The 10,000 year old civilization which was more advanced than us

DIablo: Also you do not need to cover up every little discovery, all you need is to sow a little doubt on most small ones and the in built paradigm of linear civilisation proggression will do the rest.

Hans: Unless of course the evidence actually points to CP

Diablo: true. could you tell the difference?


quote Diablo: 1) word will normally get out in parts of the archeological community, giving the conspirators a warning they need to act and

Hans: Actually no this works against the conspirators as more people get in the know as the evidence is spread about

Diablo: but the standard procedure of do not release to media before peer reviewed paper minimises this: only the actual team sees all the evidence, th e rest is kept pretty quiet untill such time as a peer review (for a major journal, who probably has someone in on it on the staff, or someone outside the journal who is in on it able to access papers submitted for reviewing) is done and the paper is published. Anyone trying to get round this by releasing info before review due to paradigm busting conclusions will be tarnished and dismissed, rightly or not, for not following proper procedures.

diablo 2) archeological digs take time, so this gives them TIME to act.

Hans: Such as?

diablo: seed doubt before a paper is even written/dig completed. scare away anyone thinking of funding research, give reviewers a bias against the paper before they even see it etc


diablo: as I said, there wouldnt normally be any need to kill anyone or similar, simply putting the reasonable suggestion that it is a hoax will be enough for most to dismiss without even properly looking at it, given the "overwhelming evidence" for the current paradigm.

Hans: How would you explain a city as a hoax? What if the discovery is made by an independently wealthy professor emeritus armed with hard evidence any archaeologist can see? Can you give an example of something that “was dismissed without properly (being) looked at”? Oh by the way when was the current paradigm established and by who?


Diablo:
as a possible example I give mohenjo daro (sp?) Now I'm not saying there was radioactive skeletons found there (to be honest, Im a bit doubtfull, but I dont know either way), but there are quite a few people claiming there were, and I would love to see some results myself on radio nucleotide testing of remains, or some pictures of the "melted clay pots" if they exist. Perhaps someone here has done the research and can point out who initially made the radioactivity claims? and what research was done as a follow up?

To be honest, archeology is not my strong point (hehe), so I'll give you an example from another area:

Cold fusion. According to the US navy, hundreds of papers worldwide and many different researchers, cold fusion IS real. Whether it is a viable way to get energy is not known, but ask most people on the street, theyll tell you it was debunked years ago. In fact, it was not. Now we may eventually get some indepependant wealthy professor who will fund research into it and develop it, in fact I think that it quite likely we will eventually get working useful cold fusion devices, but HOW LONG WAS/IS THIS HELD BACK? and how many of the, was it 13 billion dollars put towards ITER would have been put towards getting a useful (potentially much cheaper) cold fusion design had the original research not been tarnished?
(eg see www.springerlink.com...)


I also vaguely remember there being discussion of a hidden chamber under the sphinx, talked about in legends as a library, and confirmed to exist by seismic studies? now I realize there could be legitimate reasons for a delay in excavating (eg collapsing sphinx) but really, a hidden library near one of the worlds great mysterious wonders? shouldn't this be a TOP priority? I vaguely remember hearing the egyption government wouldn't allow an excavation? (I could give you 2 possible reasons for that) anyone got any info?

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by diablomonic
My point being, how many other "sphinxes" are there?

Lots and lots and lots. In fact, at Giza, there's a whole avenue of lined with them. I've seen several of Hatshepsut's many sphynxes. Take a look at this beauty from Lower Egypt:
www.whitman.edu...

no I meant "sphinxes" as in stone artifacts dated to the wrong era and yet well accepted as being from this (wrong) era

stone relics dated to the wrong age simply because that seemed to fit better with accepted history? maybe there are none, I dont know, but theres certainly a lot of claims..

As Hanslune said, I'd encourage you to volunteer on an archaeological project. You'll get a much better idea about how things are dated, how we find the stuff, and how we determine provenance.



perhaps I will do this one day. we'll see.

Originally posted by diablomonic
no I meant "sphinxes" as in stone artifacts dated to the wrong era and yet well accepted as being from this (wrong) era

None. Most of them have inscriptions on them. If they reference a known ruler, then the faces generally resemble that ruler's idealized portrait. If they're generalized sphynxes with no reference to a ruler, they're dated by the things they're found with, any inscriptions on them, and the style details of the artwork. There's the occasional squabble over a few of them, but nothing on the order of thousands of years.

stone relics dated to the wrong age simply because that seemed to fit better with accepted history? maybe there are none, I dont know, but theres certainly a lot of claims..

