Someone try to convince me that 'mainstream' aercheologists and other scientists are BS

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 12:22 AM
link   
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
 


everything you just listed has been debunked lol.




posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 12:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheSparrowSings
Keeping all that in mind, I began to think about the amount of high altitude mega cities throughout the Andes, Peru, Bolivia. How many of these sites seem to be a mix of a highly advanced civilization and technological aptitude in their architecture. Interspersed with more of a "refurbished" feeling of a less skilled craftsman. When the Spanish came to South America their reported that local tribesmen would say (about many of these places) that they did not build them, they where there long before their people.

If we take into account the stories of the people of the Andes about Varachocha and him arriving after the deluge to rebuild society... That water levels would have significantly risen after the deluge and the location of great cities... And that, from a scientific perspective, this deluge most likely occurred at the end of the last ice age. (Unless some hidden event has occurred since then that might cause such an event [ei: pole shift...]) I question the dating on these cities. Where mainstream science says that mega cities like Macchu Pichu can be attributed to the Incan's and mostly built "After Common Era" I can see that stories point towards a much older date. 10,000 BC perhaps (post ice age)

Thoughts Anyone?


I think a place like Gobekli Tepe (B.C. 9,000) pretty much blew archeologists minds at the time when it first came to light. We'd be fools to think that there are no other very ancient sites to be still discovered.
edit on 12-10-2012 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 12:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by TheSparrowSings
Keeping all that in mind, I began to think about the amount of high altitude mega cities throughout the Andes, Peru, Bolivia. How many of these sites seem to be a mix of a highly advanced civilization and technological aptitude in their architecture. Interspersed with more of a "refurbished" feeling of a less skilled craftsman. When the Spanish came to South America their reported that local tribesmen would say (about many of these places) that they did not build them, they where there long before their people.

If we take into account the stories of the people of the Andes about Varachocha and him arriving after the deluge to rebuild society... That water levels would have significantly risen after the deluge and the location of great cities... And that, from a scientific perspective, this deluge most likely occurred at the end of the last ice age. (Unless some hidden event has occurred since then that might cause such an event [ei: pole shift...]) I question the dating on these cities. Where mainstream science says that mega cities like Macchu Pichu can be attributed to the Incan's and mostly built "After Common Era" I can see that stories point towards a much older date. 10,000 BC perhaps (post ice age)

Thoughts Anyone?


I think a place like Gobekli Tepe (B.C. 9,000) pretty much blew archeologists minds at the time when it first came to light. We'd be fools to think that there are no other very ancient sites to be still discovered.
edit on 12-10-2012 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)


Gobekli Tepe is a mystery. But its not enough to bring about a huge change in views. If anything it raises the option that the semantics in the dates of farming, etc are fudged. Not exciting enough.



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 12:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by ubeenhad
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
 


everything you just listed has been debunked lol.

Ehhh... it appears this thread is completely pointless after all.



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 12:44 AM
link   
Ubeenhad,

I would be interested on your thoughts in regards to my post. Is it too much "word of mouth" from these ancient stories that would lead you to disbelieve anything in my statement?



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 12:49 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


I agree, Slayer, Gobekli Tepe really is a strange one. The only problem I have with this site is my inability to find anything "written" about the history of that area at the time. (Unless I look into Biblical scripture but it doesn't offer much information regarding the specifics post deluge at all.) It might be a "dating" error as Ubeenhad has stated but I am thinking it makes more sense that it be from the era of forgotten ancients or "gods", or whoever had the skill to build these sites.
edit on 12/10/2012 by TheSparrowSings because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 01:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by ubeenhad
Gobekli Tepe is a mystery. But its not enough to bring about a huge change in views. If anything it raises the option that the semantics in the dates of farming, etc are fudged. Not exciting enough.



It does however move the goal post after decades of denial that there could be cultures and possibly civilizations older than the first 5 earliest civilizations quoted and taught.

So in that regards they were wrong. But now, they'll claim it, because it's staring them in the face and there is no way around it.

edit on 12-10-2012 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 02:05 AM
link   
reply to post by ubeenhad
 


It has been a long time since I have replied to anyone on here.
As to your request to basically prove science wrong if I understand you correctly. Simply look at the past. The earth is flat. We are not only the center of the solar system but of the universe. Everything revolves around us. There are no such things as stars, those are merely pinpricks in the solid firmament above that protects us. Electrons flow from negative to positive, no wait, from positive to negative, no wait, lets go back to negative to positive. Each of these were FACTS supported by the main stream scientific establishment so much so that at times saying no to it could get you literally killed.

