An explanation of the Easter Island-Peru connection

Sinking of the nasca plate after extraterrestrial impact 12,900 years ago in the Caribbean Sea?



www.youtube.com...

No commentary? You have no opinion? No synopsis? Why did you post this?

Nice video with some compelling ideas. I've been researching Old Kingdom and Pre-Dynastic Egypt lately, and it's fun to consider whom else may have been alive in such times. I know one thing for sure... the existence of all these ancient ruins around the world, pre-dating Biblical records ought to end monotheism in the next generation.

reply to post by DarthMuerte


My synopsis of the video is the first sentence you should have read.

It is an accurate synopsis of the video.

Did you watch the video?

Your "mood' under your Avatar appears to be completely accurate. Congratulations.

reply to post by MuzzleBreak


Thanks for a very interesting video his idea seems quite plausible when you see the ridge linking Peru to Easter Island and you consider the dramatic sea level change and cataclysmic bombardment from space. I think he has cracked it. I also thought his cyclopean examples were very good proof.

I don't agree with him concerning his comments on Atlantis because if it were where Plato said it was, it sat on a T junction of tectonic plates the other side of South America so that bombardment could have affected the plates under Atlantis as it did the Nazca Ridge.

There is so much Academic pressure to accept Thera as Atlantis but somehow I think a man such as Plato would have said Atlantis was in the Mediterranean off Greece and also the name Atlantis kinda gives it away a bit for me.

If Atlantis is proved to have existed and I seem to recall some archaelogist has been looking under the ocean around the Azores and has found ruins etc there are going to be a lot of Academics with red faces not to mention the repercussions on religious teachings. I doubt the budget to really explore the area will be forthcoming if it means upheaval against the interested parties.

Ok, first off I have to agree with DarthMuerte about having more content in the initial post. This is a very interesting theory, presented in an intelligent manner and you totally didn't take advantage of creating a really cool starter post. That's just my opinion though.

On to the video. I'm really into forbidden archeology and it's theories. I definitely lean more towards forgotten/lost cultures that were the forerunners to our civilization, over the ancient astronaut theory. I do not rule out the possibility of extraterrestrial involvement, it is just with the evidence I have reviewed concerning both subjects, lost civilizations is the one that feels more plausible.

The theory presented in the video is very intriguing. Even if impact by asteroid was not the cause, most likely it was just sea level rising. It is interesting about the band of island looking formations beneath the ocean. I have never seen those before and now more topics make a little more sense.

There is pretty much no doubt in my mind that our "historical" timeline is completely inaccurate. There are definitely similarities between the two locations and even if there was never a connection by land, we know they could of done it by early boats.

Anyhoo, don't want to bore people so I'm going to end this with it is a shame a wee bit more work was not put into the starter post, but oh well. This totally is a flag/star worthy topic but alas not today. Win some, and lose some.


reply to post by Shiloh7


I don't believe the researcher in the video was talking about Atlantis, he stated he just refereed to any lost civilization with the blanket generic term. He also just uses Plato's approximate time frame as reference because he believes that catalytic event was an asteroid impacting Earth 12,900 years ago, according to the independent researcher.

The film by Nesbit

A few comments

1. Carolina bays: his claim is incorrect they are not oriented in the manner he says, some are the majority are not

The finite radiocarbon dates range in age from 440 ± 50 to 27,700 ±2,600 BP radiocarbon in age (Whitehead 1981, Gaiser et al. 2001). Some samples are so old, they contained insufficient radiocarbon for dating, which results in "greater than" dates. For example, samples from sediments filling Carolina bays have been dated at greater than 38,000 to 49,550 BP radiocarbon years (Frey 1955, Brooks et al. 2001).

ie the dates are not supportive of a 12,900 date he was throwing around

2. Megafauna - megafauna also died out in Europe and elsewhere just not NA, and some large animals survived, mouse, elk, buffalo and grizzlies

3. Sweet Potato; he was right about this but his dating is wrong

phys.org...

4. Bottle gourd: the ancestor of this is not presently known - he mentioned another plant but I couldn't understand what he was saying

5. Walls, dry wall is the same as other dry walls in the world. He also seem to be suggesting that the Inca would have built the walls. The Inca were late comers to civilization (they arose around 1400 AD) and most of their stone work was done by subject people. Nor did they do the naval technology thing.

6. He seems to think Polynesians couldn't find Rapa Nui, that is false they were able to find Hawaii and travel back and force for many years, they also travelled back and forth from RN to the other Polynesian island several times. (as recorded by legend)

7. Nasca ridge, this seem unlikely but I'll let a geologist comment on that, 6 above demonishs the need for this anyway

8. He made a comment at the end (written) about DNA, he is incorrect the common ancestor for both South Americans and Polynesian probably came from the same area in southern Asia - 20-25,000 years ago.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
reply to post by mcx1942

 

There is pretty much no doubt in my mind that our "historical" timeline is completely inaccurate

How did you determine this?

----------

edit on 12/7/13 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)

reply to post by Hanslune

Do you agree the pre-Incan stone walls and the Rapa Nui walls appear to be very similar?

Do you know how much farther west one would have to travel to find similar walls? (Not arguing, just asking for my benefit)

All these old megalithic structures came from the time when the warrior angels ruled and protected primal man. Yahweh / Osiris / Jahbulon then proceeded to re-write history from around 3000bc and has continued his march towards world domination ever since.

The warrior (fallen) angels fought on in through history in various guises: Islam, the Nazis, Genghis Khan and Alexander the Great being possible examples.

