Modern Technology in Ancient Times?

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Klassified
reply to post by Hanslune
 

I'd say we're likely to see what you're waiting for first. Underwater archaeology is young, limited, and very expensive. Few are going to utilize those kinds of resources on a hunch. So from that perspective, it's hard to find what you aren't actively looking for. I do think the tech will come that makes ocean floor digs feasible though.



Yes its 25-50 times more expensive than a similar sized land expedition. With under water drones/cameras they can search better but I would imagine they will stick to recovery of ship wrecks, which are fairly easy to sight and excavate.




posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 11:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by spinalremain
Obviously I don't know how prevelant or advanced ancient civs were, in terms of their technolog. I do however know that the Antikythera mechanism is very very revealing. It reveals that ancient civilizations did in fact understand a lot of celestial events which we did not become aware of until the 19th century at the earliest.

There is a ton of evidence pointing toward a knowledge they had which we do not discuss.

I would warm against watching Ancient Aliens though. Those programs are flooded with really bad science, lies and misconceptions. Too much of that show will actually dumb you down and lead in the wrong direction.

GL in your search for knowledge!


We agree on Ancient aliens! The Antikythera is wondrous device but it reflects the knowledge of that age, the maker did err in setting it to show the movement of the planets based on a geocentric view



You pretty much said exactly what I was going to say. It is almost as if people feel a need to make the device more than it is, and in my opinion, it takes away from the marvelous achievement that it is.

Watch AA like you watch 'reality' television. By that I mean watch it for entertainment value only, don't think anything shown is actually real.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 06:14 PM
link   
We don't know what technology ancient civilisations possessed!

I see the same ATS members time & time again just saying - sorry guys nothing to see here move on - we know it all & mainstream anthrapology & archaeology has got it spot on...

That's not the case at all...

Take the massive stones at Baalbek in Lebanon, no one has a clue how those stones were cut or moved. They are the largest stones used in any kind of construction ever known to be used on the planet and no modern crane could even come close to moving such immense loads.



Did ancient mankind have advanced engineering techniques to move massive objects or the power to use chemistry and superconductors to move objects bending time and space, which science is just re-discovering? Was there a genetic strain of mankind that was in fact bigger then we think of the normal today? Afterall many animals have much larger ancient cousins eg horses, elephants, dragonflies etc.

You only have to dip into what's being excavated at Gobekli Tepe to see that mainstream archeology needs a rethink because the further down they're digging, the more complicated and advanced the construction is!

Facebook Photos: Gobekli Tepe

I have to laugh when I see videos of Neolithic hunter gatherers supposedly deciding to come together to leave their food squabbles and simple ways and build such a magnificent place as Gobekli Tepe. These people were sophisticated engineers - with a language they've carved out on the stones. The pre Sanskrit that mainstream science would have us all believe doesn't exist. So far apparently only about 5% has been uncovered at the site and others nearby. What more remarkable finds are going to be uncovered in the future? I am hoping to visit the site next year and if I can find some funds would love to pull together some of the research I've been carrying out regarding ancient civilisations, beliefs and monuments and write a book.

We find polygonal masonry in a number of places all over the world, using building techniques modern engineers cannot replicate. What's more ancient stonework withstands earthquakes etc to such an extent that you just scratch your head in wonder. In this video the engineer who designed & built the Millenium Bridge in London is interviewed about some of these ancient monoliths and he admits he's at a loss to explain them. As he says so far no one has come up with anything better than stone for lasting the test of time. Tools might disintegrate or be found & melted down but the Stones cry out from a distant past.

Covered in Revelation of the Pyramids Video


In the first part of this video a British Engineer Christopher Dunn looks at some of the stone cutting techniques used at the Pyramid of Giza - the only Ancient wonder of the World remaining to this day - and why a stone and a copper chisel do not explain the impressive angles and corners cut into the stone.I personally think there is a much more rational explanation to the ancient technology than Ancient Aliens explaining ancient writings and the similarities of the ancient sites we see all over the globe.However I found the video interesting because of the stone cutting points it raises.



