Evidence of Ancient Advanced Civilizations...Would We Find It?

page: 6
27
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 09:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by rayuki

Originally posted by smyleegrl
Greetings, ATS!

Let me start with a caveat. This post is pure speculation. I have no sources, no quotes, no videos or links to support my theory. In fact, I hesitate to call this a "theory," because that would imply some scientific validity and I have none to offer.


you lost me after that part, great thread....

there is so much stuff you could have quoted, linked to, called "evidence" and you couldn't even be bothered to manage that? lol

The capability of calling some claim "evidence" does make that claim worthy of the statement.

Smyleegrl appears to be above such nonsense, and is only speculating and wondering here. I certainly applaud her for not mentioning the sort of flapdoodle you're talking about.

Everything mentioned in this thread so far has been beaten to death in the past here at ATS. There exists no evidence whatsoever for any such ancient advanced civilization. There is no claim that has not been either soundly refuted, exposed as fraud, or shown to be spurious due to there being no evidence for the claim.

For example, the "bell in coal," and any other object supposedly found in coal. There's no coal on these objects. There's no object somewhere embedded in coal. Even the people that submit this claim, if they know anything at all about the subject, tell the story of how the finder cleaned the coal off the object.

IOW, there are objects.
There are claims that the objects were found embedded in coal.
The objects are no longer embedded in coal.
There is no official report of the object having been examined while embedded in coal.
There's no coal on the object.

So, why should we believe it was embedded in coal? Because somebody said so?

Some time back, I read (and linked here) an old newspaper report that the local turnips that year wear growing so well that the U.S. Army had established a military school and bunkhouse inside of a hollowed out turnip in a farmer's field.

You like turnips?

Harte


As a teenager I dug coal out of a seam and sold it by the truckload. I dug about 15 ft back in the seam, digging virgin coal out of the seam. I dug a chunk of coal out of the mountain and as I threw it into the truck bed it broke open and there was something shiny in it. I looked closer and found a necklace. A cheap, gold plated and plastic necklace. It had a purple plastic heart on it that had been worn smooth and opaque by time. I kept the necklace about 10 years before i got stupid and gave it to a girl I was dating at the time.

It is true. There are artifacts in coal. Where they come from is a mystery, but they do exist.




posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 


The Muslim invaders burnt down great library at Taxshila. Taxshila was the greatest repository of books of Buddhist and Vedic thought at that time. Taxshila was a great university of ancient time where students from all over Asia came to study. It is said that the fire burnt for 6 months - so much was the volume of books destroyed.

Many books have been recreated in the modern time, books that have been lost due to invasions and foreign rule of India.

India had a federal structure during Vedic time. There were several kingdoms ruled by 'Raja'. The most dominant kingdom had authority over these kingdoms, and its king was called a 'Maha Raja'. 'Chakravarti Raja' is a title reserved for the king of entire Earth.

The name of the country was 'Bharat' during 'Mahabharat war'. The name of the country was 'Aryavarta' during Ramayan time. The country 'Bharat' was fairly large - it comprised of most of the area of modern day India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran.

'Arya' does not mean nobility. 'Arya' actually means a 'graduate' or learned person. 'Arya' is also a title like 'gentleman' in English. 'Arya' can be used only for a person with knowledge of Veda.



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 10:21 AM
link   
reply to post by LABTECH767
 


I'm pretty familiar with some geologists, and I've never heard anything about "previously undiscovered continents."

I don't have time for YouTube videos -- is there a summary somewhere (web page WITHOUT videos but with maps or text and links so we can verify the authors and the people involved in this)? Are they tv programs or is this just someone putting together something and pontificating about it on video?

The one thing you may not know about human neuroanatomy is that our visual system tends to override other sources of information. That's why magician's tricks work --our eyes fool us into believing evidence that our other senses discount.



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by GargIndia
reply to post by Harte
 


The Muslim invaders burnt down great library at Taxshila.

Actually, they didn't-- the libraries burned down long before Mohammad was born. It was the Huns (specifically the Hepthalites who destroyed the monastary.


India had a federal structure during Vedic time. There were several kingdoms ruled by 'Raja'. The most dominant kingdom had authority over these kingdoms, and its king was called a 'Maha Raja'. 'Chakravarti Raja' is a title reserved for the king of entire Earth.


