Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Evidence Of Advanced Technology Thousands Of Years Ago In Peru (Interesting)

page: 29
139
<< 26  27  28    30  31  32 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rocketman7



I think it was just stamped onto the surface since the imprint is so light and yet so exact. At any rate, this is not the work of simple farmers, and the like.


Why would you think the Egyptians were simple farmers?? Those emblems were drawn there thousands of years later when the temple was half covered with sand


I am asking you now, to examine this museum exhibit and open your mind

Now there are more of them like that and some with hair, and if you examine the skull on top, you will see these are not the skulls of homo sapiens sapiens because homo sapiens skulls have bone plates on top, that these skulls do not have....


We covered that already, if you believe those are another species please fund the research


So before you start talking about these migrations to South America and start arguing about Inuits being the first there maybe 20,000 years ago, consider what you are looking at there. You cannot just brush this stuff aside any more than a zealot could regarding the evidence YOU give against the 4,000 year old earth story.


No idea what you are talking about Rocketman



You have to do it that way because the first link goes to the archives, the second link takes you to an archived website. An exhibit of 40,000 year old footprints of modern man in Mexico.


I presume you are talking about the alleged footprints, the latest study has shown they aren't human footprints. Wasn't it you I was discussing this with last week?

You ignored my questions about granite and concrete, so may I presume you have conceded those?



edit on 2/3/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune
You ignored my questions about granite and concrete, so may I presume you have conceded those?



No I didn't see your comment. Please repeat your question or repeat your comment.

Take another look at that pillar. It has barnacles on it. It is 200 km from the Red Sea and it has barnacles on it.

If it was built at the time of Seti I are you suggesting that Abydos was on the shore of the Red Sea at that time?

You are trying to suggest at 1294 - 1279 BC Abydos was actually on the coast of the Red Sea?

Those are the closest barnacles.

200 km away.
edit on 2-3-2012 by Rocketman7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by Rocketman7
I am asking you now, to examine this museum exhibit and open your mind

Now there are more of them like that and some with hair, and if you examine the skull on top, you will see these are not the skulls of homo sapiens sapiens because homo sapiens skulls have bone plates on top, that these skulls do not have....


We covered that already, if you believe those are another species please fund the research


You are just not getting it. Stop for a second.

Now imagine that for some reason, you are just not able to comprehend what I am showing you.

I am showing you, images of people with big egg shaped heads.

Now I am sure you have seen Egyptian heiroglyphics.

They have images of people with egg shaped heads. Like these on the temple walls. Yes they are wearing hats.
g.co...

But they don't have hats on in the images of Ahkenaten and family.

They had droopy egg heads. No one supported their egg heads with planks, when they were young maybe.
I don't know, but the egg head connection cannot be coincidence.
Obviously.
I mean seriously. There are people with egg heads there. And you act like its nothing at all.
I mean what the heck??? When do the lights come on people?


An explanation that these heads are Olmecs with bound heads is just not true.
Yet thats the level of scientific study you want to be at? Where we just say what we want, believe what we want, and deny evidence, ignore evidence, ignore data?
You might as well just believe then God did it and its 4,0000 years old, because there is as much proof of that, as there is that those egg heads are Olmecs or Inca homo sapiens.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 05:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rocketman7


No I didn't see your comment. Please repeat your question or repeat your comment.


www.abovetopsecret.com...



Take another look at that pillar. It has barnacles on it. It is 200 km from the Red Sea and it has barnacles on it.


Insect nests actually Rocketman, there are no barnacles on Abydos - you do know what limestone is made of right?


