Latest News on Bosnian Pyramids

Originally posted by AndyMayhew
For the same reason they deny that that Malvern Hills in England are a line of pyramids constructed 554,300 years ago

And why is that? Please indulge me.

Or, indeed, that Pen Y Fan, the highest hill in southern Wales, is not an ancient temple - despite the fact it clearly has manmade pavement on its summit!

And why should anyone believe that it's manmade?

Originally posted by PhotonEffect

Originally posted by AndyMayhew
For the same reason they deny that that Malvern Hills in England are a line of pyramids constructed 554,300 years ago

And why is that? Please indulge me.

Because I said so. And because they looks like pyramids and therefore they must be pyramids!

www.allaboutmalvernhills.com...

Or, indeed, that Pen Y Fan, the highest hill in southern Wales, is not an ancient temple - despite the fact it clearly has manmade pavement on its summit!

And why should anyone believe that it's manmade?

edit on 23-8-2013 by PhotonEffect because: (no reason given)

Well, if you believe what Sam the Man says ,,,,, then yes, Obviously. Flat bedrock - manmade. QED


The only difference is that I'm not out to make lots and lots of money.

The point is: if you believe that these Bosnian hills are manamnde, why DON'T you believe these British hills are manmade?

reply to post by AndyMayhew


But Dark Ley-Lines most definately converge on Wolverhampton!

reply to post by skalla


Ah, now that I do not doubt!

reply to post by AndyMayhew


Oh wait, nevermind. I completely missed the initial joke you were trying to make.

reply to post by vind21

We do have our own pictures, yes:
www.flickr.com...
I'm the guy with the yellow t-shirt. We do have more of course, but this is a public album from our group.

About the excavation works - they are very minimalistic with the digging of the pyramids and they avoid to uncover a lot on surface. Preservence is more important. The tunnels are more in focus in terms of excavation work, again, it's not massive.

As per the question man-made or not ... They are not natural, but if they were constructed the way we construct things - no, most likely not man-made. We don't really have technology capable to construct such stuff afaik. The size of the monolithic blocks, the layers of materials, the space between the layers - its out of our (known) capacity, even at the megastructures scale.

Look at images 9743 and around. This at the Tumulus. It's aged at ~12k. Look at the size and the shape of the blocks. And they are not rocks - it's like granitogres (fine stone dust, highly compressed, very stiff and homogenic).

And as per the age - it's carbon analysis stating the age of 25k / 12k years for the different structures. There is organic matter in the layers and its said to be a relatively reliable source for aging.

And guys, I'm not a pro archeologiest or anything. I'm a software engineer and have just been there recently, so I'm just sharing first hand impressions as FYI.

And why the mainstream "science" is declining the existence or nature of this is illogical. Those who signed this dcline report of nonsense have to be really dependent on some power structure. It is an authentic non-natural site.

reply to post by loopbg79


Thanks for the pics. I have seen alot of photos from people in the area. The rocks in some of the images certinaly do not look natural, they have regular spacing and size. They are however discombobulated to some degree. It's very difficult to make an assessment from photos alone.

However the GPR report of the ravine survey comes to some interesting conclusions:

CONCLUSIONS
A summary of this report's conclusions follow:
1. The structure highlighted in Ravne tunnels shows contruction elements in the shape of equilateraltriangels
.2. The dimensions of the structure are: approximately 2.0 meters in length, 1.0-1.5 meters in width,and 4.3 meters in height.
3. The structure is composed of two chambers with dimensions as indicated above and a wallthickness of approximately 30-40 centimeters.
4. The whole structure is surrounded by a thick layer of clay having a width of 1.5 meters.
5. The layer of clay was placed inside a cage/formwork consisting of longitudinal elements madeof an unknown material and placed at regular intervals of approximately 15-20 centimeters.
6. The thick layer of clay may have been constructed to protect the structure. A system ofdrainage (or ventilation channels built to mantain a low degree of humidity around and inside thestructure) was detected along the entire length of the scanned area of 40 meters. These channelswere located at a depth of 1.5 and 3.0 meters and intersect with the hypothesized burialchambers.
7. Scannings performed by a deep-processor radar verified the presence of a large mass of non-ferrous metal (an alloy) at a depth of 1.5 meters. So far, it has not been possible to verify thepresence of alloys inside the second hypothesized burial chamber because it is out of radardetection range of the deep-processor unit.

Source

The guys doing these surveys are not hacks, but they are not exactly qualified to make comments on potential burial locations either. That is just conjecture.

An analysis of the enclosed diagram reveals that the size of the detected object oscillatesbetween 25 and 30 centimeters. The depth indicated by the diagram is 1.75 meters, which meansthat the metal object is aligned with the axis of the hypothetical burial. The most interesting fact,however, is that it can be declared with certainty that it is a
non-ferrous
metallic alloy. The non-ferrous metals commonly used in antiquity were gold, silver, and copper and its alloys typically brass and bronze.

It is unfortunate that this is the edited version of the report with the shiva nonsense and other things sprinkled in for flavor. I have requested the strictly technical report from the company but they have never replied. No real surprise as I doubt they are authorized to hand it out since it was paid for privately.