You may have your time periods confused slightly. Kingdoms did finally arise toward the end of the Vedic period,but for much of it the organization was on tribal levels I think it's interesting that during the early stages they decided kingship by divination, dice, and races.



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by ABeing
I hadn't considered how intelligent, whatever intelligence truly is, Erectus and Australopithecus could have been.

If you're going on brain structure, the answer is "quite intelligent." Endocasts show that they had brains that looked fairly modern and that did not look like chimpanzee brains


While we are still on the topic of brains; the cone head-skulls found around the Andean area are rather interesting too. The majority of the skulls have been proven to have been subject to head-wrapping and other methods used to elongate the skull, but some, at least according to some researchers, are claimed to be completely natural in their shape.


I think the ones that they are calling "natural" are those like the Egyptian Ahkenaten (whose skull is unusually long but still within human norms.)


If they indeed were a now extinct race of the Hominidae family, with such a large brain cavity, could it be possible that they also had greater brain volume than we have, and perhaps, even more efficient "wiring"?


More efficient... is hard to assess. Larger, no. Not based on the fossils we have.


Stretching it a bit here but, what if the next step in terms of evolution is actually a conscious one and we actually would develop "psychic" abilities thanks to our greater natural understanding of physics? Possible?

I wouldn't rule it out, though I think it unlikely that physics will be involved.


What if; our current theory regarding the origins of civilization is not correct, and perhaps, evidence suggesting otherwise is being "swept under the rug" or ignored because of the implications such a discovery would have on the population's paradigm and the current scientific establishment?

It wouldn't have any impact on the scientific establishment or on governments if we found out that 20,000 years ago there was a large group of people organized into a commune. Or empire. Or anything. It'd change history and science books, but those change with every new discovery (since science and history aren't religions... they're supposed to update with new discoveries.



We all know the legends of the ancients. About the gods who descended from the heavens and taught Mankind about the sciences of the Universe. Perhaps, there is some truth to these claims?

Actually, you're "kit bashing" a bunch of mythologies from various times and cultures there. Most of the times, the gods don't teach people anything (people just 'know.') For instance, you get Thoth who originally is a Moon god, changing into the Divine Teacher later in the mythos and then you get the Greeks adopting him as the Divine Teacher of Everything... while the Romans (still later) ignore Egyptian thought and have Prometheus bringing fire and various gods teaching different things. Babylonian deities simply made humans as laborers and no divine teacher was assigned. (etc)

(continued next message)



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by ABeing
 


(continuing the discussion)

let us imagine that life originated out of a primordial soup in another part of the galaxy ... and that the Earth was "seeded" in accordance to the panspermian theory ... with the same basic DNA structure as in other parts of the Universe and an another race of "humans" ... develop[ed] ...intergalactic travel...[and]... then focused on trying to find the original source of life... is it possible that they could have found Earth and our ancestors, still struggling to establish an organized society because we hadn't stumbled upon such ideas yet, and decided that they would give us a little push forward?


There is no period where one group takes an unimaginable leap forward in technology and then dominates the world.

Let's put ourselves in this position and let's say we don't have the Federation Directive (ala "Star Trek") to not interfere with cultures (which is actually a good idea because you don't know what will result.) You and I land on the Planet of the Cro Magnons and we decide to give them some help.

They're all living in family groups of 10-40 individuals. They've got stone knives, fire, and bearskins. They trade and fight with neighbors. They don't know about governments (but they have hunt leaders and digging leaders and shelter-building teams and fishing teams with leaders and so forth (I'm actually using known cultural details)

What technology do you give a herd of 40 humans who are migratory and don't interact in large groups? Do you try to teach everyone (they may not accept it?)

Let's suppose instead that we decide to influence a civilization -- in order to give them (say) iron, we have to first teach them how to smelt copper and then how to make bronze and then to smelt iron and to make high quality iron -- requiring a smelter, bellows of some sort, and tools to use for iron and copper and bronze (mallets, anvils, molds, plus ores and weights and measures) AND you have to educate the metal workers who have never worked with metal before... and educate enough of them that the learning would "stick." So we go to ...oh... King Scorpion (Egypt, pre-dynastic, early Bronze Age) in Naquada.

We might have our own agendas (improve civilization) but Scorpion's intent on conquering and unifying what would become Egypt -- he's up for a massive land grab. If we Friendly Aliens give him iron, he's not going to develop peaceful technology... he's going to run off and slaughter some of the cultures that we know will be important later on and he's going to ruin his country with years or decades of warfare and the country will destabilize after his death (arguments over who will be king) and weak leaders will cause its collapse. The technology will disseminate but will be controversial.