If it was built at the time of Seti I are you suggesting that Abydos was on the shore of the Red Sea at that time?


see note above, lol, you seem to trying the strawman agument by extention

Oh and on the skulls

Here is some light reading for you, studies on those skulls, some of these you'd have to pay for or get from a university library

Link to skull study

2nd link

3rd link

4th link

Intentional cranial vault deformation and induced changes of the cranial base and face
1. Susan C. Anton
Article first published online: 27 APR 2005
DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.1330790213

Skeletal remains from Paracas, Peru
1. T. D. Stewart
Article first published online: 6 JUN 2005
DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.1330010113

The pathogenesis of artificial cranial deformation†
1. Melvin L. Moss
Article first published online: 28 APR 2005
DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.1330160302


edit on 2/3/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 06:30 PM
link   
here is a photo stream of the Cuzco area and some of the pictures of very recent and completely unremarkable boring sites that are found there Photos of Boring things

I am of course no archeologist I just think this neat

and the beauty of it all is it was built by farmers with to much leisure time by pounding a rock with another rock about 1500 years ago Hanslune could make this in a memorial day weekend .

anyway don't think about the long headed people why study people who purposely elongate their heads when you could be moving heaven and earth to reconstruct Tutankhamen DNA

nothing to see here move along everyone knows Egypt is where all the cool stuff is.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 06:37 PM
link   
You'll have to forgive me, my science seems to me as far beyond yours as yours is to the Evangelical Christians who believe the earth is 4,000 years old. In fact, there is a better chance it is 4,000 years old, since it all exists in a computer system anyways.

And computers by now, I am sure you understand. And you also understand that within a computer, time is something that programmers can manage, and it is not linear, and need not be linear, and everything that is within it, in code can be cut and pasted in, and altered at any time by the programmers.

But here we are pretending time is linear, and the time lines have not been messed with. And hence, to have barnacles on pillars 200 km away from the Red Sea, that must mean, that when that was constructed it was close to the Red Sea.

Well I think its obvious, that you are all the victims of some very large liars.

The Greeks around 2,000 years ago, said, that the Egyptian priests told them, that the Gods and Heroes, ruled for 18,000 years, the Pharaohs for 15,000 and the lesser gods had ruled for 1,500 and the Egyptians had recorded history of all of that.

There is just something very very wrong with the entire picture of Egyptian archeology as it is presented in the mainstream.

It just is not true. People are lying. Obviously they are lying.

And egg shaped heads in Peru and all the other cracks forming in the dike at this point, makes that obvious to most people here.

Anyone who has ever looked at the stonework in Peru, would immediately assume this stonework was in Peru.

Menkaure Casings



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune

Insect nests actually Rocketman, there are no barnacles on Abydos - you do know what limestone is made of right?



Did you ever try to reason with an Evangelist?

I am trying to reason with one now. Only a different type of Evangelist.

I know what barnacles look like.
I live by the sea.

And I know what a homo sapiens sapiens skull looks like.

I also know that recently work was done which determined the bulk of the stones of the large pyramid at Giza were constructed from concrete blocks.
Lots of papers have been written.
Here is an article from the NY Times.
www.nytimes.com...

But common sense tells me yes, the stones in Peru, were made of a type of concrete.
And it was a very long time ago.
So now it is rock.

But people who refuse to accept the obvious, for whatever reason, are impossible to reason with on any scientific grounds.

I will show you once more from space, the pond above Cusco where you can see the water has flowed over the rocks from this water cistern, and worn down by the water.
www.flashearth.com...

How on earth, anyone with any common sense at all, could arrive at the conclusion, that that was built by indigenous native indians, in the 15th century, is completely beyond me.
As I say, that makes about as much sense as a 4,000 year old earth/universe whatever.

And then to say that the stone there was worn down by people sliding on it? Well that again is the level of science we are dealing with here apparently.

So I am sorry, that is not my level of science, neither is it my level to merely use scientific sounding words and studies, which appear scientific, and come from so called scientific institutions, but arrive at such nonsensical conclusions as that.
edit on 2-3-2012 by Rocketman7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 07:42 PM
link   
While we are on the subject of ancient stone construction, I think you better get a little more damage control over to Bosnia, because if people look up Bosnian pyramid rock, they can still find this...

www.bosnian-pyramid.org...

They just have to sort through thousands of pages first.

But they will, and then they will find this...

www.bosnian-pyramid.org...

