Did Humans And Dinosaurs Co-exist? (Icca Stones)

page: 4
13
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Telos


And who would go to such trouble, making over 15.000 stones depicting humans and dinosaurs to produce an hoax? Why this gigantic number of stones when the hoax could have been as good as with just a few of them? And how could a simple villager with no craftsmen skills have make all those stones in such a short time?

 


Well I don't know...

I can do a quick search on Ali Baba and find Peruvian stone carvings of dinosaurs for min. $0.38

That's about six grand if you negotiated all those pieces for the same price. How much did the Dr.'s museum make? More than 6 grand?

The farmer/villager could have been selling them for ages to tourists long before the Dr. was around. We are talking about one of the poorest countries in the world, labor is cheap. And 15,000 is not a large number for any type of craftsmanship.




posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Barcs
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


Well, since we're pondering, there is another alternative. If there indeed was another advanced culture in the past, was genetic experimentation and cloning out of the picture? Maybe a jurassic park scenario isn't unrealistic at all.
edit on 12-4-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)


Ohh, good post.

Tyvm. Also it could explain how they moved a 400ton stone. Well, they didn't move the stone, they could have cloned dinos to do it for them.

I suppose it would be quite hilarious if we found out that history was a lot more like a cross between Flintstones and Jurassic Park than we ever expected.


It's plausible. There is just no way for us to find out for absolute sure what it was like sadly, at least not yet. We need to unlock more details of the mystery.

On the other hand, I'm sure you could imagine the treasure trove of sci-fi material potential here. And in retrospect, it's amazing to think of all the sci-fi in the last 100 years that actually delves into this subject and explores many of the possibilities. Think of all the pop magazines from back in the day and the way they handled dinosaurs, ufos, etc.

They say sci fi today becomes sci fact tomorrow. So I am not too invested into the status quo belief systems, as history clearly shows new discoveries lead to new understandings and it transforms the scientific, religious, political, and economic paradigms.

I will await tomorrow's great revelations and disclosures, as I have an instinctual predilection that the pieces of the puzzle are starting to fall into place and that we will soon find out the truth about many things we have been wrong about all along. It is inevitable as we have been too arrogant and callous, far too gregarious and pejorative.

It is statistically unfeasible that the truth, whatever it may be, which is self-evident and emergent, can be avoided much longer.
edit on 12-4-2012 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by Telos


And who would go to such trouble, making over 15.000 stones depicting humans and dinosaurs to produce an hoax? Why this gigantic number of stones when the hoax could have been as good as with just a few of them? And how could a simple villager with no craftsmen skills have make all those stones in such a short time?

 


Well I don't know...

I can do a quick search on Ali Baba and find Peruvian stone carvings of dinosaurs for min. $0.38

That's about six grand if you negotiated all those pieces for the same price. How much did the Dr.'s museum make? More than 6 grand?

The farmer/villager could have been selling them for ages to tourists long before the Dr. was around. We are talking about one of the poorest countries in the world, labor is cheap. And 15,000 is not a large number for any type of craftsmanship.





Therefore we must distinguish which artifacts are authentic and which are not. If there are any authentic ones, we need to examine them individually and have full public disclosure of all relevant information.

I agree that failing to disclose pertinent data about various historical finds is extremely fishy. But it doesn't say why they are being fishy though.

There could be all sorts of explanations for why they might not want to let us know anything about these things.



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 09:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Barcs
 


time travel, time travel solves all issues and is the straw that brakes any science fiction story... ...I hate when they add time travel to any plot, they soon are eaten by the paradoxes...



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 10:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by kn0wh0w



The stones themselves are composed of andesite, a very hard mineral that would make etching quite difficult with primitive tools. They are covered with a natural varnish that is created by bacteria over thousands of years. The etching is made by scraping away this dark varnish to reveal the lighter mineral beneath. According to some reports, examinations of the stones show that the grooves of the etchings also bear traces of additional varnish, however, indicating that they are very old.



