Mayan Nohmul Pyramid In Belize Destroyed By Bulldozer

I would like to point out that I DID use the word arse in an earlier post, but to claim you were "called" them (if this is what you were referring to) is simply displaying a lack of reading comprehension, I asked the member I was replying to (I don't actually remember if it was you or slugger) not to act LIKE an arse and start supporting some claims with source material. I apologise if the person involved cannot grasp that to 'act like' does not equal 'to be'



Anyways, on topic, Slugger, that was not "good information" about how the mounds got there. It was a postulation. He even followed it up by saying "see, even I can make crap up" or words to that effect. You do know that, yes?

I am completely at a loss how come you seem so emotionally involved in denying the importance of this site, it isn't your land is it?

You seem very hung up on the words pyramid and bulldozer, semantics do not make a very good argument, whether it's a pyramid, a temple, or a domestic rubbish tip, makes no difference to its potential historical importance. Whether it is an excavator, bulldozer or wrecking ball that demolished it makes no difference to the fact that it is not now possible to investigate the site. Most of what we know about life in Saxon England was gleaned from excavating domestic waste hat had been thrown into pits, so whether it's a pyramid or not (and there are many types of pyramid) is irrelevant to the act. The fact you make it abundantly clear with every post that you are unaware of that does not in any way indicate any denying of ignorance going on, you seem to be embracing it instead.

Originally posted by waynos
I would like to point out that I DID use the word arse in an earlier post, but to claim you were "called" them (if this is what you were referring to) is simply displaying a lack of reading comprehension, I asked the member I was replying to (I don't actually remember if it was you or slugger) not to act LIKE an arse and start supporting some claims with source material. I apologise if the person involved cannot grasp that to 'act like' does not equal 'to be'

Anyways, on topic, Slugger, that was not "good information" about how the mounds got there. It was a postulation. He even followed it up by saying "see, even I can make crap up" or words to that effect. You do know that, yes?
yes
I am completely at a loss how come you seem so emotionally involved in denying the importance of this site, it isn't your land is it?

it is not your site either. boots on the ground


You seem very hung up on the words pyramid and bulldozer, semantics do not make a very good argument, whether it's a pyramid, a temple, or a domestic rubbish tip, makes no difference to its potential historical importance.



potential has been ascertained as it is being used as a source for road rock since 1978


Whether it is an excavator, bulldozer or wrecking ball that demolished it makes no difference to the fact that it is not now possible to investigate the site. Most of what we know about life in Saxon England was gleaned from excavating domestic waste hat had been thrown into pits, so whether it's a pyramid or not (and there are many types of pyramid) is irrelevant to the act. The fact you make it abundantly clear with every post that you are unaware of that does not in any way indicate any denying of ignorance going on, you seem to be embracing it instead.

So why do you suppose the archeologists disagree? They obviously feel there was much still to learn from the site. Analogous to what you said, most Egyptian tombs were plundered before they were discovered in the modern era but they still had much to teach us.

Most historical sites in my experience are closed up after excavation and preserved. Not demolished. A benefit of this stance in the UK are several sites that were explored in the 19th and early 20th centuries have benefitted from being revisited with modern techniques and revealing far more information. This is a process that is continual so who can say what future archeologists might have gleaned from Nohmul?

I also think that care must be taken when applying a literal meaning to an ancient name. Even if it was a mound to them, it could have been a sacred burial mound. I asked before if it was an earlier structure than the ones you illustrated built to a more primitive pattern, do we know if that was the case or not?

And can you explain the police interest? I think the thinks you said in your last post make sense, just that they are at odds with almost everyone elses viewpoint.

Oh, and did you have a close look at that photo that clearly shows the remains of carefully constructed inner walls?

reply to post by waynos


Why are there obviously conflicting reports on thissue?
1
one group says mound
the other says pyramid
2
one group says 8 yards high
the other says 30 yards high
3
one group says it has been used for road fill for 40 years
other group sayd it is one of largest pyramids in Belize
4
one group says excavator
other group says backhoe & bulldozers

I look at the two sides
it looks like a mound
it is 24 feet high
it is an excavator

the true picture of the reality of the situation because three out of four
correct representations of what I am seeing and what I know goes
to the not a pyramid, not a bulldozer, not 100 feet high side.