Perhaps much of this information was lost when the Great Library of Alexandria burnt down during Roman times.

But whatever explanation we care to lean towards - the evidence is becoming stronger that actually ancient mankind was alot more technologically advanced than we've been led to believe.

What would some ATS posters rather happen......bury all these finds in mud & hope they go away?
edit on 20-11-2012 by JB1234 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by JB1234
We don't know what technology ancient civilisations possessed!

I see the same ATS members time & time again just saying - sorry guys nothing to see here move on - we know it all & mainstream anthrapology & archaeology has got it spot on...


Nope the only people making that claim are fringe believers building a strawman argument.....


Take the massive stones at Baalbek in Lebanon, no one has a clue how those stones were cut or moved. They are the largest stones used in any kind of construction ever known to be used on the planet and no modern crane could even come close to moving such immense loads.


Cut using iron tools, sure a modern crane and move them please use google-fu to find modern cranes. Nor are the largest stones moved by man before mechanization, the largest was the thunderstone at 1250-1,500 tons



Did ancient mankind have advanced engineering techniques to move massive objects or the power to use chemistry and superconductors to move objects bending time and space, which science is just re-discovering? Was there a genetic strain of mankind that was in fact bigger then we think of the normal today? Afterall many animals have much larger ancient cousins eg horses, elephants, dragonflies etc.


An interesting speculation but at present the evidence says no


You only have to dip into what's being excavated at Gobekli Tepe to see that mainstream archeology needs a rethink because the further down they're digging, the more complicated and advanced the construction is!


Its mainstream archaeology finding it and continuing to study it, it pushes back the period of time for working with stone. What you are characterizing is incorrect


I have to laugh when I see videos of Neolithic hunter gatherers supposedly deciding to come together to leave their food squabbles and simple ways and build such a magnificent place as Gobekli Tepe.


Neolithic life wasn't 'simple' only those who know nothing about it would make that statement - but GT is a great place


These people were sophisticated engineers - with a language they've carved out on the stones. The pre Sanskrit that mainstream science would have us all believe doesn't exist. So far apparently only about 5% has been uncovered at the site and others nearby. What more remarkable finds are going to be uncovered in the future?


Define sophisticated? Do you mean in comparison with other neolithic cultures, then yes based on what we know that would be correct, but compared to the Sumerians and AE, not so much (but of course that is much later)


We find polygonal masonry in a number of places all over the world, using building techniques modern engineers cannot replicate.


Explain 'cannot replicate', plus it wouldn't be engineers doing it it would be artisans

What's more ancient stonework withstands earthquakes etc to such an extent that you just scratch your head in wonder. In this video the engineer who designed & built the Millenium Bridge in London is interviewed about some of these ancient monoliths and he admits he's at a loss to explain them. [/quote[

Is he an expert on ancient engineering and construction?

As he says so far no one has come up with anything better than stone for lasting the test of time. Tools might disintegrate or be found & melted down but the Stones cry out from a distant past.


In the first part of this video a British Engineer Christopher Dunn looks at some of the stone cutting techniques used at the Pyramid of Giza - the only Ancient wonder of the World remaining to this day - and why a stone and a copper chisel do not explain the impressive angles and corners cut into the stone.[snip] .However I found the video interesting because of the stone cutting points it raises.


Dunn was wrong, you may wish to look at explanation of where he went off



Perhaps much of this information was lost when the Great Library of Alexandria burnt down during Roman times.


Probably not the library was available for research for a long time - no great discoveries came out of it based on what the ancient writers noted, I recommend you look at the Pinakes the list of books/subject areas in the library of Alexandria by Callimachus


But whatever explanation we care to lean towards - the evidence is becoming stronger that actually ancient mankind was alot more technologically advanced than we've been led to believe.