From what I remember of a show from quite a while ago, it was either an In Search of episode or that Arthur C Clarke show, the sheen on the rocks were made by putting the rocks in a fire fueled by guano or dung. Either that or the stones were rubbed in the dung before being fired, I forget and the show was 15 to 20 years ago. . That gave them their "organic" varnish. They even had villagers show every step of the process and the end result was indistinguishable from the original ICCA stones. The carvings were done with razors from what I remember from that show. The really telling part was looking at the carvings under a microscope, the lines were too crisp to not have been done recently, if they were older, their would have been more degradation of the lines.The lack of oxidation within the cuts further proved the point that they were not ancient etchings. Total BS, believe what you want though. Of course believers will say they were done with space man lasers..........



posted on Apr, 13 2012 @ 04:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by Snoopy1978
If you go to Ica, Peru, you can buy these type of "original pre-incan" type of stones EVERYWHERE. They are easily made and pushed on gullible tourists all the time.


It's claims like this that look bunk to me.

You just say "go to Peru" as if anyone can drop everything right this minute, go there, and find out the truth if you are lying or not.

Did you bother to link us to websites pushing these things? No?? Why? Google is so easy to use.

You then use derogatory language to refer to anyone "gullible" enough to buy them (insinuating that anyone who even considers this as possible for a second is a 'gullible' fool).

Very clever comment, sadly some gullible readers bought into your no-content dismissive claim without even requiring the smallest bit of proof, not even a link to a website selling these things.

I am disappointed in you and the folks who starred your post. Next time I ask all of you to please at lift a finger for a moment and put some quality into your claims and help a guy out and post a link or two.


Alright, I did forget to point something out. I AM from Peru. Born and raised. I have visited every major historical site including the Paracas and Nazca lines. I have been to Ica and spoken to elders. As a child I even had an old nanny that was from Ica and had first hand insight into this stone business.

About these stones, the doctor that burst into the international scene actually BOUGHT them from a villager that would not disclose the location of the find. This villager would provide him with a certain number of stones at a time. Later, the Ica connection even recanted the story and admitted the items were fakes. The doctor loved the fame and kept on with the story. Now you can even buy casts of these stones from creationist museum websites.

Furthermore, these stones can be ordered, custom made, from the Ica villagers themselves (or any artisan really) with any design you want. Peru is a mecca for piracy and fakes. You can get ANYTHING you want there for a price. It's great. Want a stone with Incas riding a gray alien? How about Carl Sagan shaking hands with Manco Cappac, the first Inca? Lol all is possible over there for the $.



posted on Apr, 13 2012 @ 08:37 AM
link   
Look, I love dinosaurs. Im not a debunker. I do want to believe that they may still be there, somewhere waiting to be found. Sadly, this ica stone deal only reeks of scam and disinfo.

Here are links of Nazca stones of crap quality in comparison to the ones Ive seen in person.

Showing the supposed "astronaut" or "alien":

Nazca Astronaut on Stone

The monkey:
Monkey Lines on Stone


This is a creationist "museum" banking on Ica Stones casts:

Ica Stones Ca$t$
edit on 13-4-2012 by Snoopy1978 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 08:01 PM
link   
reply to post by kn0wh0w
 


Surely it's been proven already that these stones are modern fakes?



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 08:09 PM
link   
There have been other carvings, petroglyphs unearthed all over the world depicting dinosaurs and humans coexisting. What makes everyone here so sure that these specific stones are a hoax? Why not the other cave paintings and such? No one from these time periods should have any clue of what a dinosaur even is, yet in some paintings theyre depicted quite noticeably..



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 08:14 PM
link   
I also have another question... In some articles I've read regarding these stones (I dont remember where I read it), it was stated that when trying to carbon date the stones, no organic matter could be found.

As far as I know, organic matter is defined as broken down plant, animal life type of thing.

Most or all substances on this earth contain organic matter

Why no organic matter on these stones?

Feel free to correct anything I've said here...



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by warcloud41
 


Stone is not organic matter. Organic means derived from living organisms. During fossilization the organic matter is slowly replaced by rock, which is why there is no organic material in most fossils and rocks. This is why you can't carbon date them. There isn't any carbon left. You could date the rocks themselves using other radiometric dating techniques, but it would only tell you how old the rock is, not when the lines were carved. Honestly those stones look like BS things they try to sell to tourists. They hardly look ancient at all. The website is trying to sell you 4 for $275. I'd bet they carve dozens of those each day.
edit on 26-9-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Snoopy1978
Look, I love dinosaurs. Im not a debunker. I do want to believe that they may still be there, somewhere waiting to be found. Sadly, this ica stone deal only reeks of scam and disinfo.

