City of the Annunaki

reply to post by Tardacus


There are a few different ways I can think of they could use for mining but no matter which method was used it would still require someone to physically pick up the rocks and remove them from the mine otherwise they would bury themselves just as in our society today we have robotic equipment building cars but you still need humans to operate the robotic equipment

Hanslune

lookaroundu
reply to post by OmegaSynthesis

 

I wonder why after 2 or 3 replies the topic shifted on z. sitchin. Is it done on purpose not to analyze the structures at waterval, mpamalunga, and machadodorp?

Because the basic claim is based on something Sitchin made up. What do you feel needs to 'analyzed'?

The fact that the structures are there, that no books about african archaeology contain anything about them... or maybe their possible function, their alignment...

ZSitchin never wrote anything about these structures, only Tellinger and an italian author did, so why do you discuss about ZS's theory instead on concentrating on the structures themselves?

lookaroundu

Hanslune

lookaroundu
reply to post by OmegaSynthesis

 

I wonder why after 2 or 3 replies the topic shifted on z. sitchin. Is it done on purpose not to analyze the structures at waterval, mpamalunga, and machadodorp?

Because the basic claim is based on something Sitchin made up. What do you feel needs to 'analyzed'?

The fact that the structures are there, that no books about african archaeology contain anything about them... or maybe their possible function, their alignment...

ZSitchin never wrote anything about these structures, only Tellinger and an italian author did, so why do you discuss about ZS's theory instead on concentrating on the structures themselves?

Says who? there has been a ton of research on stone structures from S. Africa to Nigeria to Morocco as well as their correlations to astronomical observations. I'm sorry that nobody has come to the similar conclusion that these stones were used in some bizarre sonic exercise but there has been research done, especially by German and S. African teams. Here is one paper I came across and will look for some others when I get a moment. Oh... and as for why bring up Sitchin in regards to Tellinger, how can you not? ALL of Tellingers work is completely based on Sitchin's. There is no disconnect between them other than a cognitive one.

www.jstor.org...

lookaroundu


The fact that the structures are there, that no books about african archaeology contain anything about them... or maybe their possible function, their alignment...

Did you even look?

A quick look finds...

The visibility and invisibility of herders' kraals in southern Africa, with reference to a possible Early Contact Period Khoekhoe kraal

Marothodi: The Historical Archaeology of an African Capital

The origins and spread of Pre-Colonial Stone-walled architecture in Southern Africa

Edited to add - I re-read the last one and found it mentioned this specific claim, this clip comes from the second page

ZSitchin never wrote anything about these structures, only Tellinger and an italian author did, so why do you discuss about ZS's theory instead on concentrating on the structures themselves?

He wrote about aliens using humans to mine gold. Some of his believers then sited the ruins of the kraals as evidence of a 200,000 year old city

Older story

Tellinger basis his theory on the fiction of Sitchin as noted in the link above

The latter was best known for his theories of human origins involving ancient astronauts, known as the Anunnakis, who'd originally settled in Mesopotamia, in search of gold but who it is suggested, through Sitchin's translations of ancient Sumerian cuneiform texts, moved on to Southern Africa where gold was to be found in greater concentrations

We can talk about the structure but the basic data needed to do so has not been provided, if you look at the images provided they are only roughly circular, if that - go back an look at the first page of this thread

randyvs

Why does science refuse to taake into account all the cultural
memories of a flood ? And the absence of any memories of our origins?
Which again points to a world wide disaster that interupts mankinds
lineage to his origins. A world wide catastrophe that just about
wiped out mankind completely. Explains this amnesia perfectly.
But it's GOD and we don't want to admit that do we ?
Someone might have to change their lifestyle !

edit on 5-10-2013 by randyvs because: (no reason given)

because there are a ton of cultures that don't have a world wide flood?
the only cultures that claim a world wide flood are those influenced by abrahamic religions, whether through contact or fraudulent recording of stories.

there are in fact more cultures that don't have a flood story like genesis than do.
by the way, why should science take into account mythology? name me one mythological story that has any sort of unambiguous evidence and isn't just arguing that since a place exists the story must be true too.

go read the norse version of it's so called "flood story" and how that interrupts our memories of our origins, because that story was not an attempt by the gods to wipe us out, merely an accident.