Think of the (modern) history of the atomic bomb and the "haves" trying to control the "have nots."

So giving it to one civilization won't work (and if we've seen our own world and other worlds develop, this isn't a hard thing to understand.) Giving it to ALL civilizations will mean a lot of warfare and much earlier. No one will turn it into "making lovely ironwork and plows and farm tools" as long as there's that Wicked Bunch Over There Who Might Want Our Land.

That's what it'd look like if some group suddenly got technology. So we don't see any of the ancient world suddenly developing new technology and completely conquering all of the world. Alexander did it to some extent, but that was with Iron Age technology that many people already had.



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 11:36 AM
link   
The way I look at it, you can't have an "advanced" civilization unless you have the ability to manufacture lots of little high quality screws. I don't think we're advanced because we can build atomic bombs or particle accelerators. It's because we have the ability to manufacture lots of consistently high quality screws of various sizes that hold the planes and missiles and buildings together where the atom bombs or Mars rovers are made.



Yeah, you might be able to find somebody like the Unabomber who was able to make his own screws so they couldn't be traced. But if you're going to have any kind of chance of creating any technologically advanced machines and maintaining them, you're gonna need screws and lots of them, and when you dig in archeological pits, there are going to be plenty of them lying around all over the place.



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blue Shift
The way I look at it, you can't have an "advanced" civilization unless you have the ability to manufacture lots of little high quality screws. I don't think we're advanced because we can build atomic bombs or particle accelerators. It's because we have the ability to manufacture lots of consistently high quality screws of various sizes that hold the planes and missiles and buildings together where the atom bombs or Mars rovers are made.



Yeah, you might be able to find somebody like the Unabomber who was able to make his own screws so they couldn't be traced. But if you're going to have any kind of chance of creating any technologically advanced machines and maintaining them, you're gonna need screws and lots of them, and when you dig in archeological pits, there are going to be plenty of them lying around all over the place.



Good job,
And to get those screws you to have


An iron mine



A cooper mine for all the wire needed for the electricity.

Oh ya a source of energy


Or a coal mine



All of those those things will be here for millions of years.

Also there are going to be lota of used cutting inserts left over from making the screws.



That one in the center of shot is a threading insert

And those tungsten carbide inserts will never corrode, that are harder than any naturally occuring material , save diamonds,



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Byrd
 


As far as I know the modern brain size is in part related to nutrition as well as genetic's, Often adult's whom were exposed to prolonged malnutrition during childhood show smaller adult brain size, interestingly it seem's to have very little to do with ethnicity though there are certain ethnic trait's they are more family than sub race, some neanderthal skull's approached modern human capacity in cubic centiliters indeed there are many modern humans alive today with smaller brains than the larger neanderthal brain's cases would suggest, as somebody said it is more to do with the wiring of the synapses and the cellular structure of the brain.

That said there are growing indication's that modern humans may be far older than previously thought and there have a great number of things that in any other science would have thrown the standard model of human evolution into doubt or suggest rapid leaps with equally rapid reversal's in at least the social evolution of the human race, there are as you know numerous story's of stone artifact's pushing the age of man back even further and at every level of human evolution they may have had there equivalent inventive geniuses as even today most humans only copy what they are shown by others and lack that spark indicating the possible presence of two human sub types even today, it would appear that modern human thought was married to our ability to express more advanced levels of thought through our communication and that does not mean by any means that earlier human types were actually any more stupid than the average human but that they lacked the tool's to communicate effectively.

Still weather advanced or not in our modern definition of the word the world is replete with many mystery's such as the supposed white pyramid of china which if real and not destroyed by the cultural revolution may indicate a far older culture were china now stand's,
www.bibliotecapleyades.net...
and though this is not anything more than proof of ancient large scale construction requiring the entire infrastructure to support the behemoth task of this construction it is also proof of an indifference at best or even a deliberate policy of silencing the past, Why what are they hiding from, are they afraid the public will no longer be the docile ignorant sheep that currently keep there illegitimate corporate governance in effect or perhaps it is all down to patent's and the wish to control any unknown (TODAY) technology or techniques that may once have helped such cultures thrive and long before they were lost to history.

