The PUMA PUNKU dilemma is, Mr. White says that Von Daniken has exaggerated the weight
and composition of the stones at Puma Punku and that later researchers like Giorgio
Tsoukalos, just picked up the info from Von Daniken's books and ran with it, without
verifying if it was true or not.
As I have mentioned, I've seen enough evidence to suggest that even what archaeologists
believe about Puma Punku is based on what they read by some other archaeologist, who is
speaking GENERALLY about Tiwanaku, but not necessarily
about Puma Punku. In addition, both
Puma Punku and Tiwanaku have red sandstone, but Puma Punku's H stones, are not red sandstone.
As the guy mentions in the video, they are andecite and sandstone. Andecite, from what I can
tell, is a form of granite, albeit softer than granite. It's only one step below granite
gneiss on moh's hardness scale. It's about mid way the hardness scale, harder than limestone,
softer than granite.
My concern is whether or not the information in scholarly articles is any more reliable
than the Ancient Aliens show because whenever data is presented in these scholarly papers,
they tend to vacillate back and forth from calling everything in the area, Tiwanaku, and not
stipulating when the info is from Puma Punku. To understand why that is not
good, consider that Puma Punku is not in the general vicinity of the main buildings at
Tiwanaku. It says in the documentation that it's over a kilometer away.. The style of
building is different. The quarry would naturally be different. Etc.
So I think the only reason Mr. White can levy any criticism on the subject of Puma
Punku, against the TV show, is due to lack of clarification in scholarly articles. Doesn't
matter if there are pounding stones found by the subterranean temple complex, if it's over a
mile away from Puma Punku. To prove the H stones at Puma Punku were created using pounding
stones, would mean they would have to show a map of pounding stones at Puma Punku or its
quarry, and since the quarry for the whole area is only called the Tiwanaku quarry, that is not
sufficient information. you need data on an andecite quarry, not a red stone quarry,
to determine info on the H stones, and even that may be less than revealing if there are
andecite stones at the subterranean temple complex.
The only way to resolve it is to have better, more specific research, with color
photographs and so on, by people who actually went to the site and verified the materials and
their related quarries, with the sole intent of verifying, what it's made of, where it was
built (quarry), and where the building tools are located, specifically
for Puma Punku.
edit on 10-12-2012 by undo because: (no reason given)