reply to post by demongoat


The Norse myth is a great one and a story that was still being told to Danish children last century I heard an abridged version from my maternal grandmother who was Danish (less blood and death in her version)

At first there was only a great void, Ginnungagap. Eventually a region of mist and ice, Niflheim, was formed in the North and a region of fire, Muspellsheim, was formed in the South. The great world-tree, Yggdrasil, reached through all time and space, but was perpetually under attack from Nidhogg, the evil serpent. The fountain of Mimir, source of hidden wisdom, lay under a root of the tree. Niflheim came into contact with Muspellsheim, and the fires melted the ice, which yielded Ymir, the Frost-Giant with a human form. From Ymir's sweat came a race of Giants, so that a huge cow (Audhumla) was created to feed them.

One day the cow licked the ice and hair emerged, on the next day a head, and on the third day Buri emerged, fully formed. Buri begot a son, Bur, who in turn had three sons: Odin, Vili, and Ve. These three were a new race, not Giants but gods. They banded together and murdered Ymir. Most of the other Giants drowned in Ymir's blood, which created a great sea. From Ymir's body the three gods made solid land, the earth, and from his skull they made the heavens. They then created a race of dwarves from the maggots that fed upon Ymir's body. This was followed by the creation of the first man and the first woman. They shaped the man from an ash tree and the woman from a vine.

Yeah that all makes scientific sense

How do you explain the construction and precise alignment of the Adam's Calendar for a civilization living in the dark ages? And how it coincidentally aligns with the Great Pyramid of Giza?

reply to post by OmegaSynthesis


What do you mean by align? Any two points will always draw a straight line...

OmegaSynthesis
How do you explain the construction and precise alignment of the Adam's Calendar for a civilization living in the dark ages? And how it coincidentally aligns with the Great Pyramid of Giza?

The dark ages? That has meaning in historiography that doesn't apply to the eras you seem to be thinking about. lol

What two points align? chuckle - I see you have low data tolerance.

You seem to be skipping over questions go back and try answering a few, you might find it useful. Doing a Gish gallop will not help your failing attempt to prove something by your personal attestation.

You need data and as the British say bollocks isn't the plural of evidence.

Have you read any of the real science done on the subject? I gave you three sample - I suspect you're might becclosed-minded but hey surprised me by reading them - I encourage lurkers to do so.

Man has always observed the sky, the Tomb of Khufu was probably aligned by sighting on the north star as the error in its placement is the width of thick sting hung at arms length. In the southern hemisphere its a whole lot tricker but can still be done.

wtf... do you at least read the links you post or you just put a keyword on the internet and link whatever comes out?
None of the links talk about the features, they talk about other kinds of what they call SWS.
Only the last one ("The origins and spread of...") contains a few line about tellinger's theory, not about the place itself. And the buildings the paper talks about all along are not the ones about which tellinger speak. They only have ONE name in common, Mpumalanga, because both features are located in that zone.
No one of the paper speaks about the circle of erected stones where 4 of them double the "sirius-alnilam-alnitak-mintaka" pattern (and it would also be useful to remember the parallel with giza, with xian'yang and with teotihuacan, where the same pattern exists)... none of the link talks about the immense structures of Waterval.

You just read 'mpumalanga' and 'south africa' and that's ok?
I though this was a serious forum... damn me, guess i found the wrong place.

Says who? there has been a ton of research on stone structures from S. Africa to Nigeria to Morocco as well as their correlations to astronomical observations. I'm sorry that nobody has come to the similar conclusion that these stones were used in some bizarre sonic exercise but there has been research done, especially by German and S. African teams. Here is one paper I came across and will look for some others when I get a moment. Oh... and as for why bring up Sitchin in regards to Tellinger, how can you not? ALL of Tellingers work is completely based on Sitchin's. There is no disconnect between them other than a cognitive one.

www.jstor.org...

edit on 8-10-2013 by peter vlar because: (no reason given)

Did you even look?

A quick look finds...