AS for the pyramid's on china there are many reasons the Chinese are afraid of the lost history that may be uncovered such as the legend of the sun god's whom built the pyramid's and founded that earlier culture whome had hair like the sun and eye's like the sky according to one YouTube video anyway.

There are many thing's we do not know about the past and the further back we go the less accurate the dating become's, as for Archimedes little baby the screw, well you do not actually have it Nailed down there (sorry for the pun) these are small easily corroded item's and there is no proof a previous civilization had to have none corrosive metal's, even if they did any self respecting archaeologist is not going to put his reputation on the line for a screw or nut and bolt but hallofthegods.org...
please pay attention to the section man made object's embedded in rock and before you say "but were more advance and why don't we find them, I live in Lancashire England and have heard of one or two story's from old miners from before the mine's were closed but you don't stop a multi million pound operation or go off the job for a screw, it costs money to stop and start as well as compromising safety and it is more likely that they would pay it no heed even assume it was part of the machine or similar so that is why.

There is I believe evidence out there and another important point, though there is a lack of evidence (some does exist but only anecdotal or suggestive but none definitive) we may not be the first sentient or sapient race to have evolved on earth,.

It would be more accurate to say Archimedes invented the screw principle and intended it as a means to pump water so who really invented the modern screw?.

www.kuro5hin.org...
edit on 23-4-2013 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by GargIndia
reply to post by Harte
 


The name of the country was 'Bharat' during 'Mahabharat war'. The name of the country was 'Aryavarta' during Ramayan time. The country 'Bharat' was fairly large - it comprised of most of the area of modern day India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran.


And, as I said, not Atala.

Harte



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 01:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Byrd
 



Originally posted by ABeing
While we are still on the topic of brains; the cone head-skulls found around the Andean area are rather interesting too. The majority of the skulls have been proven to have been subject to head-wrapping and other methods used to elongate the skull, but some, at least according to some researchers, are claimed to be completely natural in their shape.



Originally posted by Byrd
I think the ones that they are calling "natural" are those like the Egyptian Ahkenaten (whose skull is unusually long but still within human norms.)


I find Ahkenaten's skull to be way outside of human norms, just by observation, but I am no expert within the field of human anatomy. Reminds me that I need to do some research about Ahkenaten too, because I am not familiar with the history here and have only seen 3D images and statues thus far.

However, the cone head skulls seem significantly larger than what Ahkenaten's was, but I may be mistaken. Whether or not they will all be proven to be wrapped or otherwise; they truly are enigmatic.



Also, from what I have heard; it is believed, by some at least, that tribes people wrapped the heads of their young in order to imitate the appearance of the "gods", "star brothers" and so on.



If they indeed were a now extinct race of the Hominidae family, with such a large brain cavity, could it be possible that they also had greater brain volume than we have, and perhaps, even more efficient "wiring"?



More efficient... is hard to assess. Larger, no. Not based on the fossils we have.


That is the problem. Our current paradigm includes that we are, and have always been, the apex of intelligent species on the planet and within the solar system. But, we cannot imagine what a more intelligent being would be like, due to our level of intelligence.

I need to look further into the conehead enigma, but I am fairly certain that we do not have any remains of their brains and have not found any fossils of skulls like these either so we don't really know how large their brains were or how they were wired.


What if; our current theory regarding the origins of civilization is not correct, and perhaps, evidence suggesting otherwise is being "swept under the rug" or ignored because of the implications such a discovery would have on the population's paradigm and the current scientific establishment?



It wouldn't have any impact on the scientific establishment or on governments if we found out that 20,000 years ago there was a large group of people organized into a commune. Or empire. Or anything. It'd change history and science books, but those change with every new discovery (since science and history aren't religions... they're supposed to update with new discoveries.


Indeed, they are supposed to, but a lot of science is based on theories that have only been provided evidence suggesting that they are correct. For instance, we only have theories regarding the origins of life and how it came to be, specifically on Earth; and fossil records suggests that the Darwinian theory is correct, however, you seldom (or never actually) read about any anomalous archaeological discoveries that contradict the theory in the textbooks, so the reader is not given a fair chance to make up his or her own mind about the subject based on the various theories that actually do exist.

In other words; the scientific establishment, which is based upon the big bang-and evolution through natural selection theories, who are in power thanks to the western culture's influence across the world, vigorously protect their theories, which is only natural, but they never give other contradicting theories a chance to be taken part of.

"Big Banginism" and Darwinism is, more or less, a lot like religions too.