Whenever you see a stairway to nowhere like that, carved in rock, you can assume that when someone carved that in rock, they were not just making a nice stairway for their grandma so she could climb up and look at the view.

People seem to forget that glaciation, miles thick, scrapes the bedrock off completely. But still some things survive.

Like this...
www.ancientmysteries.eu...

I'm sorry, but that wasn't hewn by Indians ok? I am not a racist, I am a realist. I lived with the Indians. They are great people.
ANYONE who has ever lived with the Indians knows they often, do not even want to take out the garbage, let alone move the old cars from the front yard, or their old washing machines, they are hunter gatherers, and not apt to carve upside down staircases to nowhere, no, not even for their gods, or to sacrifice things to it, or anything of that sort.
They are what they are. And the reason in Peru, you see small stones piled on big huge megalithic stones, is the native indigenous people, were not industrious enough, to move anything they could not carry.
Oh sure, at times they were put into slavery by the Spaniards, and forced to do some rock work, but in almost all cases, they worked with stones a foot square when not forced into slave labor.

But my point to this post is, yes, there are signs of that same culture in Bosnia, that was a global culture, from Peru, and in Egypt, and India, and who knows where else. Easter Island.

And for saying that archaeologists in the mainstream may call me a nut, and Evangelists may call me a nut, but at least I am using my common sense, and so feel free. When nuts call you crazy you must be sane.
edit on 2-3-2012 by Rocketman7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 08:00 PM
link   
I have not read every single persons reply so maybe someone else said this, but perhaps ancient temples were built by giants, which is how such large scale stones were able to be moved over long distances.

Look at ants to us, they build some pretty neat structures, although not quite perfect.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 08:16 PM
link   
reply to post by MrsBlonde
 


That was an AWESOME photo display.

Thank you very much.

STAR!



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 08:35 PM
link   
reply to post by anon72
 


I told you not to look at the boring photos!


see what I mean though the more you see the more you know the canned tale of who built this and when and above all things why? is all wrong. Rocket says the indigenous people aren't the type to build this kind of thing and I put it to you that none of are

look at what people do when just left to do what comes naturally,they build shelters out of wattle and daub or skins or wood or adobe or they live in a trailer haha!

if it is so easy to move 15 ton stones and bash them into shape with another rock and drill holes in them with sand and a tube shaped rock then how come I don't live in a megalithic strong hold? like Ed Skanlin? answer it is easy IF YOU KNOW HOW,I don't



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 08:52 PM
link   
I think once you accept that they used concrete things like this jar on the plain of jars seem a lot easier to make...
Big rock jar, one of many

A jar to keep kids in? Or very very large jelly beans?
edit on Fri Mar 2 2012 by Jbird because: removed quote of preceding post



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 09:29 PM
link   
Regarding the barnacles at the Osireion in Abydos, it seems to me that it even confused people 2500 BC since they buried some boats there.

www.ancientmysteries.eu...

So you can probably assume that they were not just plain stupid, but realized that there was something strange about finding barnacles at the Osireion, and seeing that at one time it was covered with sea water, they figured they better hedge their bets and have a few boats close by, just in case.

But that is nothing at all even remotely close in terms of paranoia, regarding flooding as has been seen in Peru.

When they built in Peru, for instance at Coricancha, they built with water tight joints.

But how paranoid of flooding do you have to be, to build Machu Pichu?

Sure the Inca found it and added some small stones much later, but when it was first built, it was built with megalithic stones.

www.riantours.com...

But you know if you go far enough back, and asked the people, they would probably say flooding? We WISH we had flooding, what we got was fire hot enough to melt stone.
Lots of places where the stone has been glazed by heat, and even in places like Scotland.
And you think well Scotland like a Scottish castle but no, that same global Antediluvian culture, were in Bosnia, and places like Scotland as well.
But most of it in the northern hemisphere was just totally wiped clean by glaciation.
Right down to bedrock. And all that was left was moraines, and well to suggest that same culture that built with megalithic stones, piled up pyramids made of rubble as some have suggested in Bosnia, is probably not true.