The visibility and invisibility of herders' kraals in southern Africa, with reference to a possible Early Contact Period Khoekhoe kraal

Marothodi: The Historical Archaeology of an African Capital

The origins and spread of Pre-Colonial Stone-walled architecture in Southern Africa

Edited to add - I re-read the last one and found it mentioned this specific claim, this clip comes from the second page

reply to post by Hanslune

so when did they learn how to remove gigantic stones from the ground and precisely shape them to build those amazing structures we see still standing? You guys love to claim the technology was very simple yet conveniently leave out the part why no one can replicated it using those same simple tools. There had to be some sort of infrastructure to produce such things and you fail to point out where that went.

bottleslingguy
reply to post by Hanslune

 

so when did they learn how to remove gigantic stones from the ground and precisely shape them to build those amazing structures we see still standing? You guys love to claim the technology was very simple yet conveniently leave out the part why no one can replicated it using those same simple tools. There had to be some sort of infrastructure to produce such things and you fail to point out where that went.

They bashed them out, a number of cultures used that technique, its hard work and requires a great deal of expertise and craftsmanship - and zeal provided by religious piety and belief.

You can see examples of it in their ancient quarries

Quarries of the Eastern Mediterranean

Could we build a pyramid? Yes Could we do so today using the techniques the AE and other did? No

The reason for that is that we don't know the precise procedures and more importantly we don't have the expert knowledge gained from generations of doing so, ie craftsmanship. Example you cannot make a Mongol type composite bow, nor can you take obsidian and make a Clovic point nor do you know how to hunt and kill a dugong. They could because they had the skills and experience.

We could learn those skills again, about 2-3 generations - but who is going to pay for it? Why would anyone be interested it doing so?

The AE and others left some images of working stone and moving massively heavy stone. We have experimented and documented evidence of people moving big stones, what evidence would you want?

Very good video. I only watched a half hour so far but will watch the rest of the two hour program later tonight. I like to have ideas on how to do things. I hate the programming we are given that limits our ability to create things. I know that some people want control over us. They want riches. They are training us to be just like them and then we destroy the earth to make them rich. Of course, we are considered guilty of this action even though some know that we wouldn't have to.

reply to post by Hanslune

seriously Hans it's one thing to say someone bashed a chunk of stone off another, but it's way past irrational to say that's how they accomplished what we find in the physical evidence. There has got to be a more mechanically sophisticated, logistical system of engineering that we still can't find any trace of. And you claim they just fit it in between times of basket weaving and gathering wild grains? that's technically laughable.

bottleslingguy
reply to post by Hanslune

 

seriously Hans it's one thing to say someone bashed a chunk of stone off another, but it's way past irrational to say that's how they accomplished what we find in the physical evidence. There has got to be a more mechanically sophisticated, logistical system of engineering that we still can't find any trace of.

It's certainly a reasonable hypothesis and there's absolutely nothing wrong with emoting it as a thought excercise. I don't think there's anyone studying AE that claims we know 100% how they did everything. We do however have a pretty accurate picture if how life was at that period. However what gets published is what passes due diligence and can be verified. It's just good science to only claim what you can verify and support. When making an extraordinary claim you need extraordinary evidence to support it. There's no hard evidence currently to support anything outside of what we currently know. If it ever appears you can be sure people will be fighting each other to alter the current paradigm.

And you claim they just fit it in between times of basket weaving and gathering wild grains? that's technically laughable.

Society in that period of Egypt was essentially split up into specialised subclasses. The people who were weaving baskets were skilled artisans who only performed that function. Likewise with stone workers and masons. That was all they did. Between the remains of quarries and remains of the city that housed all the people working on the Pyramids there's a vast array of evidence to support current thesis on AE.

bottleslingguy
reply to post by Hanslune

 

seriously Hans it's one thing to say someone bashed a chunk of stone off another, but it's way past irrational to say that's how they accomplished what we find in the physical evidence. There has got to be a more mechanically sophisticated, logistical system of engineering that we still can't find any trace of. And you claim they just fit it in between times of basket weaving and gathering wild grains? that's technically laughable.

Peter had an excellent answer but I'll add a few comments:

No, we don't NEED a mechanically sophisticated method of engineering, the ancient did quite well with what we think they had, in AE there are some images of their moving stones and working them - all in the manner suspected. In Peru the Inca were building when the Spanish arrived and kept at it during the war, afterwards the children of conquistadors wrote about their mothers people (beside Spanish commentors), they mentioned dragging stones and bashing them out. The Rapa Nui demonstrated the same techniques, I always recommend people go to Easter Island and walk around the quarry at Rano Raraku where unfinished Moai were left along with the tools.