Originally posted by slugger9787
reply to post by waynos

 

Why are there obviously conflicting reports on thissue?

I look at the two sides
it looks like a mound
it is 24 feet high

Well, it definitely looks constructed, not natural or randomly thrown together, but it is (at least in the state it is in in those pictures,) not very obviously a pyramid, such as those found in Altun Ha, the place that I had visited in 2009.

Altun Ha, Pyramid of the Sun:

reply to post by slugger9787


No, muzzlebreak and yourself were both calling this just a dirt pile.
It is proven that it is not, it is an ancient structure that is part of a much larger complex.
It was one of the largest structures in northern Belize, not the highest.
The style of construction at Nohmul is the same style/technique as the structures of Chichen Itza.

Yes it had been damaged in previous years, but that is no reason to destroy what was left of it especially without permits from the relevant authorities. The view of the government is conservation and preservation over destruction of ancient sites and rightly so. You constantly whine and moan like a child that it's not a bulldoser, that it's not specifically a pyramid shape or that "your" is spelt "your're". But you are deliberately missing the big picture, it was more than just a dirt pile. You have deliberately ignored quotes from the archaeologists who are actually there witnessing the destruction. You have deliberately ignored the responses from all of the different government bodies as well as the police. You have deliberately ignored the international outcry from the total destruction of the building. So you have to admit that it's pretty ignorant of you.
Your dirt pile theory has no ground.

i disagree with you
i looked at chicken itza and it
has a main structure that is
a geometric pyramid- @200 feet x
200 feet on the bottom and 135 feet high.

is it made out of the same material at the mound?
probably, that was the period construction materials and style.

they did not have skyscrapers then and when they wanted a high
structure they had to use the pyramid model in order to support the structure
and stack successive layers to the elevation they wanted.

you can continue to be ignorant of the facts and i will intelligently disagree.

reply to post by slugger9787

is it made out of the same material at the mound?
probably, that was the period construction materials and style.

I think we're making progress with you, I'm glad you now see it was a structure.
Just to be clear, I did'nt refer to the Chichen Itza pyramid, you did.
Chichen Itza was always thought to be post classic period.
Nohmul is proven to be from the earlier Terminal classic period.
The pottery fragments from Nohmul matched those from Chichen Itza proving that Chichen Itza was
from a much earlier period than first thought. As well as early trade between Highland and Lowland Maya.

As for the structures at Nohmul that are the same as Chichen Itza I was not refering to the mound. There were two building excavated during the 80's. The main one was a round structure built on top of a plaza/platform that is almost identical in size to the Caracol structure at Chichen Itza I have posted a pic of Caracol below.

How high would you say that main platform is? About 8 meters/yards I think.
But saddly we will never no what the great mound that was destroyed used to be.
Being an even larger structure than the building in the pic I posted, it is said to have been quite important and a focal point for the city in ancient times. Perhaps it was a market plaza or where they chopped people up, or both

reply to post by slugger9787


What makes you go against the academically proven fact that the mound is important?
Where is your proof that the archaeology department of Belize is wrong about the site?
You have proven nothing at all so far and it is getting boring, so please add some souce material to prove your point.
The mound at Nohmul used to be much bigger but over the decades of neglect and vandalism it is all but gone.
The mound was 3x higher than you say it was. I read this story over the weekend and thought of this thread.

But now it appears that nearly the entire main pyramid, once standing over 60 feet tall, has been destroyed by road building crews, said John Morris, associate director of research at Belize's Institute of Archaeology. The institute is a department of the Belize Ministry of Tourism and Culture.

news.nationalgeographic... .com

So tell me why we should believe you when the people who are directly involved say alot differently.
Sometimes you just have to admit you are wrong and move on with your life. Or if you feel so strongly about it all then maybe try to contact the Belize institue of archaeology and see how hard they laugh at you.

reply to post by weirdguy


But now it appears that nearly the entire main pyramid, once standing over 60 feet tall, has been destroyed by road building crews, said John Morris, associate director of research at Belize's Institute of Archaeology. The institute is a department of the Belize Ministry of Tourism and Culture.

