural.



posted on Oct, 10 2011 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by lastofall
 


My GoogleEarth is shocking, can you put up a Pic for those of us with # Internet.

Cheers



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 03:02 AM
link   
I don't have a URL or any web site to offer. Maybe someone could volunteer to start a new topic or post it here.
Off the coast of Eureka, California just as the ridge (Gorda Escarpment) go out to about 30 miles and see rectangles with a line bottom left to top right. Go out another appox. 30 miles and look on both sides of the ridge to see the designs.
I am trying to be helpful and not too confusing as possible. This is something to look into and see if it is real or fake.
My Google Earth Crashes every time due to low monitor resolution. It's fun to play with for a few seconds. I like to use Google Earth through Google Map or a weather site with map. Turn off waves or ocean view. Ctl - Prt Scrn to capture full screen, paste into Paint or graphics editor and post it.
I've sent emails with 1 response:
to Ahabstar 10-05-2011
Off the coast of Eureka, California at the start of the ridge of what ever name it has, look on both sides and see some more Nazca type designs. Off Washington coast, too. Think Big

Reply to Ahabstar
RE: new nazca
from: Ahabstar
sent: 6-10-2011 at 10:21 PM
Hate to be a stick in the mud, but the white lines are waves and the darker lines are relative floor depth. You will notice that the mouth of the river has dug out quite the channel there near Seattle. But do keep looking. In Nevada you will see bombing run lines that form some interesting diagrams out in the desert.
Ahabstar
------------------------------
We are all contained and socially trained. It's hard not to be anti-social when you go against the grain.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 09:29 AM
link   
Im willing to bet my left nut most of the ancient megalithic structures were made with the power of the Law of One.

Just Sayin.



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 07:02 PM
link   
reply to post by RA777
 


Debunking David Hatcher-Childress' new book on ancient megaliths in South America -- I have a response from a professor in archaeology, Dennis Ogburn, who specializes in South American archaeology in Peru and Ecuador:



The stones were shaped by hand, primarily using harder rounded stones (often quartz river cobbles), and I've seen a number of these in the stone quarries. They also used some bronze tools to extract blocks, but the shaping involving battering the blocks with the hammerstones. Moving the largest stones involved dragging them with ropes, and often required a thousand men or more. They only moved the largest stones over short distances of a few kilometers. The stones they moved up to Ecuador were still quite large, but only up to about 700 kg/1,500 lbs - these I suspect were carried on something made from wooden poles, like a litter. Archaeologists and other researchers have done quite a bit of work on these questions, and there is plenty of historical and archaeological evidence to show that the Incas were quite capable of doing these things using very basic technology in combination with the labor of many thousands of their subjects.



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 10:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by fulllotusqigong
reply to post by RA777
 


Debunking David Hatcher-Childress' new book on ancient megaliths in South America -- I have a response from a professor in archaeology, Dennis Ogburn, who specializes in South American archaeology in Peru and Ecuador:



The stones were shaped by hand, primarily using harder rounded stones (often quartz river cobbles), and I've seen a number of these in the stone quarries. They also used some bronze tools to extract blocks, but the shaping involving battering the blocks with the hammerstones. Moving the largest stones involved dragging them with ropes, and often required a thousand men or more. They only moved the largest stones over short distances of a few kilometers. The stones they moved up to Ecuador were still quite large, but only up to about 700 kg/1,500 lbs - these I suspect were carried on something made from wooden poles, like a litter. Archaeologists and other researchers have done quite a bit of work on these questions, and there is plenty of historical and archaeological evidence to show that the Incas were quite capable of doing these things using very basic technology in combination with the labor of many thousands of their subjects.


Have any of these bronze tools been found?

As old as these megaliths are they have deteriorated too much to be able to say how they were made.

I'm not saying they weren't made the way Ogburn says they were, just that his is only one possibility out of many.



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 11:54 PM
link   
reply to post by AGWskeptic
 


You're implying the Professor pulled the bronze tools out of his backside when he states there's many archaeologists who have the evidence for these tools, how the stones were cut, how they were moved, etc. If he speculates he says he speculates otherwise he's referring to hard evidence he's either seen firsthand like he says or his colleagues have documented on site and published in journals, etc. He says they used bronze tools so they used bronze tools.

Also the sites have been radio-carboned -- they were built by the Incas. O.K. -- they have the quarries, the tools and the radio-carbon testing. I didn't even post the radio-carbon because you can find that on wiki.