Yes they had excellent craftsmen and yes every day more information is found but none of it is 'Technologically advanced' in the way i think you mean, perhap you could explain


What would some ATS posters rather happen......bury all these finds in mud & hope they go away


I for one would like you prove they had these abilities as it would be cool



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 07:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 





Cut using iron tools, sure a modern crane and move them please use google-fu to find modern cranes. Nor are the largest stones moved by man before mechanization, the largest was the thunderstone at 1250-1,500 tons


No one has a clue how heavy the Baalbek stones are but they ARE as I understand estimated to be heavier than the Thunderstone. One of the biggest stones lies half quarried.

Engineers couldn't move those stones with modern cranes and they certainly couldn't lay the stones so closely that you can't even fit a razoe blade or human hair between them.

I can't find anyone debunking Christopher Dunn regarding the stone cutting ? Perhaps you can enlighten me. You can't cut precise right angles with stone balls & copper chisels to the degree of precision found at sites like Giza, Puma Punka etc etc - Dunn's theory on the Giza powerplant might have been down played and ridiculed by many - but he's still an enginner who cuts materials for a living and what he says about stone cutting in the video posted has merit.

Some of the stones like Lydite, Granite found at ancient sites require something extremely hard to cut that material, none of which fit in to the mainstream belief of the tools that were available to Neolithic man.
Nor can anyone explain why older constructions are as with Gobekli Tepe more sophisticated than newer constructions. Which kind of agrees with the findings at Cuzco in South America - there you can see 3 different wall constructions side by side - Ancient Pre Columbian - Incan & Spanish. The Incan & the Spanish wall is completely inferior in it's construction than the older wall, which has suvived millenia

They were supposed to have only copper tools in Neolithic times not iron - that is supposed to have come later wasn't it. In fact they hadn't even invented the wheel - let alone cranes.

Perhaps ancient man had a way of melting stone or turning it into a cement, so that massive blocks could be molded. In South America there is a bird that makes nest holes in solid rock by rubbing a leaf juice on it until it literally melted the rock enough to lay an egg in.

I don't know what technology they had to be honest but I'm certainly not going to presume that they weren't highly sophisticated and could use advanced engineering techniques to accomplish these massive projects. Where did they get all this time from when they were supposed to be busy not growing crops but going out hunting and gathering?!!



Yes they had excellent craftsmen and yes every day more information is found but none of it is 'Technologically advanced' in the way i think you mean, perhap you could explain


Craftsman might be the people making smaller scale artifacts but precise design and civil engineering techniques on a large scale, requiring much skilled man power is involved when making some of the enormous objects. That required co-operation. Many claim that Neolithic man did not possess proper languages let alone a system of belief. Yet we see similarities regarding these stone monuments in different parts of the globe.
edit on 20-11-2012 by JB1234 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 07:45 PM
link   


Define sophisticated? Do you mean in comparison with other neolithic cultures, then yes based on what we know that would be correct, but compared to the Sumerians and AE, not so much (but of course that is much later)
reply to post by Hanslune
 


Well then how do you explain that some of the carved animals found at Gobekli Tepe bear a striking resemblence to stone carved animals found in Israel near Jerusalem recently.

How do we explain that one of the more striking carvings at GT resembles very much a Mayan Jaguar. The worship of the serpent, the Sun and indeed the Cross of Tau, which may allude to Tammuz in the T shaped stones found elsewhere also may give us a clue - although you will no doubt dismiss.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 07:58 PM
link   
Just randomly googled Neolithic Man and this is how many think of mankind at that time - remembering that GT is supposedly 12K years old so would be in the less advanced earlier Neolithc period.