For the Great Sphynx, there's really only two: Schoch's initial claim of the greater age of the sphynx, and the original dating based on archaeological evidence. Schoch's a geologist with a real PhD... the others are also PhDs and Egyptologists -- so we have a fairly high level quarrel among genuine experts.

Now... there's a lot of speculation from others like Graham Hancock -- while they may be well read on something, they haven't actually gone to the site and done the fieldwork (unlike Schoch and the Egyptologists.) So they're basing their guesses on "he said-she said" kind of stuff and aren't up to date on the latest discoveries there on the plateau.

Originally posted by diablomonic
DIablo: Also you do not need to cover up every little discovery, all you need is to sow a little doubt on most small ones and the in built paradigm of linear civilisation proggression will do the rest.

Hans: Unless of course the evidence actually points to CP

Diablo: true. could you tell the difference?

Fairly easily, if you're an archaeologist with a lab at your disposal. You look for differences in the way they're crafted; improved polishing (fewer scratch marks), improved glazes and paints and so forth.

Hans: Actually no this works against the conspirators as more people get in the know as the evidence is spread about

Diablo: but the standard procedure of do not release to media before peer reviewed paper minimises this: only the actual team sees all the evidence, th e rest is kept pretty quiet untill such time as a peer review (for a major journal, who probably has someone in on it on the staff, or someone outside the journal who is in on it able to access papers submitted for reviewing) is done and the paper is published. Anyone trying to get round this by releasing info before review due to paradigm busting conclusions will be tarnished and dismissed, rightly or not, for not following proper procedures.

I'd dispute that, based on personal experience. Archaeologists and other researchers in historical artifacts attend conferences, work at or with universities, work for government agencies, etc. They talk with their peers, they research ideas, and if someone's got something big, it will be known to some degree long before it hits the media. Friends and associates will be asked to read and comment on various drafts of the papers.

The media may not know about it, but the rest of the community does.

diablo: seed doubt before a paper is even written/dig completed. scare away anyone thinking of funding research, give reviewers a bias against the paper before they even see it etc

Criticisms of the dig generally take the form of personal gossip and are angled at the "he's an unprofessional loon" or "I wouldn't EVER work with her if she was the last person on Earth." But, remember that they're not on the site all by their little lonesomes... they have a team which usually includes other archaeologists and students and professional "shovel bums." Gossip won't stop those people.

Pre-publication negative comments aren't always bad, because they let the researcher know what needs to be tightened. Occasionally these will stop a paper but it's more from the angle of "that's just all wrong and you know it" than from suppressed information. There's been a number who published anyway and got hammered by some good rebuttals. I'm expecting this scenario with the recent "meteor exploded over North America and wiped out Indians and mammoths" concept.

Diablo:
as a possible example I give mohenjo daro (sp?) Now I'm not saying there was radioactive skeletons found there (to be honest, Im a bit doubtfull, but I dont know either way), but there are quite a few people claiming there were, and I would love to see some results myself on radio nucleotide testing of remains, or some pictures of the "melted clay pots" if they exist. Perhaps someone here has done the research and can point out who initially made the radioactivity claims? and what research was done as a follow up?

There's over 1,600 papers on it accessible through Google scholar:
scholar.google.com...

I find one reference to "radioactive skeletons", and that was written by a man who was a UN advisor and a professor of international relations... will look that one up in a bit. None of the other papers mention this issue at all.
links.jstor.org...

When material's radioactive, it's well known in the community because you have to take care in housing the material (this is the case with fossils from the Morrison beds in Kansas and other areas.)

I also vaguely remember there being discussion of a hidden chamber under the sphinx, talked about in legends as a library, and confirmed to exist by seismic studies?

There's a small one. The source of "chamber as library" is something that was first said by modern psychic Edgar Cayce. No previous sources mention it. He claimed he was "channeling" "ancient knowledge" but his statements don't match fact.

And before folks go accusing Zahi Hawass of misconduct here, you guys should realize that at one point in his career, he WAS a very enthusiastic supporter of Cayce's ARE organization.

now I realize there could be legitimate reasons for a delay in excavating (eg collapsing sphinx) but really, a hidden library near one of the worlds great mysterious wonders? shouldn't this be a TOP priority? I vaguely remember hearing the egyption government wouldn't allow an excavation?