Look at the photographs of the pile of dirt with the excavator beside it.

the experts said it was 100 feet high, now a new expert is saying it used to be 60 feet high until vandals and road construction crews destroyed it.

there are trees growing on the top of the pile of rocks.

if this pile was twice the height it is now then how did they get a BULLDOZER to remove only the top thirty feet of it?

reply to post by LeLeu


go to google maps and put these coordinates in for a satellite view:

18.217356,-88.584731



satellite view.
allegedly there are "80" smaller
structures/piles of rock in this
area that make up noh mul.
according to the experts

do you see any of the other 80 structures?
or are they being farmed around for the sugar cane.
they have to have good roads in order to feed the worlds addictive appetite for sugar.
i use little to no sugar so i am not
contributing to this sacreligious
road being built
sure the gods of the pile will probably make the
sugar cane farmers suffer for this transgression.


according to the experts:
allegedly it first was 100 feet high
then 60 feet high
then thirty feet high.

look at the trees and growth of plants on the top of this pile
if it was 100 feet high how did a bulldozer get on top to remove the top?
or even if it was 60 feet tall the same question how did bulldozer get on top?
and if it did get on top then why are trees still standing?
some kind of bulldozer that does not hurt plants and trees when it runs over them
or maybe the gods of this piule were/are protecting the trees/plants
think people, with your brains and not your whipped up feelings/emotions.

someone wants to hang the guy that did this
and they are making a mountain out of a molehill.

satellite view yields the apparent fact that miles and miles of roads
connecting towns to each other, citizens of towns to the sugar cane fields
towns to the river, towns to the coast and roads from the nuh mul pile of rocks
to all these places, and the roads are made out of caliche. the same stuff that is in the pile
of contention

satellite view yields other close locations producing caliche for vital road construction to
keep addictive sugar flowing to world markets and economy of Belize.


maybe the excavator operator got mixed up and went to the wrong location for the caliche.

Originally posted by slugger9787
satellite view yields the apparent fact that miles and miles of roads
connecting towns to each other, citizens of towns to the sugar cane fields
towns to the river, towns to the coast and roads from the nuh mul pile of rocks
to all these places, and the roads are made out of caliche. the same stuff that is in the pile
of contention

satellite view yields other close locations producing caliche for vital road construction to
keep addictive sugar flowing to world markets and economy of Belize.


maybe the excavator operator got mixed up and went to the wrong location for the caliche.

Well nobody can bitch and moan that the site has'nt been thoroughly excavated

Slugger, your entire argument is about semantics. If, for example, you had an antique heirloom from an ancestor that was a small wooden box that was worth about £200, but was priceless to you for what it represented and it was stolen. Would an inaccurate newspaper report that it was a priceless piece of antique furniture make any difference to you? Would it negate the theft because some wrong words were used in reporting it?.

Now, nohmul, How high did it stand? What equipment was used to destroy it? I don't care. It's irrelevant.

Was it an illegal act? Yes. Was it archaeologically important and protected? Yes.

We are going round in circles so, until there is something different to talk about I'm done here, thanks.

reply to post by waynos


whinos i have been pointing out
the lies and misinfirmation---the
ignorance or deliberate fabrication
of lies or ignorance fostered about
this pile of rocks.

ignorance is no excuse to continue
to be stroked emotionally and intellectually,
to be manipulated, by the experts giving
erroneous and incorrect information about this situation.

if looking at pictures and comparing it
against what is being said by experts
about what is in the pictures is semantics
to you then it is too bad that you are getting
stroked by the hype regurgitated by media and
originally put out by the experts.

wha wha wha i am done here wha wha

Like I said. I am done here purely because it is a circular discussion, so there was absolutely no need for the twattish response, now was there?

Originally posted by waynos
Was it an illegal act? Yes. Was it archaeologically important and protected? Yes.

We are going round in circles so, until there is something different to talk about I'm done here, thanks.


Like I said. I am done here purely because it is a circular discussion,

who is going around in a circle?

you can say that again.
except for the fact that you are
complaining about me saying the
same thing over and over again.
according to the experts:
allegedly it first was 100 feet high
then 60 feet high
then thirty feet high.

look at the trees and growth of plants on the top of this pile
if it was 100 feet high how did a bulldozer get on top to remove the top?
or even if it was 60 feet tall the same question how did bulldozer get on top?
and if it did get on top then why are trees still standing?
there are too many inaccuracies and
inconsistencies and out right lies
coming from the experts.

if you want to let them stroke you then fine, I won't.