NEOLITHIC MAN


Our Neolithic ancestors were a very advanced race and by about 5,000 BC had changed from their nomadic lifestyle of hunting and gathering. The influx of agriculturists from the East led to the more settled lifestyle based on farming communities as new skills were learned and passed on through successive generations. Now that they had become more settled, they were able to concentrate more upon constructing buildings of a more permanent nature and potters used their skills to create bowls and containers for everyday use. Wood, stone and bone were also used to make tools. Flint became a very important material from which arrowheads and crude knives were made. By now, the Neolithic people had developed the practice of ceremonial burial and their sense of respect for the dead led to the construction of burial mounds, known as barrows. Their sense of awe for nature, the changing seasons and the lights in the sky must have been so overwhelming that they began to construct monuments of stone, wood and earth with astronomical alignments so precise, that one cannot help but to have sincere admiration for their ingenuity. It was at this time that our Neolithic predecessors began to construct monuments that are so well known to us today—thousands of years after they were built. Stonehenge, Avebury, Arbor Low and Castlerigg are names known by millions world-wide, thanks to our Neolithic friends




When looking at some of these impressive ancient monuments I wudn't have thought the guy in this artists impression of what a Neolithic man lookied like was anywhere near close. However they have to look like that - otherwise mainstream anthrapology doesn't quite fit.




posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by JB1234


No one has a clue how heavy the Baalbek stones are but they ARE as I understand estimated to be heavier than the Thunderstone. One of the biggest stones lies half quarried.


The still image in your video showed the trilithons which is what I was referring to they are around 800 tons. The two big ones were never moved, they are around 1,200 and still in quarries. You just take the average weight by density of a stone and multiple it by the dimensions - the key is to know what type of stone it is


Engineers couldn't move those stones with modern cranes and they certainly couldn't lay the stones so closely that you can't even fit a razoe blade or human hair between them.


Sure they could - you seem to be repeating an old Sitchin claim, we have the capacity to lift weighs far greater and place them with the same or better accuracy


I can't find anyone debunking Christopher Dunn regarding the stone cutting ? Perhaps you can enlighten me.


Nope you didn't try and since all you are presenting are your personal unevidence assertions I have no interest in countering such opinions with facts, gets some facts first, try ....google....



You can't cut precise right angles with stone balls & copper chisels to the degree of precision found at sites like Giza, Puma Punka etc etc - Dunn's theory on the Giza powerplant might have been down played and ridiculed by many - but he's still an enginner who cuts materials for a living and what he says about stone cutting in the video posted has merit.


Sure they could you see the evidence for yourself - plus a complete and utter lack of anything remotely resembling the infrastructure necessary to have, lol, power tools - you should read what the Inca said about how they built remember the Spanish burst into their empire while they were building things


Some of the stones like Lydite, Granite found at ancient sites require something extremely hard to cut that material, none of which fit in to the mainstream belief of the tools that were available to Neolithic man.


Because they didn't cut it they either split it or bashed it out


Nor can anyone explain why older constructions are as with Gobekli Tepe more sophisticated than newer constructions.


They are not take a look at the AE, Sumerian or even Greek - far superior to GT OR if you are referring to GT alone then yes the earlier work has been called more elaborate than the later


Which kind of agrees with the findings at Cuzco in South America - there you can see 3 different wall constructions side by side - Ancient Pre Columbian - Incan & Spanish. The Incan & the Spanish wall is completely inferior in it's construction than the older wall, which has suvived millenia


In your opinion, you do know don't you that the Inca system of wall making used two different sysems, one for the lowest tier and different from the next, similar to the Phoenicians who used a two-system building system


They were supposed to have only copper tools in Neolithic times not iron - that is supposed to have come later wasn't it. In fact they hadn't even invented the wheel - let alone cranes.


So?


Perhaps ancient man had a way of melting stone or turning it into a cement, so that massive blocks could be molded. In South America there is a bird that makes nest holes in solid rock by rubbing a leaf juice on it until it literally melted the rock enough to lay an egg in.


No evidence they did that lots of evidence they bashed rocks, cut the softer ones and dragged them around - excellent craftmen with a great deal of practical experience


I don't know what technology they had to be honest but I'm certainly not going to presume that they weren't highly sophisticated and could use advanced engineering techniques to accomplish these massive projects. Where did they get all this time from when they were supposed to be busy not growing crops but going out hunting and gathering?!!