Because treasure hunters and Cayce fans were digging up the sphynx's ground rather enthusiastically. Treasure hunters had already dynamited parts of the pyramid and other areas of archaeological interest before the government got it under control.
www.touregypt.net...

reply to post by Byrd


Hi Byrd, gotta say you are a very good debater, some very good points there. WHile you havent convinced me Im totally wrong, you have made me stop and think hard about this.

when it all comes down to it, I guess my assumption (yes I do realise it is that) of a possible coverup comes from this: I really find it hard to believe the entire US/australian/british mainstream media could be as controlled as it is regarding several CT's I have researched, and yet I see evidence (or more importantly, DONT see evidence) for it all the time. I dont think the majority of them are aware they are controlled. If they can be so controlled, unawares, then so can the scientific media (this includes those that "write the book" on something, literally), and through them, the scientists.

some of the strongest evidence I consider for ancient civilisations is probably things like the accurate light speed figure and interesting partially correct scientific ideas written in the ancient indian texts, though I admit, having not read and translated these personally, how can I really trust what I read?
also things like the flood myth: mow can pretty much every culture have a flood myth (people living like kings or even gods before a great flood, island nations sinking into the sea, etc) if it did not occur? I find this very hard to believe.
put it this way, a good portion of america thinks that the bible is a true story of a man "magically" concieved and born as the son of god. Me, I see an encounter with alienw or a more advanced human race. (eg ezekials wheel) as much more likely than some omnipotent being who created the earth in seven days etc.
given every culture has their god/creation myths, and most involve what, if translated with the right bias, could easily be alien encounters, (supposedly there are more than 3000 written records of alien encounters in our historical documents) and that literally millions of people worldwide claim to have seen/encountered aliens, I find it interesting that my brain still wont actually accept they exist as a likely fact...
I cant remember where I was going with this, its 3 in the morning hehe sorry

anyway a few clarifications:
re the "sphinxes" comment, you still dont get what I mean, I did not mean other actual sphinxes, simply artifacts with similar well accepted but wrong dates.

cant remember what else I had to clarify..



[edit on 25-9-2007 by diablomonic]

Howdy Daiblomanic

Let me briefly back up what Byrd said. I've often known months or even years before publicaation about what is being found at site where I have contacts. Only very rarely is the information "classified" usually only when different teams are working in the same area, from different organizations (or the principals hate one another)and even that is very rare. Usually people are sharing information at a prodigius rate. This is particularly true for the technical experts in pollen, bone ID, pottery, animal remnants, etc. These people work at multiple sites and share information.

Has suppression ever occured? Yes there was some in the communist countries but it was known that it was occuring there is still some in a few countries were nationalist concerns (about where the population came from) is still a matter of debate - example Japan, where certain early mounds are off limits as they would show the Japanese Emperor probably was Korean.

reply to post by Hanslune


guess I'll have to think this out a bit more

perhaps its more a case of there are so few definitive finds proving anything like this that there doesn't need to be much of a cover up? You have convinced me that certain parts of my hypothesis are unlikely, to say the least.

putting this in the "dont know" basket (allthough thats pretty much where it was before), unless I find out anything else interesting.

cheers guys

Originally posted by diablomonic
reply to post by Hanslune

 

guess I'll have to think this out a bit more

perhaps its more a case of there are so few definitive finds proving anything like this that there doesn't need to be much of a cover up? You have convinced me that certain parts of my hypothesis are unlikely, to say the least.

putting this in the "dont know" basket (allthough thats pretty much where it was before), unless I find out anything else interesting.

cheers guys

Too bad to hear that diablomonic... I agree with much of your content. For instance, the 100's of ancient cultures from every part of the world who all share oral records of a great people who were destroyed in a cataclism. Coincidence? Also, the Sphinx is worth more research, because sand and water erosion are recognizably and physically different. Schoch was not ignoring sandstorms, he thinks sand couldn't cause that type of erosion. His geological training led him to conclude that water erosion was the cause.
Also, the Piri Reis, Portolans, and other ancient maps mentioned are worth more study. They may have inaccuracies, granted, but compare them to the other maps of the time, even the best ones. The longitudinal accuracy is what to focus on. Maps of that time were terrible regarding longitude, until much later, when chronographs were precise enough to correct them.
How can the maps based on source maps 2000 years old have much better longitudinal accuracy?
But, my fave, the great pyramid. The more you look, the more amazing it gets. The builders of that marvel were extremely advanced.... far more so than the people of the old Kingdom of Egypt, be it the 4th, or any one of them. I can't see even now, any way we could build it today if only allowed to use the tools of the 4th dynasty, such as stone pounders, levers, wedges, and copper blades. It is too complex, too precise, too big... and it is my view that only using all our latest technology do we have any chance of exactly duplicating such a edifice - the most durable structure ever built... still.
And there is so much more... flutter echoes in ancient central American pyramids which imitate the call of the bird that the pyramid is dedicated to.
The Vedas accounts of metal flying machines, and the speed of light described very accurately, and time periods measuring billions of years in length...
There are also the megaliths to consider, which are spread across the earth, yet share common traits, and are hard to see how they were created by primitive people.
Keep your chin up diablomonic! Don't just accept what it says here, do your homework, even the most intelligent posters are wrong sometimes.
Oh yeah, I almost forgot, the most important book for me, on the topic.
"When the earth nearly died" by Allen and Delair