More recently string theory. There are only TEN dimensions. Anyone who believes in a eleventh dimension was a quack and was effectively banned. There was no such thing as super gravity.
Funny thing though is that they found string theory would not work and ended up with five theory's ALL correct! But if you added in the eleventh dimension and super gravity string theory now worked again and ended up with one theory again!

Magnets have always been a continuous source of energy as shown by the fact they have a continuous magnetic field which requires energy to produce. Simply because we have not figured out how to access this energy without using another source does not dispute this, yet most main stream science ignores this.

My point being main stream science walks in lock step and punishes anyone who does not. You must not only be correct when you dispute them but have some means of power to break the lock step and still survive. Otherwise you will be like the scientists of the past. Remembered in the future for being correct and a genius but held up to ridicule and disregarded in your own life time. Most humans do not have the determination to do that which means much TRUTH which they have discovered becomes discarded when if main stream science really had a open mind they would listen and actually prove or disprove the theory's before condemming them.

Science today, just as it always has, is about money and reputation. Where the money is will be where science goes, just to have the money to conduct science. If a theory contradicts someone with a large reputation it will be disallowed simply because of the power of that reputation and the money it can draw. It is a human thing but means many false things will be believed for hundreds of years before the truth will be allowed to be known. Sorry but that is the best I can do for you.



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 02:12 AM
link   
I am going to help out on this one.


The Oxford English Dictionary says that scientific method is: "a method or procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses


With the added emphasis above. What we know is what we are taught, it never had to be right or wrong. Those that spoke against it, are no longer here to tell the story of history. We are full of "scholars" that have learned first hand from the one place they should have had enough common sense to question.

Peace, NRE.



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 04:40 AM
link   
OP you obviously already have your mind made up. So this thread is really just an attempt to troll up responses in my opinion. Nothing Chaotic Order mentioned has been truly debunked. There are many ancient mysteries that ms archaeology has some flimsy explanations for.



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 07:11 AM
link   
reply to post by ubeenhad
 


many reasons....

in the commercial world - eg. paid to prove something...ie..."convince em this cereal isnt toxic"

forcing facts for commercial agendas...etc


and dont get me started on archeologists

who subsidises them has overall control - so if i tell an excentric philanthrapist that i will find the holy grail...and i have a theory...i will lie through my teeth to prove i was right....like people thought with Vyse when he found quarry marks in khufus pyramid...they thought he faked them

peace

edit on 12-10-2012 by thePharaoh because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Jerk_Idiot
 


Good post, Jerk_Idiot;

Another problem with mainstream science is that these people are their to do a job. They are trained and told specific things and if someone is to step outside this box they could be at risk of losing their jobs. Or they will find they are not content in the current scientific mold and weed themselves out. Therefore mainstream science is left with people who have a very "set" point of view and rarely do things break from the norm.



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 10:34 AM
link   
Just watch The History Channel; that should convince you...



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by ubeenhad
Gobekli Tepe is a mystery. But its not enough to bring about a huge change in views. If anything it raises the option that the semantics in the dates of farming, etc are fudged. Not exciting enough.

It does however move the goal post after decades of denial that there could be cultures and possibly civilizations older than the first 5 earliest civilizations quoted and taught.


No Anthropologist has ever asserted such a ridiculous thing, though claiming they have creates a ready-made argument for you, I note.

I'm aware that you know that the word "civilization" in general speech has different connotations than the same word when used in the context of Anthropology. So, why do you here pretend to not know this?

It is abundantly obvious that the people that built Gobekli Tepe (and the dozen or so other similar sites from that era found in that region) were not a civilization in the academic sense. Since that is most assuredly the case, in what way, then, has the "goal post" been moved?


Originally posted by Jerk_Idiot
reply to post by ubeenhad
 


It has been a long time since I have replied to anyone on here.
As to your request to basically prove science wrong if I understand you correctly. Simply look at the past. The earth is flat. We are not only the center of the solar system but of the universe. Everything revolves around us. There are no such things as stars, those are merely pinpricks in the solid firmament above that protects us.

The above statements come from a time when science didn't even exist. Can we blame you for WW1, even though you had yet to be born?