But have a look at Scotland to see what might be, something also from the Antediluvian culture...
Tap-o-noth
Not large stones, but melted on one wall.
And really scattered. Like if you wanted to do that, I am not exactly sure how you would scatter those stones like that. In fact, where do you get so many small stones like that from? The sheep fields I guess.
The ancient sheep fields of bonny neolithic Scotland.
Just because they can't find anything older than 2,000 years there does not mean it is only 2,000 years old.

Just like when they find a stone knife with an inscription on it, near a pyramid and say oh, that must be the pharaoh that made that pyramid.

I think West is not off his nut when he looks at the Sphinx and says it might be 40,000 years old.
40,000 years is nothing. Peru goes back 2 million years. The problem is there is a HUGE gap when that civilization disappeared, was destroyed by global cataclysm, and civilization regained a footing, beginning 40,000 years ago.
And then, it wasn't until 11,000 years ago or so that we find it thriving in the middle east.
Do people tell the truth today? No they do not. So just because years ago, someone wrote down that someone made some great thing, does not mean they actually were telling the truth.
Neither does it mean they actually really knew who made it in the first place.
Stone Henge looks megalithic. Is there really an account of when it was made or is this date more speculation, based on wishful thinking attributing it to the Druids?
Its a shame you can't date rock, and a greater shame that concrete that is over a million years old is indistinguishable from rock, otherwise there would be less controversy and less mystery regarding these things.
But also, it is often difficult to tell where their concrete started and where the rock begins, in some of these huge constructions. It seems to be part of the rock now.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 09:52 PM
link   
So 2500 BC a group of people took some megalithic stones they found laying around, and built Stone Henge.
upload.wikimedia.org...

Well what was it a million years ago? What was it before glaciation or global cataclysm?

Anyone can pile up stones, but long long before that and for a million years people were building huge buildings with concrete. And those stones could be from some ruined site there too.

A global Antedeluvian culture has pretty much been established.

And yeah, when you look at Yonaguni, you can only come to one conclusion.

There, be giants.
sebastoc.free.fr...
edit on 2-3-2012 by Rocketman7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketman7
 


Rocketman7 here's what I will say this construction does look like concrete,look how homogenous all the individual blocks are same color ,no strata , no fractures, no seams of different colors, no inclusions for mile after mile . Some surfaces look 'glazed' and whats up with the knobbs and the odd places where they look like somebody pushed something in wet clay?They look molded, it's puzzle

now look at the rocks the Inca used to build their rubbley walls ,all different colors and textures,and shattered like broken rocks which is what they are

so yeah I feel ya



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 10:11 PM
link   
But you know if you examine Yonaguni, and lets call it part of Mu, since it was a seperate culture, from the Atlantean culture. Still going back a million years.

But its either a foundation for a building, and had huge stones on it which are now gone, or was wooden on top, and the base may have been either concrete, whch is likely, or pumice and easily carved.

It may have even floated at one time, and was a kind of floating palace made of pumice.
Now turned to stone by mineralization.

So although there is plenty of evidence of giants, there is no real evidence of a civilization of giants.

Even at Yonaguni, there are normal human sized stairways too. In fact what people mistake for giant sized stairways are probably just part of the foundation of the building walls. But seriously, people have to stop calling everything a temple. Only the natives who found ruins, used anything as a temple because when they found it, it scared the crap out of them.

This is not a temple.
www.world-mysteries.com...

