It's not accepted by 'science' because your contention is wrong. The local people of that time learned to do that with the materials they had
available. Unless you can explain how an 'advanced' group came in, cut a bunch of stones then left, leaving no traces whatsoever?
No 'preflood', no biblical world destroying flood, lots of little floods, at different times in different places.
Lets say the world had a big destruction with floods and big quakes most things would be destroyed with not a trace left except things like in this
youtube video or the 3 big pyramids of Giza, stone(s) from Ba'albek and so on.
Also be sure to watch this youtube video (4 parts, came across it when watching the vid in this thread):
www.youtube.com...
Now in that above video it shows there was some big destruction going in a very late time but with the same stone technique stil seen.
Anyways after this destruction, slowly people who survived came back to such areas, and they worshipped those old remainings as holy places and even
made their own temples or pyramids (just not with the same big stones or as big).
No proof from worldwide flood or destruction? I guess it's hard to proof? What do we know from people from like 10.000-20.000 years ago, not much.
Only some if lucky bones we can find. As most things it's hard to proof it, even a worldwide flood and or destruction, I'm sure. Anyways how or why
those areas and advanced civilizations where destroyed I don't know, but it just seems logical, since all those old big structeres are using the same
know-how/technigue. So lets say I would loose a screwdriver 10.000 years ago, or some kind of laser device, good change it will decay and/or never be
found again.
In the first video did you notice the knobs (bosses) on the redstone blocks? Those are there to help them move them - if they used 'advanced'
technology - how where they left on? Now we don't know the context of which site they were at so cannot provided exact information on when it was
built. That type of stone isn't particularly hard, Mohr 4 I believe, his statement of 7 is incorrect
How do you know that for sure? Not all stones got those knobs and not all on the same places, maybe those knobs where used to hold something (a wooden
construction or whatever) that we can't see now anymore, we only see stones. Again if there was a great destruction and or flood and they where build
like 10.000 years ago, there wouldn't be much left, except those very big stones with an earthquake proof (often) construction. And you see many big
stones scattered around, alone, which looks like there was some great destruction.
Like the great pyramids they where flat in the past, not irregular stones (as you can see the biggest still got a flat area at the top, the stones
covering the big pyramids which made them flat sided where removed by arabians I believe. Maybe even covered in gold at one time?
And you got different stones, some harder, some softer. I guess inside the Pyramid you got about the most hardest stones (black granite), but I'm not
a stone expert.
Question how was this cathedral made and when? How is it possible for Europeans to have made this without advanced machining?
How did a Greek/Roman artist carve this in marble over 2,000 years ago without advanced machines?
Well you can't compare it with a statue like Ramesses II or other ancient huge statues, from 1 piece of granite not made from relative soft material.
And those huge granite made statues where much much harder to move.
Eurpopian cathedrals where made in many many years from small stones and cement, those ancient big stones are all placed on eachother with different
sizes and often with lasersharp straight lines and so on.
And if those structures where much much older then we believe, they would be I'm sure much more impressive, because you only see the left overs and
with allot of weathering and or water damage.
Ok maybe I will take a look at that book.
edit on 22-2-2012 by Plugin because: (no reason given)
edit on 22-2-2012 by Plugin
because: (no reason given)
edit on 22-2-2012 by Plugin because: (no reason given)