Originally posted by Jerk_Idiot
Electrons flow from negative to positive, no wait, from positive to negative, no wait, lets go back to negative to positive. Each of these were FACTS supported by the main stream scientific establishment so much so that at times saying no to it could get you literally killed.

You have a strange opinion concerning the meaning of the word "fact."
For example, your statements about electron flow. It appears that perhaps the electromagnetism unit in your Physics (or Physical Science) curricula left a sore spot. More on that later.

With no way to determine which way electrons actually flow, an assumption was made. That's all. The assumption, which was subsequently found to be wrong but has never been changed, had no impact on the field for over 150 years, so what's your problem with this?

Originally posted by Jerk_Idiot
More recently string theory. There are only TEN dimensions. Anyone who believes in a eleventh dimension was a quack and was effectively banned. There was no such thing as super gravity.
Funny thing though is that they found string theory would not work and ended up with five theory's ALL correct! But if you added in the eleventh dimension and super gravity string theory now worked again and ended up with one theory again!

Here it appears that you object to scientific research. After all, is it not the point to discover models for the evidence we gather? What, exactly, is wrong with the idea that theoretical Physics should come up with several competing models, then eventually discover, on their own (and with the tremendous effort of a single individual genius - Edward Witten) that all five models were equivalent?

How is it that respected Physicists were all simultaneously offering varying views on the number of dimensions that exist in the string model of reality if, as you claim, they were constantly being called "quacks" and being "banned?"

Please cite and link to this sort of criticism you so eagerly claim is the case.


Originally posted by Jerk_Idiot
Magnets have always been a continuous source of energy as shown by the fact they have a continuous magnetic field which requires energy to produce. Simply because we have not figured out how to access this energy without using another source does not dispute this, yet most main stream science ignores this.

Here we return to your defective comprehension of electromagnetism. It requires no energy for a magnet to produce a magnetic field. The field is the vector sum of the fields produced by the magnetic domains in the magnet. The domains display fields that are the result of molecular (or atomic) arrangements in their lattices. All of this is completely explained by Physics, and has been for a hundred years (60 years for much of the "atomic" part I mentioned - see single domain magnets.) The theory itself, like all theories, has undergone alteration in the last hundred years, mainly accounting for special cases.
The only person ignoring anything in this is you. You are ignoring a century of results from scientific experimentation.

Harte



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheSparrowSings
reply to post by Jerk_Idiot
 


Good post, Jerk_Idiot;

Another problem with mainstream science is that these people are their to do a job. They are trained and told specific things and if someone is to step outside this box they could be at risk of losing their jobs. Or they will find they are not content in the current scientific mold and weed themselves out. Therefore mainstream science is left with people who have a very "set" point of view and rarely do things break from the norm.



Then why is there constant discovery.....and rewards for those who make them?



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheSparrowSings

Then why is there constant discovery.....and rewards for those who make them?


Because there is obviously still alot to be discovered in science. And these people DO deserve to be rewarded. Sometimes they even step out of that "box". I don't question everything about mainstream science, in fact without it we would know nothing. What I do question is allowing "Scientific data" (ei: dating) to dictate to us the age of monuments when it is obvious that other factors (Such as the use of sidereel mechanics and local "mythos") hold just as much probability, if not more, as our scientific methods.



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheIrishJihad
OP you obviously already have your mind made up. So this thread is really just an attempt to troll up responses in my opinion. Nothing Chaotic Order mentioned has been truly debunked. There are many ancient mysteries that ms archaeology has some flimsy explanations for.


The fact that you either can't accept it or that you are perhaps ignorant of it doesn't change the reality that what ubeenhad said concerning Chaotic Order's post. I mean, crystal skulls? Really?

I can start you off, but you have to be willing (I believe the fringe calls it "open minded.")

There are many threads right here at ATS that provide all the info you will ever need to see that every single thing Chaotic Order mentioned has been utterly refuted. Here's the best one at ATS on one of the topics mentioned:

UFOs in Art

If you want more, rather than use the search function here, I recommend that you use a site-specific Google search, which was what I used to find that old thread. Here's a link to the search I used. Note the suffix "site:abovetopsecret.com" when you go there. If you put that at the end of your search, it will return posts made at ATS concerning anything you put in the search box.

Harte



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by TheSparrowSings
 


Give us an example



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 


Were have you been my whole life!?



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by ubeenhad
reply to post by Harte
 


Were have you been my whole life!?


Saving the world from fringe for quite some time now!





new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join