Thats a barracks. Do you need to be a genius, to see that is a barracks?


edit on 2-3-2012 by Rocketman7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 10:38 PM
link   
barracks is as good a guess as any,it isn't a temple I agree . It could have been a monastery a college,a hospital a museum a shopping mall lots a things.
if you look at the Photo stream I posted you will see that there are places all around the Cuzco area that resemble very closely Yonoguni,anybody who is familiar with both places would conclude that they are the same.

while I am not willing to call anywhere Atlantis or Mu,I will say that I am starting to think that the yearning for Atlantis is the yearning of those among us who still remember that world and want to recreate it ( I have a feeling you know who I mean)

I have seen whole discovery channel documentaries about these ruins that state with absolute authority that the Inca constructed them. The Inca have never ever said that they made this. Hanslune says the Killke made it and the Inca say that the Virracochas made them

so I'm going to call the 'Atlantians ,the Virracochas, they were race of people that used to live in this area in remote antiquity and they came from the 'sea ' and built this with as yet unknown methods. In most cases there doesn't seem to be a clear purpose as to what lots of these locations could have been used for. There is in the very old megalithic part a strange lack of adornment very few examples of depictive art for arts sake.

I find this subliminally disturbing about these remains of a culture, it's not human

edit on Fri Mar 2 2012 by Jbird because: removed quote of preceding post



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 07:32 AM
link   
reply to post by MrsBlonde
 



I have seen whole discovery channel documentaries about these ruins that state with absolute authority that the Inca constructed them. The Inca have never ever said that they made this. Hanslune says the Killke made it and the Inca say that the Virracochas made them


And on and on and on...

Exactly the point. All these peoples believed to have build these structures, that are clearly above the tech and knowledge they had at the time, came upon them and went WOW... our decendants MUST have made them... let write on the walls etc...



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrsBlonde
here is a photo stream of the Cuzco area and some of the pictures of very recent and completely unremarkable boring sites that are found there Photos of Boring things

I am of course no archeologist I just think this neat

and the beauty of it all is it was built by farmers with to much leisure time by pounding a rock with another rock about 1500 years ago Hanslune could make this in a memorial day weekend .

anyway don't think about the long headed people why study people who purposely elongate their heads when you could be moving heaven and earth to reconstruct Tutankhamen DNA

nothing to see here move along everyone knows Egypt is where all the cool stuff is.


Good photos, AE are far better studied than any other group, they also left substantially more images and writing and had a culture that last 4,000+ years than say the Inca who weren't literate and who were around 300 years.

As noted above in my links the heads have been studied, physical anthropologies have examined them an pronounced them human, whether any DNA testing on the skulls has been done I don't know, however there has been DNA testing of locals, they are not surprizing, human



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rocketman7


Did you ever try to reason with an Evangelist? I am trying to reason with one now. Only a different type of Evangelist. I know what barnacles look like.
I live by the sea.


Sorry you are wrong, there are not barnacles on the rocks at Abydos. I go with evidence you go with intense belief and seem to be suffering from the Dunning and Kruger effect


And I know what a homo sapiens sapiens skull looks like.


But do you realize that the shape of a skull can be deliberately warped? That this was a common cultural trait in the SA and other places? Why do you not recognize that?


I also know that recently work was done which determined the bulk of the stones of the large pyramid at Giza were constructed from concrete blocks.


That was the ideas put forth and rejected, you seem to have a problem with finding only the first report on anything then ignoring counter and follow on reports


But common sense tells me yes, the stones in Peru, were made of a type of concrete.
And it was a very long time ago.
So now it is rock.


Well you just made that up, why should I believe it? Got evidence that concrete does that?


But people who refuse to accept the obvious, for whatever reason, are impossible to reason with on any scientific grounds.


Yes I know I'm exchange posting with one now


I will show you once more from space, the pond above Cusco where you can see the water has flowed over the rocks from this water cistern, and worn down by the water.
www.flashearth.com...


Nice picture, what is your point?


How on earth, anyone with any common sense at all, could arrive at the conclusion, that that was built by indigenous native indians, in the 15th century, is completely beyond me. As I say, that makes about as much sense as a 4,000 year old earth/universe whatever.


Because you know very little about archaeology, engineering, or the cultures of that place and time



So I am sorry, that is not my level of science, neither is it my level to merely use scientific sounding words and studies, which appear scientific, and come from so called scientific institutions, but arrive at such nonsensical conclusions as that.


So tell us from your knowledge what it actually is?





new topics

top topics



 
139
<< 26  27  28    30  31  32 >>

log in

join