Reply continuing...



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 01:07 PM
link   

We all know the legends of the ancients. About the gods who descended from the heavens and taught Mankind about the sciences of the Universe. Perhaps, there is some truth to these claims?


Actually, you're "kit bashing" a bunch of mythologies from various times and cultures there. Most of the times, the gods don't teach people anything (people just 'know.') For instance, you get Thoth who originally is a Moon god, changing into the Divine Teacher later in the mythos and then you get the Greeks adopting him as the Divine Teacher of Everything... while the Romans (still later) ignore Egyptian thought and have Prometheus bringing fire and various gods teaching different things. Babylonian deities simply made humans as laborers and no divine teacher was assigned. (etc)

I am sure that the ancient Egyptians, Greeks, Romans and Babylonians revered the celestial bodies and the natural elements as gods, but then we have cases such as that of Quetzalcoatl, who is often depicted as a man and Native American tribes whose legends speak of “star people/brothers” who visited them in the past.
The Incas, for example, state that they did in fact not themselves construct ancient cities such as Puma Punku or Machu Piccu, but that the “gods” did it, and the Incan forefathers assisted them.
Now, that does not prove that the gods were extra-terrestrials, but, it does indicate that the ancient Incas were not attempting to fabricate a myth just to provoke the imagination of those their history was being told to, but that there actually were some truth behind it.
And it is not hard to imagine, that something out of the ordinary at least, took place, since Puma Punku and Machu Piccu definitely are some of the most mysterious sites on the face of the Earth that are still intact since ancient times and contain some of the largest megaliths ever found.

There is no period where one group takes an unimaginable leap forward in technology and then dominates the world.

I do need to investigate this further, but the Sumerian and Mayan cultures, as well as the Göbekli Tepe seemingly just appeared with agriculture, astronomy, sophisticated architecture, writing, law and school system and so forth. But I may be mistaken here too.
---
I apologize; I need to provide myself with some nutrition but I would like to discuss this topic further. It is much enlightening and highly interesting!



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by ABeing
I am sure that the ancient Egyptians, Greeks, Romans and Babylonians revered the celestial bodies and the natural elements as gods, but then we have cases such as that of Quetzalcoatl, who is often depicted as a man and Native American tribes whose legends speak of “star people/brothers” who visited them in the past.

They also speak of "ant people," who live in anthills, and talking coyotes.

Are these aliens as well?


Originally posted by ABeing
The Incas, for example, state that they did in fact not themselves construct ancient cities such as Puma Punku or Machu Piccu, but that the “gods” did it, and the Incan forefathers assisted them.
Now, that does not prove that the gods were extra-terrestrials, but, it does indicate that the ancient Incas were not attempting to fabricate a myth just to provoke the imagination of those their history was being told to, but that there actually were some truth behind it.

You might have a point, were there any ancient Incan myths about this. Are there, or are we only looking at what the Inca told the Spanish invaders?


Originally posted by ABeing
And it is not hard to imagine, that something out of the ordinary at least, took place, since Puma Punku and Machu Piccu definitely are some of the most mysterious sites on the face of the Earth that are still intact since ancient times and contain some of the largest megaliths ever found.

The Inca do not deny building Machu Picchu. In fact, they clearly state that they built it for one of their emperors.

Also, Puma Punku was not built by the Incas, as it predates them. Hence, they told the Spanish that they did not build it.

I hope this helps you.

Harte



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Blue Shift
 


Screws and screw like objects.

www.disclose.tv...

I'm not saying this second one is real though but if it is?.

--.com...

As for the dam's water is erosive and also as has already been explained concrete fails at the molecular level over time turning to sand and gravel, only a buried dam in a infilled valley bay survive as a strange crescent pattern visible from space, try old footage from the 80's and 90's taken from the shuttle video of the earth and played on German television at night, pay particular attention to the Andes and specifically to there eastern side looking for six pyramid like structures arranged in two row's further east and south on the same frames look for the crescent pattern, I can't tell you the frame but it was a motion video anyway so not a frame a video that was played on German T.V. I think they called it earth light after station shut down during the AM hour's, I saw it and it was huge but there was no valley so infilled also it bowed away from the mountains so if it was what it looked like it Pre dated the Andes as the river would have flowed toward them.

