It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
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.
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
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...
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!
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?
We find polygonal masonry in a number of places all over the world, using building techniques modern engineers cannot replicate.
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.
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
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
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
reply to post by Hanslune
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)
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
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.
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?!!
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
Originally posted by JB1234
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.
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.
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)
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!
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.
Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
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!
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.
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.