Yahweh prefers subterfuge, while the angels like an honest fight.

...maybe.

Originally posted by MuzzleBreak
reply to post by Hanslune

 

Do you agree the pre-Incan stone walls and the Rapa Nui walls appear to be very similar?

Do you know how much farther west one would have to travel to find similar walls? (Not arguing, just asking for my benefit)

Yes and they are similar to other dry built masonry walls in much of the rest of world. You are probably referring to Bali or Nan Madol I would presume?

I suggest you look at similar types of wall - which will be of a different colour but have the same type of construction, roughly rectangular, well fitting, bashed out of igneous rock. The Rapa Nui and SA quarrymen used the same source for stone, existing rubble and then shaped it to fit. They avoided the much more difficult method of cutting the rock out of quarries (they did do that too in SA)

reply to post by Hanslune


I've been following the Facebook posts of one Brien Foerster, particularly his posts regarding rock working, and what he refers to as "pre-Incan" rock work, which he believes is far superior to Incan rock works. Have you heard of him, and if so, what do you think of his opinions regarding the rock work?

Originally posted by MuzzleBreak
reply to post by Hanslune

 

I've been following the Facebook posts of one Brien Foerster, particularly his posts regarding rock working, and what he refers to as "pre-Incan" rock work, which he believes is far superior to Incan rock works. Have you heard of him, and if so, what do you think of his opinions regarding the rock work?

Yes I've heard of him he has an overly active imagination. I do remember a Youtube were he was acting shocked that the Inca and those before them used foundations that looked different than the upper layers, he seemed to think it meant, because two different methods were used, that one was older than the other......His website is a nest of new age 'stuff', not his but he seems to support it.

The Incan's were late comers to the game of empire and they used stone workers from conquered/subject tribes.

Originally posted by Hanslune

Yes I've heard of him he has an overly active imagination. I do remember a Youtube were he was acting shocked that the Inca and those before them used foundations that looked different than the upper layers, he seemed to think it meant, because two different methods were used, that one was older than the other......His website is a nest of new age 'stuff', not his but he seems to support it.

The Incan's were late comers to the game of empire and they used stone workers from conquered/subject tribes.

Ive been lurking this site for some time now and always restrained myself from replyin to statements such as this one. BUT:
I suppose when you talk of foudations you refer to sites such as Sacsayhuaman, Ollantaytambo, Machu Pichu and the likes, and again, having read most of your truth holding replies i suppose you consider the very precisely layed out, multi ton, gigantic stone work the foundation for the "randomly stacked" light weight stones found on top of them. Not only, but there is evidence of repair work carried out in the same way with small, lightweight stones filling the cracks between some of the megalithic walls.
What i find fascinating is that even thou the Incas themselves admitted not building the megalithic structures upon which they settled, Academia apparently doesnt take their account into consideration and feels enlightened enuff to have the answer regardless. Toothpick and dedication like someone said in a joke on another thread.

As for Brien Forester, im not much of a fan, cause even thou i dont agree with your line of thinkin i have to agree on your statement on his regards. Overly active imagination, which per se is not a bad thing, but in this fieldd it can easily become your worse adversary.
I find the Ancient Megaliths the most fascinating mystery of the ancient world, and i dont subscribe to any of that Ancient Alines HC crap in case youre wondering, as its clarly a bunch of stirred togheter crap as most anything else on tv, and shouldnt be considered anything more than simple entertainment. Sad part is that it doesnt do any good to those serious researches that go against the mainstream view, not even those subscribing the Ancient Astronaut theory...

Originally posted by bon3z


What i find fascinating is that even thou the Incas themselves admitted not building the megalithic structures upon which they settled, Academia apparently doesnt take their account into consideration and feels enlightened enuff to have the answer regardless. Toothpick and dedication like someone said in a joke on another thread.

That quote is well known and is used often by fringe who don't seem to understand it. The Incan came into existence in around 1300 AD the earlier civilization had done a lot of building and the Incan used the same people to continue to build for them. That is what they meant when they said it. The Incan's continue to build during the Spanish period and these building techniques were comment on by both Spanish and Spanish-Inca commentors.

You may wish to read about these pre Incan societies:

Moche, Paracas, Norte Chico, Buena Vista, Lambayeque, Chavin, Heilkie (SP), Tiahuanaco, Wari and Chimu to name a few the Incan in some cases built on top of these structures.

I find the Ancient Megaliths the most fascinating mystery of the ancient world, and i dont subscribe to any of that Ancient Alines HC crap in case youre wondering, as its clarly a bunch of stirred togheter crap as most anything else on tv, and shouldnt be considered anything more than simple entertainment. Sad part is that it doesnt do any good to those serious researches that go against the mainstream view, not even those subscribing the Ancient Astronaut theory...

It would if they came with evidence - evidence wins everytime even if it takes time - and we agree about the AA show

The Wari.I seem to remember its the population to which the quite impressive south west road network is attributed to, but wasnt wari a name given to Viracocha like beings?
All very fuzzy as its been quite a few years since ive been readin any history at all. Gotta dive into it again if i wanna stand an argument with you it seems

Just managed to watch the video. Rather intresting, and the underwater ''land shape'' seem to remind of Micronesia. Based on that i would say its possible, but im no geologist so i saddly cant say.

As for the jigsaw walls, Egypt has some too, one i remember, althou i dont remember where exactley, is a corridor, and the two sides are mirror images of each other. Now imagine doin that!

#in double post! Damn phone!