Mining operation's such as open cast and Quarry erode becoming more indistinguishable that distinguishable especially where water flows and indeed are also infilled over time.
edit on 23-4-2013 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Byrd
 


You are correct the we can be deceived by what we see, or think we see but if we stop seeing then we are worse than deceived because we have closed the mind, as for the continental fragment I found this on the net.
"A Precambrian microcontinent in the Indian Ocean," Nature Geoscience, Vol 6, doi: 10.1038/NGEO1736)
from this page.
nanopatentsandinnovations.blogspot.co.uk...

The referenced article should have the full scientific credential's but it is less astounding than it seem's, still it is intriguing.



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 


I have never heard of any Native American tribe that describe what you mention, ants and coyotes, as star people.

Who knows what they symbolized originally.
Perhaps, they actually recognized the similarities between our sociological structure and the ants'? Specifically, that ants live in societies and thus regarded ants as being like people, that lived in hills?

If I am not mistaken; coyotes chatter to each other and it does almost sound like they are talking?

Just a theory.

Regarding the Incas and the conquistadores, I see your point. The Inca people did tell this story to the Spanish invaders and have continued to tell the same story to whoever asks.
If the Inca actually constructed Maccu Piccu themselves and you know this for a fact; please explain how they moved the giants stone blocks along the mountain side.
And as I said, from what I have heard; the Inca people state that the "gods" came to the Inca forefathers and constructed the site, assisted by the Inca predecessors.

In reply to:

Originally posted by Harte
Also, Puma Punku was not built by the Incas, as it predates them. Hence, they told the Spanish that they did not build it.



The Incas, for example, state that they did in fact not themselves construct ancient cities such as Puma Punku or Machu Piccu, but that the “gods” did it, and the Incan forefathers assisted them.


Yes, Puma Punku predates the Inca people, whose forefathers referred to the site as "a place of the gods", which was built by the gods and inhabited by the gods.

The mere scale of the blocks and construction of Puma Punku is evidence enough for me to believe that when the ancient people, whose tales the Inca elders still tell, described a group of people, wherever they originated from, which were evidently more advanced, sophisticated and intelligent than the Inca forefathers themselves and thus were regarded as gods, or divine beings; the Inca predecessors actually tried to explain something completely natural. Although, rather extraordinary in nature.

Much like we probably would describe a far more advanced being if we saw one today. As, or almost, godly/divine.
edit on 23-4-2013 by ABeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by ABeing
Regarding the Incas and the conquistadores, I see your point. The Inca people did tell this story to the Spanish invaders and have continued to tell the same story to whoever asks.
If the Inca actually constructed Maccu Piccu themselves and you know this for a fact; please explain how they moved the giants stone blocks along the mountain side.

Certainly. The instant that you explain exactly how my knowing they did build it requires that I have precise knowledge of exactly how they did so.

After all, I know that Samsung built my TV. Exactly how, I have to tell you, I couldn't say.


Originally posted by ABeing

Originally posted by Harte
Also, Puma Punku was not built by the Incas, as it predates them. Hence, they told the Spanish that they did not build it.



The Incas, for example, state that they did in fact not themselves construct ancient cities such as Puma Punku or Machu Piccu, but that the “gods” did it, and the Incan forefathers assisted them.


Yes, Puma Punku predates the Inca people, whose forefathers referred to the site as "a place of the gods", which was built by the gods and inhabited by the gods.

The mere scale of the blocks and construction of Puma Punku is evidence enough for me to believe that when the ancient people, whose tales the Inca elders still tell, described a group of people, wherever they originated from, which were evidently more advanced, sophisticated and intelligent than the Inca forefathers themselves and thus were regarded as gods, or divine beings; the Inca predecessors actually tried to explain something completely natural. Although, rather extraordinary in nature.

Please provide an example, showing not only that the tales exist at all, but also that they are "still told."

Harte



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 09:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by LABTECH767
reply to post by Byrd
 

That said there are growing indication's that modern humans may be far older than previously thought

Current science says about 90,000-100,000 years old. I haven't seen anything older yet.


and there have a great number of things that in any other science would have thrown the standard model of human evolution into doubt or suggest rapid leaps with equally rapid reversal's in at least the social evolution of the human race,

Could you name some of these?


there are as you know numerous story's of stone artifact's pushing the age of man back even further and at every level of human evolution they may have had there equivalent inventive geniuses


Yes, this is quite true.


that does not mean by any means that earlier human types were actually any more stupid than the average human but that they lacked the tool's to communicate effectively.