False dilemna, you left out good planning and skill


Craftsman might be the people making smaller scale artifacts but precise design and civil engineering techniques on a large scale, requiring much skilled man power is involved when making some of the enormous objects. That required co-operation. Many claim that Neolithic man did not possess proper languages let alone a system of belief. Yet we see similarities regarding these stone monuments in different parts of the globe


Humans come up with the same solutions for similar problems. Part of the problem is you seem to be shifting between GT and later civilizations which in some cases have 10,000 years between them. You may wish to make it clearer what you are referring too
edit on 20/11/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by JB1234


Well then how do you explain that some of the carved animals found at Gobekli Tepe bear a striking resemblence to stone carved animals found in Israel near Jerusalem recently.

Why is that surprizing you can find carving of common animal types on all continents - your point is?


How do we explain that one of the more striking carvings at GT resembles very much a Mayan Jaguar. The worship of the serpent, the Sun and indeed the Cross of Tau, which may allude to Tammuz in the T shaped stones found elsewhere also may give us a clue - although you will no doubt dismiss.


Nope, no idea what you are taking about, show images of what your are referring too



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 09:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by JB1234

When looking at some of these impressive ancient monuments I wudn't have thought the guy in this artists impression of what a Neolithic man lookied like was anywhere near close. However they have to look like that - otherwise mainstream anthrapology doesn't quite fit.


That isn't a scientific site - so your incoherent point is moot, lol


edit on 20/11/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 22 2012 @ 08:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by JB1234

When looking at some of these impressive ancient monuments I wudn't have thought the guy in this artists impression of what a Neolithic man lookied like was anywhere near close. However they have to look like that - otherwise mainstream anthrapology doesn't quite fit.


That isn't a scientific site - so your incoherent point is moot, lol


edit on 20/11/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)


I erm Googled "Neolithic Man" - and was pointing out what most people envisage Neolithic Man to be.....

I wasn't wishing to find a "scientific site" at all. That's the kind of thing we're all taught at school and we therefore
never actually question whether the mainstream view of history is correct.



posted on Nov, 22 2012 @ 09:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by JB1234
I wasn't wishing to find a "scientific site" at all. That's the kind of thing we're all taught at school and we therefore
never actually question whether the mainstream view of history is correct.
Actually, archaeologists challenge mainstream views all the time...one reason that Columbus was supplanted by Erik the Red. One more victory for the Viking horde!


In fact the entire shift in thinking on the peopling of the Americans is a great example of the 'mainstream' process at work. Everyone is looking for the next 'wow' discovery. Careers in academe are not created by regurgitating the same old stuff. Researchers start with 'what if?'...then they go about proving their premise. That's the difference between knowledge and belief.



posted on Nov, 22 2012 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by JB1234
I wasn't wishing to find a "scientific site" at all. That's the kind of thing we're all taught at school and we therefore
never actually question whether the mainstream view of history is correct.
Actually, archaeologists challenge mainstream views all the time...one reason that Columbus was supplanted by Erik the Red. One more victory for the Viking horde!


In fact the entire shift in thinking on the peopling of the Americans is a great example of the 'mainstream' process at work. Everyone is looking for the next 'wow' discovery. Careers in academe are not created by regurgitating the same old stuff. Researchers start with 'what if?'...then they go about proving their premise. That's the difference between knowledge and belief.


Exactly JC

To JB1234

What you were pointing to is a popular view of neolithic man, a rather cartoonish one at that, not the 'mainstream; scientific view - but you already knew that didn't you? Since you seem unable to do basic research without being overcome by your bias , I'll help out the interested lurkers. Images of what neolithic people may have looked liked based on archaeological research, not sure if any of the portraits are based on skull/face reconstruction
















new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join