Ancient Stone Shaping and Setting

The difficulty with trying to use Inca stone work as an example of 'mysterious' or an example of unknown skills is that the Inca were building structures right up to, during and after the Spanish arrived. After the conquest Inca and mestizo who knew the culture commented on many thing to include building, no mention of these fine technique show up, nor did the Spanish note them. What they did note was skilled craftsmanship and back breaking work.

The image above in black and white is what you get when you use hammer stones, you can see the same effect on AE and Rapa Nui stones.

At this present day if you wish to 'prove' levitation or stone softening, you're going to have to physically demonstrate it.

reply to post by Hanslune


Yep.............all depends on what you believe. Closed minds wont see a damn thing until one day the proverbial seagull drops one right on top of you. I understand your stance...........and wont argue with ya!
Most people will only believe whats right at the end of their nose..........and no more. This is also why I use the terms "I believe" and "in my opinion"........figure those two lines out.

Originally posted by Stonesplitter
reply to post by Hanslune

 

Yep.............all depends on what you believe. Closed minds wont see a damn thing until one day the proverbial seagull drops one right on top of you. I understand your stance...........and wont argue with ya!
Most people will only believe whats right at the end of their nose..........and no more. This is also why I use the terms "I believe" and "in my opinion"........figure those two lines out.

Or one can go with the evidence, but sure let us know if you ever re-create levitation or stone softening. It would be quite an accomplishment.

One rhetorical question why did the later Inca deny doing these 'magical' things and report just hard work and craftsmanship, odd eh?

reply to post by Hanslune


Because the Inca more than likely didn't build these things.......only added to them later. I'm also quite sure South American natives weren't sacrificing people either.........in a distant past. Maybe they knew about something they lost, and didn't understand how to get it back!

Listen, I saw how you were acting on the other thread, going into semantics.....dates, civilizations etc. when that wasn't even what it was about......don't try that crap here. Better yet, seeing as I've already given my position and stance, how about instead of acting like a wannabe scientist.....you pick up a hammer and gad, whack some rocks basically do some REAL work, come back with YOUR evidence to debunk my "opinion" instead of waffling garbage. Link Here's a link for ya.

Originally posted by Stonesplitter
reply to post by Hanslune

 

Because the Inca more than likely didn't build these things.......only added to them later. I'm also quite sure South American natives weren't sacrificing people either.........in a distant past. Maybe they knew about something they lost, and didn't understand how to get it back!

Listen, I saw how you were acting on the other thread, going into semantics.....dates, civilizations etc. when that wasn't even what it was about.

I guess you failed to note that I announced I'd made a mistake in misreading it, apologized and redacted my comment - so do you care to apology and redact for your error above?


.

....don't try that crap here.

LOL

Better yet, seeing as I've already given my position and stance, how about instead of acting like a wannabe scientist.....you pick up a hammer and gad, whack some rocks basically do some REAL work, come back with YOUR evidence to debunk my "opinion" instead of waffling garbage.

If you were an actual stone mason you would know it would take many many years to develop a skill to the level of the Inca, you should know that so why make such a challenge?

I would suggest that if you are so convinced that the Inca couldn't possibility do it that you offer a 2.5 million A$ dollar prize to anyone who can reproduce the Incan style of rock work. Since it is your opinion that they cannot based on your view of existing evidence you shouldn't have to pay up.

Oh by the way, welcome to the forum

reply to post by OccamAssassin


Your list of possible explanations are just that, possible explanation. Nobody can rule out levitation. All we have is theories.

If you are right, then why nobody could build something like sacsayhuaman using the techniques you mentioned.

I've seen and heard so much people giving the same explanations, but honestly, nobody really prove them. Let's face it, we have no clue how ancient pre-columbian civilization did it.

This same topic popped up here a couple of years ago, and it was pretty amazing to me at that time. It is no less amazing today, but today I understand it better (or, rather, how it was discovered).

Great thread.

Originally posted by Stonesplitter

I've read quite a bit about ancient Chinese and even white bearded men making their way into these parts eons back. I just hope that these places don't get further ruined or covered up in order to hide some ancient truths.

That made me remember this, about the origin of the Tiwanaku Culture :

in the mysticism of the Andes Huyustus name is lost in the mists of time when he referred to as "The messenger who carried all his people into the realm of the stars' ... how the sages explain the disappearance of all the Andean civilization which preceded the existing one.

those who kept the historical archives of the Empire - who told the legendary conquerors Huyustus was a powerful lord, blond and blue eyes, who came from far away ...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Hanslune
The difficulty with trying to use Inca stone work as an example of 'mysterious' or an example of unknown skills is that the Inca were building structures right up to, during and after the Spanish arrived. After the conquest Inca and mestizo who knew the culture commented on many thing to include building, no mention of these fine technique show up, nor did the Spanish note them. What they did note was skilled craftsmanship and back breaking work.

The image above in black and white is what you get when you use hammer stones, you can see the same effect on AE and Rapa Nui stones.

At this present day if you wish to 'prove' levitation or stone softening, you're going to have to physically demonstrate it.

Chelation is a known principle. Man could easily have seen birds doing the same thing.

Somewhere around here is an article that discusses this, and how a native describes the plant. They believe the plant was located, and have tried to replicate the results.

I will look it up after i get the family fed. Chef Bigfatfurrytexan has work to do.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


Here is the aforementioned thread from Apr 11:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Some interesting info relating to chelation:

www.geopolymer.org...

