Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

An Extremely High Tech Civilization Definitely Existed In The Distant Past Of Our Planet

page: 4
122
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 06:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by yorkshirelad

Originally posted by PlanetXisHERE

I CHOOSE TO BELIEVE WHAT I SEE WITH MY OWN EYES - A PYRAMID.

Please save your disinformation for other sheeple.
edit on 19-6-2012 by PlanetXisHERE because: spelling
edit on 19-6-2012 by PlanetXisHERE because: spelling

Well with that logic we have "The Turin Toast" becasue I can quite clealry see an image of Jesus Christ on a piece of toast.

I take it you believe that giants built a causeway from Northern Ireland to Scotland becasue of the perfectly formed hexagonal structure......

Human brains try to make sense out of random patterns. Sometimes nature makes random shapes that look like ordered shapes. NB that Bosnian pyramid is NOT a perfect pyramid it's your brain making the approximate pyramid shape look perfectly pyramid shaped.

Saying it's all MSM lies is a cop out to avoid saying the conspiracy is wrong......cognitive dissonance.

FYI - I've just come back from holiday from Aruba where there is a rock formation that MUST have been created by giant gorillas because it looks just like King Kong. We were not told this by the MSM but the locals so it must be true.....


So these blocks they have excavated along the sides of the Bosnian pyramid are just coincidences as well that happen to look like building blocks? Please, give up this disinformation.............save it for someone more susceptible.



edit on 19-6-2012 by PlanetXisHERE because: spelling




posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 07:09 AM
link   
A stone called Lapis Lazuli is very similar to the blue stone pic you posted.

www.pakistan-marble-granite-onyx.com...

2nd line.



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 07:48 AM
link   
.



This is absolute proof ... The crystal was studied and it's properties CAN NOT BE REPRODUCED !

Ref; 4:30

If anyone disagrees ..reproduce this demonstration !

.



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 08:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by RealSpoke
So you guys believe a picture of an object on a random website as being 100,000 years old because it says it is? Why so gullible?

Do you realize why you guys aren't taken seriously yet? Even people that watch reality television 24/7 would think to question it.


edit on 19-6-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)
Reality television? No such thing.



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 08:12 AM
link   
In Ireland they have a hill called Croagh Patrick, in county Mayo.

Looks like a pyramid to me and looks well out of place.






edit on 19-6-2012 by bluloa because: extra image



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 08:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by PlanetXisHERE
reply to post by Hanslune
 


I think you need glasses, it looks pretty man-made or ET made to me, why are you afraid of the truth?

They have excavated regularly shaped blocks from the pyramid.................you need to review the information.

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...



They don't look man made to me, and they have been determined to be natural formations.. pretty awesome if you ask me.

Author Semir Osmanagić claimed he found paved entrances, stone blocks and various other things.. he claimed to have taken an international team of archaeologists, however those people he claimed accompanied him on his expedition flat out denied ever being at the site.. it's a hoax and you've fallen for it.



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by PlanetXisHERE

So these blocks they have excavated along the sides of the Bosnian pyramid are just coincidences as well that happen to look like building blocks? Please, give up this disinformation.............save it for someone more susceptible.


The second photo does indeed look like natural formations.. the first photo looks like a product of how they excavated the site .. they could easily have easily shaped it as they were digging.. and indeed that appears to be what has happened..


However, many archaeologists he named have stated they had not agreed to participate and were never at the site The dig began in April 2006, and has involved reshaping the hill to make it look like a Mayan step pyramid.


The guy already lied about his team of international archaeologists.. he has no reputation .. excavations by real scientists concluded it was natural .. and his lies continue


On 8 May 2006, members of the Geological team investigating Visočica on behalf of the Archaeological Park: Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun Foundation held a press conference in Tuzla to present the results of their research. The academics, from the Faculty of Mining and Geology at the University of Tuzla and led by Professor Dr. Sejfudin Vrabac, concluded that the hill is a natural geological formation, made of clastic sediments of layered composition and varying thickness, and that its shape is a consequence of endodynamical and exodynamical processes in the post-Miocene era.[17][18]