Just because there's dozens of youtube vids about people bathering about ancient dating doesn't mean there isn't evidence stating otherwise. If someone makes a youtube video saying -- these rocks are really worn down therefore aliens built the structures -- that's not exactly hard evidence is it. On the other hand there is radiocarbon dating of these sites -- and also x-ray dating.

So to burst peoples' bubbles but then the alien invasion propaganda is spread pretty thick via all the CIA cable shows, etc. as the Stargate Conspiracy book has exposed.
edit on 27-12-2011 by fulllotusqigong because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 12:37 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


A realy good peice of work, that gives us some insight into the way things were. If say Neanderthal men bred with homo sapien women..then logically we might be looking at the female line holding more of the Homo Sapien look.Which in fact it is to this day?.Ask why should childbirth be so dangerous?
Certain conditions would favour neanderthal at certain climate conditions, the type of game etc..Really well thought out peice of work thanks.



posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 10:03 AM
link   
reply to post by fulllotusqigong
 


I don't have as much faith in carbon dating as you do.

www.allaboutarchaeology.org...

They could be off by 10,000 years or more.



posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by AGWskeptic
reply to post by fulllotusqigong
 


I don't have as much faith in carbon dating as you do.

www.allaboutarchaeology.org...

They could be off by 10,000 years or more.


No, not actually the article - biased by association with YEC, attempts to question the accuracy while the accuracy is known to good if you follow all the procedures and avoid contamination. Tree ring and dating of known materials shows a good accuracy rate.



posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 10:13 PM
link   
reply to post by AGWskeptic
 


Yeah that's why they use x-rays. haha. The stones are dated by x-rays.



Evidence for Long-Distance Transportation of Building Stones in the ... www.jstor.org/stable/4141586 by DE Ogburn - 2004 - Cited by 12 - Related articles BUILDING STONES IN THE INKA EMPIRE, FROM CUZCO, PERU. TO SARAGURO ... Wavelength-dispersive X-ray fluorescence determined the concentrations of nine ele- ments in samples ..... dating to the last 26000000 years (Miocene to ..
edit on 28-12-2011 by fulllotusqigong because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 13 2012 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 

Whoever Wrote this please Add me as a Friend, your Absolutely Right and I've held the same views for many years and have never once in thousands of discussions ever head anyone present the same Ideas until now, I have other pieces of the puzzle to show you that you may enjoy.



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 08:52 PM
link   
I think these megaliths look a lot less mysterious when you remember that humans have existed for a lot longer than most people think. Also, these structures are made out of stone, and therefore, it's extremely difficult to tell how old some of them really are, we can get an estimate, but it's also possible, that they're the remains of larger structures. Are they a great feat of engineering? Yes.

Perhaps there was an old civilization that found a way to lift these objects into their current positions and chose stone, because it would probably last (they were right).



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 09:40 PM
link   
Excellent thread, star and flag and subscribed.

I've been saying for YEARS that the biggest conspiracy on the planet is the massive cover up of the real human historical timeline by the archaeological community.

Sometimes, people will sit up and listen, more often and not, they laugh at you.

UNTIL you tell them "well, if the last Ice Age ended about 12,000 years ago, and humans were living in caves at the time, why are there STONE CITIES showing advanced architectural techniques being dated to 17,000 BC?

Normally shuts them up for a while.



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 11:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by babybunnies

UNTIL you tell them "well, if the last Ice Age ended about 12,000 years ago, and humans were living in caves at the time, why are there STONE CITIES showing advanced architectural techniques being dated to 17,000 BC?

Normally shuts them up for a while.

Only the ignorant, and only because they are ignorant of the fact that no "city" on Earth dates to before the end of the last Ice Age, and no stone construction dates any further back than 10,000 BCE or so, and those are merely crude stacked stone walls.

Well, that or they shut up for a while because they don't know exactly how to react when such an obviously ignorant statement as "Why are there STONE CITIES showing advanced architectural techniques being dated to 17,000 BC" is uttered without blinking an eye.

Harte



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 12:52 AM
link   
I just found this thread and gave it a flag and star purely for the obvious research and patience involved in creating it.
I was always under the impression that the Neanderthals almost became extinct but a small band kept the strain going for some 10,000 years before dying out prior to 'modern man' arriving on the scene.





new topics

top topics



 
247
<< 17  18  19    21  22 >>

log in

join