The organo-mineral complexes are obtained through the intermediary of oxalates, tartrates, succinates, fulvates, etc. .(3) It is known also that the organo-mineral complexes have a very strong dissolving action on the natural silico-aluminates (feldspar, hornblende, laterite, clorite,...) their dissoving action being 2 3 times greater than that of sulphuric acid or hydrochloric acid (4). The most highly acctive organo-mineral complexes are those obtained with oxalic acid, which is found in large quantities in numerous plants (5).

Now, if modern Amerinds were not using chelation, I would say it was a loss of knowledge. The methodology seems to have been known, if by no one else other than shaman and the philosopher that observed nature.

reply to post by Trueman

Your list of possible explanations are just that, possible explanation. Nobody can rule out levitation.

If levitation was available to the builders of these structures......Why bother with lever points?

Seems kind of...... superfluous.

All we have is theories.

No, all you have is a hypothesis and not even a good one at that. Forensic science can take over here and relieve you of your burden of ignorance.

If you are right, then why nobody could build something like sacsayhuaman using the techniques you mentioned.

Would you kindly re-word the previous sentence as it lacks structure, form intelligence.

I've seen and heard so much people giving the same explanations, but honestly, nobody really prove them. Let's face it, we have no clue how ancient pre-columbian civilization did it.

..."no clue"... Are you blind or a bit simple? There are millions of clues, every single piece of carved stone is a clue. The style of architecture is a clue. The purpose of the building is a clue.

This scenario is exactly like the Coral Castle. The methods for building the Coral Castle are known to any mason worth his/her salt. Only the incredibly ignorant think that the Coral Castle is some sort of magically built structure. Ask an engineer or a mason on how such a structure was built and they will be able to tell you how to do it using only "simple machines".

Originally posted by Stonesplitter
Thanks for the interesting questions mate.

You haven't attempted to answer the most important one:

"Do you have any data to prove that the 'carved' blocks you have shown are definitely 100% naturally occurring rock?"

If the data is not there to prove that, then we've hardly done our work, have we?

I'm not saying that many ancient cultures (and modern masons, as shown by thousands of cathedrals, Coral Castle etc) didn't know how to cut and manipulate huge stone blocks. But if proof or disproof of the most obvious candidate for 'liquid rock', i.e concrete, has not been eliminated in each case shown, then I can only assume that people prefer mystical and speculative answers over proper science.

reply to post by Stonesplitter


Here is a pic of an 888 OP. This crane is capable of lifting 5500 ton steel beams into place for a freeway overpass.
All day long.
Truly something to behold. As far as I know they only been around maybe 50 yrs or so.



SnF

however, these claims have not been rigorously analyzed by either engineers or scientists, and[14] such theories seem to be discounted by evidence, such as photographs showing Leedskalnin working, apparently using traditional methods like block and tackle

Source
There's a few interesting words used above, can you guess which?

The comparisons to Egypt's pyramids are a red herring; there are vast differences in weight, material, and complexity between the castle's coral slabs and the huge stone pyramids at Giza. Because coral is porous, large blocks appear heavier than they actually are

It seems likely that if scientists haven't explained the Coral Castle specifically, it's because there's little to "explain."

Source
Again, we have a science website trying to "debunk" Leedskalin and claim photos about tri-pods and even link to a man who lifts 10.25 ton blocks. Yet NOBODY ever saw this man work. 10.25 ton blocks though is one thing and can be manipulated...........yet what about 200 ton blocks? What about 500 ton blocks? You see, the science heroes have once again finished with the old "well......there's nothing to explain here.......move along" line which is oh so typical. Besides, trying to equate Coral Castle with ancient stone walls is completely beside the point........not even remotely similar.

But sound is action, and under the right circumstances it can have a very visible effect.

Source

As for being a stone mason, I've been doing this for seven years solid. Day in, day out. I may still be relatively "young" in the trade, but I know this trade extremely well. I don't live on this website to try and debunk each and everything like two people I've seen in this thread so far, and quite frankly........both of your arguments are EXTREMELY weak. One guy is using coral castle, and some "bumps" on stone as an argument, the other.......well, lets just say he's not even on the same page. The bumps or protuberances mentioned I've already pointed out earlier, but I'll explain..........these would literally snap, or disintegrate if being used as leverage points on stone so damn massive. And I'll reiterate, NOBODY in this day and age could or would be able to complete a structure like this, It's simply unfeasible. Show me some IDENTICAL modern day construction work completed under the same conditions, with the same material and I'm all ears.

reply to post by yampa


That's the stupidest question I've heard, It is quite obviously rock, as it was quarried, do you know what a quarry is?
As I said earlier, in the case of the Egyptians there is NO DOUBT it is rock......whether or not it was dissolved and reformed or natural is another question, have you heard of Limestone? as for the South American walls, well you're either being deliberately obtuse, or again, like the other two.........you know nothing about masonry! Go figure

You'll also notice science is at loggerheads on this issue too.........concrete is NOT Limestone!

reply to post by randyvs


Nice crane mate. Are you suggesting the ancients had one? If anything, it probably helps the case for a previous high-tech civilization!

reply to post by Stonesplitter


I'm not suggesting anything like that stud. Just giving some of the capabilities as opposed to some of the crap floating out there about what today's machines are capable of. Just call it keeping em honest.

reply to post by Stonesplitter


S&F


I am also, in awe of these stones. They melt into one another,as if the powers to do so, were polished with thoughts and magics, long forgotten.

reply to post by randyvs


No worries mate. It's hard trying to put this into perspective. Far too many still unanswered questions in regards to ancient work.

Oh, and drag line excavators differ from a fixed crane

reply to post by sonnny1


Cheers mate

I'm having the week off at the moment, relaxing, and thought this would be an interesting subject to bring up.

Certainly brings out the best in some of us!