A point that's sometimes very hard to explain to people not studying anthropology or archaeology.


...the world is replete with many mystery's such as the supposed white pyramid of china which if real and not destroyed by the cultural revolution may indicate a far older culture were china now stand's,

It's real, however it's not proof of an older civilization.

Wikipedia has more recent and more complete information. They date to around 500 BC -30 BC.


and though this is not anything more than proof of ancient large scale construction requiring the entire infrastructure to support the behemoth task of this construction it is also proof of an indifference at best or even a deliberate policy of silencing the past,


They are made of dirt, and are well-known (the Terracotta warriors come from one of them) -- they were well known before 1947, in fact.


AS for the pyramid's on china there are many reasons the Chinese are afraid of the lost history that may be uncovered such as the legend of the sun god's whom built the pyramid's and founded that earlier culture whome had hair like the sun and eye's like the sky according to one YouTube video anyway.

I said that YouTube is not reliable, and it's not. They have indeed uncovered history there, but the Chinese have no legends of redhaired sun gods.


...even if they did any self respecting archaeologist is not going to put his reputation on the line for a screw or nut and bolt but hallofthegods.org...


Not something that's badly documented or fake, no. No scholar would do that.


There is I believe evidence out there and another important point, though there is a lack of evidence (some does exist but only anecdotal or suggestive but none definitive) we may not be the first sentient or sapient race to have evolved on earth,.

No, we aren't. We know that the Austalopithecines and early hominids hold that record. At one time there were at least 5 species of humans alive on Earth.



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 09:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by ABeing
reply to post by Harte
 


I have never heard of any Native American tribe that describe what you mention, ants and coyotes, as star people.

Who knows what they symbolized originally.


We have a fairly good idea, in fact, since they are part of the sacred literature of the Hopis, Navajos, and many other cultures including the Chumash. There's quite a few books on the topic.
This is a First Nations (Native American) site on them


If I am not mistaken; coyotes chatter to each other and it does almost sound like they are talking?

No, Coyote was a very important deity in many mythologies.


If the Inca actually constructed Maccu Piccu themselves and you know this for a fact; please explain how they moved the giants stone blocks along the mountain side.

They used the stone of the mountain -- stones that were on-site.


The mere scale of the blocks and construction of Puma Punku is evidence enough for me to believe that when the ancient people, whose tales the Inca elders still tell, described a group of people, wherever they originated from, which were evidently more advanced, sophisticated and intelligent than the Inca forefathers themselves and thus were regarded as gods, or divine beings; the Inca predecessors actually tried to explain something completely natural. Although, rather extraordinary in nature.


It was built sometime after 400 AD (not BC, not 50.000 years ago. Only 1600 years.)



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 10:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 


You can ask Samsung how your TV was constructed and they can actually tell you exactly how it was.
You can ask a myriad of different archaeologists how they think the site was built and you will receive a myriad of different answers, one of which will fit the current paradigm and be considered to be true.

I was not asking how, whoever did it, constructed Machu Piccu piece by piece, but how they managed to move such heavy stones on such a high altitude. If you are not certain; then what is your theory?

In reply to:

Originally posted by Harte
Please provide an example, showing not only that the tales exist at all, but also that they are "still told."


I can only provide evidence suggesting that the tales are still being told, but to have concrete, solid evidence I would either have to reach an Incan elder on the phone or online somehow, or travel to Peru and ask them face to face, which I do not believe is possible at the moment.


In reply to Byrd:

Originally posted by ABeing
If the Inca actually constructed Maccu Piccu themselves and you know this for a fact; please explain how they moved the giants stone blocks along the mountain side.



Originally posted by Byrd
They used the stone of the mountain -- stones that were on-site.


And again, how did they move the stone blocks of considerable weight. That is what I am asking.

And regarding Puma Punku and its dating; how do one date stone?

Still, the question of the topic is if we would be able to find any evidence suggesting that an ancient advanced civilization, and perhaps; structures and monuments of civilizations or cultures, either terrestrial or non-terrestrial in origin is difficult to find.. But I firmly believe that the evidence is right under our noses, and it may or may not be as ancient as we first would have imagined if archeologists dating is 100% correct (which I doubt, more or less, because it is difficult, and that's an understatement, to date stone quarried directly from the rock).

The Giza Plateau and Puma Punku is the most convincing evidence for me, personally.

edit on 23-4-2013 by ABeing because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
27
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join