According to Professor Vrabac, who specializes in paleogeology, there are dozens of similar morphological formations in the Sarajevo-Zenica mining basin alone. The Geological team report on Visocica, based on the data collected in six drill holes at 3 to 17 metre depths, is supported by the Research and Teaching Council of the Faculty of Mining and Geology, as well as the Association of Geologists of Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina.[18]

In June 2006, Zahi Hawass's name became linked to the excavations[19] as recommending a supposed expert, Ali Abdullah Barakat, to investigate the hills. Upon being contacted Hawass denied any involvement, accusing Osmanagić of "giving out false information", and clarifying that Barakat "knows nothing about Egyptian pyramids".[20]


So this guy has a tendency of lying a lot .. and it seems to be purely to further his financial gain if you ask me.. real scientists have found nothing there.
edit on 6/19/2012 by miniatus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 08:34 AM
link   
reply to post by AdamsMurmur
 


Fine then. People that watch MTV non stop would know to question this article. Most of the people in this thread didn't and I find it sad. Especially since so many of those people would claim to have more intelligence than the "MSM brain dead watching zombies".

What happened to common sense in the conspiracy world?
edit on 19-6-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 08:47 AM
link   
reply to post by kdog1982
 

reply to post by EnigmaAgent
 


That absolutely is Lapis Lazuli, even the name "Sky Stone" comes from Lapis Lazuli;


Etymology

Lapis is the Latin word for "stone" and lazuli is the genitive form of the Medieval Latin lazulum, which is taken from the Persian لازورد lāzaward, meaning "heaven" or "sky", since the sky is blue; therefore, it is the "stone of heaven" or "sky stone". Lāzaward is from the Persian لاژورد lāzhward, the name of a place where lapis lazuli was mined.[6][7] Taken as a whole, lapis lazuli means "stone of Lāzhward".

The name of the place came to be associated with the stone mined there and, eventually, with its color. The French azur, the Italian azzurro, the Polish lazur and the Spanish and Portuguese azul are cognates.

source


Apparently this piece of bogus misrepresentation originated in a magazine article titled "Angeli Pietrificati da Atlantide", as printed in Fenix n.10 (agosto 2009), an Italian new-age magazine of very fringey stuff indeed (cover photo and table of contents here)

The publisher's blog (I believe):
Il Blog di Adriano Forgione

Now it's pretty difficult to accept anything as truth from an article that went above and beyond to misrepresent a stone such as Lapis Lazuli with outrageous and easily disproved claims.



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by mikemck1976
These kinds of artifacts are referred to as O.O.P. Artifacts or Out of Place Artifacts. Many of these artifacts have been found, (or faked) all over the planet.


They need to take these two off the list
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Baigong Pipes
fossilized casts of tree roots

en.wikipedia.org...
Ica Stones
Hoax



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 09:30 AM
link   
I'm quickly becoming disappointed in this site. While there is an overwhelming amount of ooparts, people refuse to question some things... I find it highly interesting that politics and medicine today are corrupt, how could history not have been corrupted as well. Not just specific to this find, but a great number of finds have been blown off and mainstream knowledge is always quoted... Medicine is an area of expertise for me, and regardless of how many doctors, nurses, etc(like all the amateur scientists and mainstreamed), the level of corruption in the pharmaceutical companies and practice is ridiculous... Look at fluoride, yet doctors endorse the hell out of it for "healthy" teeth. Although they can't prove a significant difference between people non fluoridated in, say Scotland, and fluoridated America. They always resort to comparing less developed countries that clearly don't have great health care.

Point being, evidence can always be faked and ANYTHING, can be corrupted even historians and archaeologists. Hell if Joe nobody can fake an artifact, TPTB can fake any kind of documentation they'd like.
edit on 19-6-2012 by VeritasAequitas because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by VeritasAequitas
 


I personally get a bit confused over the Fluoride arguments. Even if the water does not contain Fluoride, toothpaste does so you still use Fluoride? Right?


Or am i missing something? After info rather than an argument as i am genuinely a bit puzzled by this one!

Sorry for going off topic OP.



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flavian
reply to post by VeritasAequitas
 


I personally get a bit confused over the Fluoride arguments. Even if the water does not contain Fluoride, toothpaste does so you still use Fluoride? Right?