Here are links of Nazca stones of crap quality in comparison to the ones Ive seen in person.

Showing the supposed "astronaut" or "alien":

Nazca Astronaut on Stone

The monkey:
Monkey Lines on Stone


This is a creationist "museum" banking on Ica Stones casts:

Ica Stones Ca$t$
edit on 13-4-2012 by Snoopy1978 because: (no reason given)


They are still here! Just look in the sky and you'll see them flying around....



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by warcloud41
There have been other carvings, petroglyphs unearthed all over the world depicting dinosaurs and humans coexisting. What makes everyone here so sure that these specific stones are a hoax?


Because of the fossil record.


Why not the other cave paintings and such? No one from these time periods should have any clue of what a dinosaur even is, yet in some paintings theyre depicted quite noticeably..


Please post examples of cave painting depictiing dinosaurs. PLEASE!



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 03:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Blarneystoner
 















kinda new here, Blarney. If these thinks dont work just do a quick google search for dinosaur cave paintings.
edit on 28-9-2012 by warcloud41 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by warcloud41
 


Those images have been debunked....



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 04:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Blarneystoner
 


Are you telling me that the pottery found in South America depicting dinosaurs, which are located in the Lima Museum have been debunked? The carvings at Ta Prohm, Cambodia? Chateau de Chambord, Chateau de Blois, and Chateau Azay-le-Rideau?? All debunked? The dragon carving on the Church of St. Louie in Rome? The dragon carving on St. Peter’s basilica in Rome?

I don't think any of those have been debunked, sir.



posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by warcloud41
 


Yes... every single one.


But I have a question for you. From your posts, I can assume that you believe that humans and dinosaurs walked the Earth together.

Are you telling me that you believe that there is a conspiracy to convince us that humans and dinosaurs actually did walk the Earth together? Are you asking me to believe that thousand of scientists, and hundreds years of research are wrong? That every single archeologist and historical geologist is complacent in the conspiracy to convince mankind that dinosuars and humans actually existed at the same time? And that most dinosaurs did NOT die out 65 million years ago after so much evidence has been peer reviewed and published in countless scientific journals?

Are you telling me that the entire fossil record is bogus?

And now you're asking me to believe that a few cave paintings and pottery etchings is enough to overturn all those scientists, countless fossils, and years of research.

Please.....



posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 04:31 PM
link   
Humans have very good imagination. That's the reason why dragons exist. That's the reason why thousands of mythical monsters beyond comprehension have been created and stories exist about them. It's silly to take something as truth, simply because it's ancient. How do we know what stories / art reflect reality and which ones are simply made up for storytelling purposes? Did these people come across dinosaur fossils and create depictions of them, much like we did? Who really knows what bed time stories they told their children? How many ancient stories reflect parts of reality, while other elements are exaggerated? This is why ancient stories and art are not reliable sources of information. It's impossible to test. Much of it quite interesting, however.

Dragons were known to be fire breathing as well, so please find me a dinosaur that can breathe flames, and then you might have an argument with the dragons. I think it's more likely than not that they were referring to some type technology that wasn't common to them. The bible passage talks about bones like iron and brass. What does that sound like to you? Either a descriptive metaphor or some type of jet propulsion vehicle. How do you think an ancient person that's never seen technology better than clay pots and wooden huts would describe something like an airplane or a tank. Those passages nailed it.
edit on 1-10-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 04:15 PM
link   
I'd like to point out to the OP that any thread which starts with the line: "I was watching the Discovery Channel the other day...." probably won't be taken very seriously.

I just watch a "documentary" about the discovery of a Mermaid body by scientists in S. Africa on the Discovery Channel. The whole thing was fabricated. Discovery Channel just aint what it used to be,,,



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Blarneystoner
 


No no, Blarney, not at all. I just like to think a little deeper than most. I tend to challenge almost everything were taught or told to believe. I just think with a lot of these depictions more thought needs to be put into the origins of such. I have a hard time believing some of these things are just due to the ancient's imagination. One of those pics I posted, to me anyway, clearly looks like a stegosaurus. Not a variation of a stegosaurus but the current accepted physique of what we know a stegosaurus to have looked like. I have a hard time believing that someones imagination conjured up such an accurate depiction.

Thanks for your comments by the way, sorry I took so long to respond as I've been hella busy.





new topics
top topics
 
13
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join