The point is: if you believe that these Bosnian hills are manamnde, why DON'T you believe these British hills are manmade?

I have done NO research on those locations. The main factors that lead me to entertain the idea that this is infact a man made site, is the geopostions and orientation of the site itself.

The fact that the ravein system is, at this point, undeniably "touched by man" also lends credability to the pyramid shape.

That, and its looks like one!

Anyway it sounds like we are mostly in agreement anyway. It's about where we are on all structures like youngai etc, evidence for man being there, some speculative and ad-hoc conjecture based on gut feelings etc. But then again, where has man NOT touched? Unfortunately, like most things people have to get old and start dieing before any real progress is made.

Osmanagich is just another Däniken. Trying to find something wierd and unusual in everything.

When looking at pictures that isn't taken at the exact right angle, those "pyramids" looks like just another hill.

I just have to join the skeptics on this one.

How come there are no legends and myths about this amazing pyramid? And it would have been made by quite primitive hunter/gatherer people. We had no highly advanced cultures at that part of Europe at the time where those pyramids is said to be created.

Nope, no pyramid there. Wishful thinking.

reply to post by Chazam


Exactly, nice hills modified or built on at various time (archaeologically speaking) but not built or modified to be' pyramids'.

His fraud will live on for some time to come but I suspect that even he is losing heart.

The article does certainly read like a propoganda piece, which adds to the skepticism regarding this site. That being said, I would like to find out more about the 5 separate tests performed, and whether or not the scientists performing these tests are reputable. Also, from what section of the pryamid/hill in question were these samples taken from? Are they all from one location or from various spots around the entire hill? Were these samples given to the scientists by Sam and his crew in good faith, or did they extract them themselves? Finally, were the samples taken from the toe of the hill where a community during the middle-ages was active constructing walls, or from near the top of the hill where those large blocks of stone are located?

reply to post by skybolt


Well said

btw the top of the hill was also used a Roman signal station.

reply to post by TruthxIsxInxThexMist


Same, I still don't know what to think. Particularly with the whole "energy beam" thing. And as for the dating of things, I've always had a hard time believing that things such as carbon dating are accurate.

reply to post by Harte


I never claimed it to be true, but this is definitely the most "informative" source I've found on the topic

Maybe I missed it, but when they dug the dirt away, they found paths of cut stone. How did those get there? It appears to be a step type pyramid. Has anyone provided an explanation of that besides, "it's natural" as the Egyptian official said when he "debunked" he Bosnian pyramids?

It's obvious why he would come out against them, but I am open to whatever the truth is on this. So, any logical explanations of the paths and the stuff in the tunnels?

Originally posted by LABTECH767
reply to post by tzdub

 

I don't think it would be a step too far to assume a culture that could and did build such must have been old already or inherited it's knowledge from previous cultures (That every archaeologist will try to say there is no evidence for) and may be a way stone on the road to a lost advance civilization,

There can only be one explanation....


hahaha jk,


But ya, this really does give credit to our ancestors being more than monkey humping, cave dwelling neanderthals. As for ancient tech, I believe that there is a lot in this world that we don't understand, I can't remember where i heard it but this statement has always resonated with me:

"Science is the slow revelation of god's blueprint"

Who's to say that there hasn't been some sort of "Tech" or knowledge lost or even taken away.

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity
Maybe I missed it, but when they dug the dirt away, they found paths of cut stone. How did those get there? It appears to be a step type pyramid. Has anyone provided an explanation of that besides, "it's natural" as the Egyptian official said when he "debunked" he Bosnian pyramids?

It's obvious why he would come out against them, but I am open to whatever the truth is on this. So, any logical explanations of the paths and the stuff in the tunnels?

Certainly the most logical explanation is that while natural, this area and hill has been utilized by many people over several periods of human history. from Roman to medieval times. the area was also used for quarrying for centuries which explains large blocks. Finding structures built into and on top of a hill is pretty normal in Europe. That's not to say this is 100% not a pyramid, I think it would be really cool if it turned out to be true. I just haven't seen anything terribly convincing yet to suggest that it is. I won't even get into some of the insanity in Osmanagich perpetrates in his written work.

reply to post by LABTECH767

Originally posted by LABTECH767
reply to post by tzdub

 

I don't think it would be a step too far to assume a culture that could and did build such must have been old already or inherited it's knowledge from previous cultures (That every archaeologist will try to say there is no evidence for) and may be a way stone on the road to a lost advance civilization,

There can only be one explanation....


hahaha jk,


But ya, this really does give credit to our ancestors being more than monkey humping, cave dwelling neanderthals. As for ancient tech, I believe that there is a lot in this world that we don't understand, I can't remember where i heard it but this statement has always resonated with me:

"Science is the slow revelation of god's blueprint"

Who's to say that there hasn't been some sort of "Tech" or knowledge lost or even taken away.

I can see the argument that something was built but it is not a pyramid, but that is just an idea in itself. Until they excavate the whole area then how do you know what it was? It seems a bit premature to say it's not a pyramid. First they said, "It's all natural" and now, "It's constructed but NOT a pyramid".

Well it's something and I want to know what it is. I am sure we could excavate that area if we wanted to, but it appears someone does NOT want it to be done and that makes me wonder, "Why?"