Or am i missing something? After info rather than an argument as i am genuinely a bit puzzled by this one!

Sorry for going off topic OP.


Topical use of flouride is shown to be beneficial, ingesting flouride has been shown to be detrimental .. there's no benefit to ingesting the stuff ( water supply ) .. so there's quite a difference between it being in your toothpaste vs. your drinking water.. I have no issue with it being in my toothpaste since I rinse the stuff out.. people shouldn't be swallowing toothpaste in the first place.



edit on 6/19/2012 by miniatus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 09:47 AM
link   
How advanced can this earlier civilization be; the "plug" is clearly the base of a Vacuums tube.

These earlier "advanced" humans, probably were even still using 8-track tapes.

Hey super advanced humans from 70,000 B.C.; the Sleestaks called and wanted their bell bottom jeans back!

>> OK, couldn't help myself, I'm just in a slapstick mood today.



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by miniatus
 


Brilliant, just what i wanted. Thanks very much. So, in simpleton terms (for me), brush = good, eat = bad?


Thanks for clearing that up.

Won't take up any more of your thread OP, sorry.



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flavian
reply to post by miniatus
 


Brilliant, just what i wanted. Thanks very much. So, in simpleton terms (for me), brush = good, eat = bad?


Thanks for clearing that up.

Won't take up any more of your thread OP, sorry.


Correct - at least that is what mounting evidence seems to suggest.. though it's even up for debate on how beneficial it is topically as well. ( certainly less harmful )


Fluoride has been found to damage soft tissues (brain, kidneys, and endocrine system), as well as teeth (dental fluorosis) and bones (skeletal fluorosis). There are now 24 studies that show a relationship between fairly modest exposure to fluoride and reduced IQ in children. Two of these studies suggest that the threshold for damage may be reached at fluoride levels similar to those used in water fluoridation.


and


Even promoters of fluoridation agree that fluoride works topically (on the outer surface of the teeth), and not via some internal biological mechanism (CDC, 1999). A recent U.S. study found no relationship between the amount of fluoride a child ingested and level of tooth decay (Warren et al., 2009). Topical treatment in the form of fluoridated toothpaste is universally available, so it is a mistake to swallow fluoride and expose all the tissues of the body to its harmful effects.
edit on 6/19/2012 by miniatus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by VeritasAequitas
 


Nearly everyone in this thread was going along with this sketchy article as being legitimate. What exactly are you disappointed in? The minority in this thread that had the common sense to question it?

There are what 2 or 3 ooparts that are validated? The rest are hoaxes/speculation/flat out wrong.

edit on 19-6-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 09:52 AM
link   
reply to post by miniatus
 


Ever heard of Toms of Maine? Doesn't have fluoride in it and plenty of its users have perfectly healthy teeth. Vitamin K2 is completely natural and is what the "Activator X" is in Skatefish liver oil. It cures cavities and tooth decay, by removing the calcium from your organs and tissues and stores the calcium in your bones and teeth where it belongs. I could argue for days about topical application of fluoride being bad as well because I know several people who have gotten dental fluorosis, and no they haven't swallowed it...



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by miniatus
 


Ever heard of Toms of Maine? Doesn't have fluoride in it and plenty of its users have perfectly healthy teeth. Vitamin K2 is completely natural and is what the "Activator X" is in Skatefish liver oil. It cures cavities and tooth decay, by removing the calcium from your organs and tissues and stores the calcium in your bones and teeth where it belongs. I could argue for days about topical application of fluoride being bad as well because I know several people who have gotten dental fluorosis, and no they haven't swallowed it...


I don't doubt that Flouride can be bad even topically, my second response kind of gets to that .. But my main point is that including it in drinking water is absolutely a bad idea.. having it in toothpaste at least lets it be avoidable ( buy another product ) ..



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by RealSpoke
 


Not the questioning of just this, but you ever notice how people only question what they don't want to believe in the first place? It is always the stuff that is out of place that people screamed hoax, ever notice anybody questioning the Mainstream in such a way( and no I don't mean by threads like this).





new topics

top topics



 
122
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join