As Peter said we have to go with the evidence we have and it says, bashing out stones with harder stones and dragging them to where needed.

One other note: High tech or advancements usually shows up in elite grave sites and in the military weaponry, no such sign of such in AE or Peru (think Tut's rare iron dagger)

reply to post by Hanslune


The freaking Ancient Aliens tripe has successfully spawn a new batch of misguided nincompoops (they lack the critical thinking ability or have no inclination to use it). I like people that go against the mainstream but the main problem remains the same the inability to think for themselves or have doubts about what others say.

reply to post by demongoat

why should science take into account mythology? name me one mythological story that has any sort of unambiguous evidence and isn't just arguing that since a place exists the story must be true too.

Well the simpler and most common thing would be to refer to the discovery of Troy but I do not see why you think science shouldn't cover everything from mythology to religion (as it does)...

Panic2k11
reply to post by Hanslune

 

The freaking Ancient Aliens tripe has successfully spawn a new batch of misguided nincompoops (they lack the critical thinking ability or have no inclination to use it). I like people that go against the mainstream but the main problem remains the same the inability to think for themselves or have doubts about what others say.

AAT has spawned some interesting thought patterns but even before then Usenet was a mad house, and before that I use to collect mimeograph sheets and letters about 'interesting' theories sent to Universities, newspapers and professors.

On the web there is about a 10/12 to one ration of real information to fringe on most subjects - real information is now easier to find but a lot still lies behind paywalls and costly books.

Some few things I have notices

Aliens theory have less traction now along with related UFO ones

Atlantis as a theory has greatly weakened and is now more commonly called the 'lost civilization', etc.

Having lost the main argument fringe now looks at details

I would also add there are real archaeological mysteries, lots of them. After one has debunked the Piri Reis map for the 312 time one does like to consider how the Americas were populated, whether the Polynesians got to South America, how some people got to Madascagar. What happened to the Harappa, etc.

reply to post by Hanslune


Most programs and information on the esoteric is very skewed, often done more for profits an attempt to seek attention towards spreading other type of ideas but rarely in an attempt to advance a field of study.

10/12 to one ration of real information to fringe on most subjects - real information is now easier to find but a lot still lies behind paywalls and costly books.

I think you are extremely optimistic on your assessment and I also think you give too much credit to printed books as good sources or that "proprietary information" if accessible is any better (information that is not public may be, and often is of better quality hence the protection or secrecy).

Aliens theory have less traction now along with related UFO ones

As I read I disagree, the possibility of alien (extra terrestrial life, even intelligent) has crossed the threshold into the public acceptance, almost as a self evident fact. Some of the more fringe theories have been dismissed as too outlandish so a depuration process has occurred, but overall those that had good traction still got it even if more vocal people have lost relevancy due to the deluge of information that the Internet permits...

UFOs are in my view mainstream only the possibilities to explain them remain debatable, what seems to be decreasing is the quality of reports (strangely) and that the quantity hasn't increased to match the access to recording devices and increased flow of information. The relevancy also has diminished since our own technology can now explain much of what wasn't explainable previously.

Atlantis as a theory has greatly weakened and is now more commonly called the 'lost civilization', etc.

I think that Atlantis has never really been a theory but a possibility to explain the clear gaps that exist in our history, as with alien life it is obvious that there has been many lost civilizations and some that we acknowledge aren't as yet fully understood. This merge and greater acceptance seems positive to me as it permits scholars to work with more freedom out of the box, something that the Internet has come to potentiate as academic institutions to a degree have lost relevancy as the keepers of the scientific truth (good and bad, now it is based more on public consensus).

Having lost the main argument fringe now looks at details

I don't think that fringe concepts ever lose arguments, they shift and only die with the more zealot believers. We still have people defending the Hallow Earth...

one has debunked the Piri Reis map for the 312 time

Darn I may have missed the good ones, can you point me to it? I still see it non conclusive, the best one I saw that raised the stakes was the reinterpretation of the section regarding South America.

There has been also new theories about the Minoans reaching the Americas (and mining cooper) that seem vary plausible, I still hope to be alive when examination of the underwater ruins across most of the worlds coastal areas will provide some better insight of human presence before the start of the last ice age. Even a good study of the Mediterranean basin or the Red Sea as to examine the origins of the flood mythology would be very interesting...