www.knowledge.co.uk...

This book shows how most of the evidence of these ancient greats was destroyed. It is scientifically supported, and agrees with the ancient oral accounts too.

[edit on 1/1/2008 by BlackGuardXIII]

Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
and it is my view that only using all our latest technology do we have any chance of exactly duplicating such a edifice - the most durable structure ever built... still.

Haha, that's such a joke. We have already "duplicated" it: Luxor hotel in Las Vegas. It only took a couple of years at the cost of a couple of hundred millions, ending up 10,000x more complex than the Great Pyramid... Albeit some 30m shorter.

With 20+ years and the entire US goverment budget of some 3 trillion dollars (per year), imagine what we could do. We could not only repeat the feat of the great pyramid, we could make it 1km tall and have it house 10 million people... And its own airport.

I was being serious. The least you could do is be serious as well, if you want to refute my post. A bunch of made up numbers, and guesses out of thin air mean nothing to me. The Luxor... how would it look in 5000 years?
lol
And besides, I said I think we could do it.
Lots of good research is out there for you if you ever really want to study the intricacies of the great pyramid in detail. If you have not done so already, that is.

reply to post by BlackGuardXIII

How would it look in 5000 years? Probably not too good. But we dont build in 2 ton blocks of stone today and theres a fairly good reason for it. Its cumbersome and ineffective.

Would for example the US goverment put away say the low low sum of 500 billion dollars every year for the construction of a stone pyramid (regardless of size) housing the body of G.W Bush?

It aint gonna happen. Never. It would be a revolution. But the thing is, the egyptians *did* this. It is spitting out random numbers, but its also trying to get you to see the extent of dedication involved and I'm probably not even close in comparison.

Today, we cannot understand it. Its beyond comprehension, especially to the western world people because in America, there hasnt been any emperor, king or pharaoh that gives the orders. A president doesnt even come close, he still rely on the people.

This is far beyond what an industry can put out or a global corporation. There are very, very few comparisons today with the pyramids. The only one I can think of off hand would be the proposed bridge over the Gibraltar straits.

Here is ATs link about the Hindu ancient flying machines
www.abovetopsecret.com...


And here is the Hopi North American indian tales of creation. they mention the world has been destroyed 3 times and decribes city of lites and flying machine before the last destruction.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The nuclear weapons of those days were made by using alchemy. Alchemy was the science of their days. They probably summoned some demons to do it for them. Thats why they went under, they were into black magic & stuff.

Originally posted by drexciya
The nuclear weapons of those days were made by using alchemy. Alchemy was the science of their days. They probably summoned some demons to do it for them. Thats why they went under, they were into black magic & stuff.

That doesnt make much sense. Alchemy was a word used to define an at the time undefined and wide field of research. Now we call it chemistry, or most of it anyway. The science is pretty much the same, except people figured out that the magic part of it didnt hold ground.

Nuclear weapons however, require a feat far greater than "alchemy" could ever provide. If they summoned demons, I fail to see why you would say it was made using alchemy: obviously said demons needed to use more than just alchemy.

[edit on 5-1-2008 by merka]

Totaly Amazing Thread........

My research along with others is proving that thousands of years ago they did indeed have extreme knowledge of science .

Plato locked/hid some of this science in our music notation.

I mean the actual formulas to create zero point energy,stargates,
hyper space, and so so much more..

my thread has numerous information as well as some of the actual
formulas and lessons on how to read the math.

its the new/ancient science coming to light for us.
its always been here....hidden in plain sight.

and its science follows the universal laws on nature.
the golden mean, Phi, the pythagoran spiral, the fibonnaci sequence,
and so much more.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

-Bobby

Originally posted by merka

Originally posted by drexciya
The nuclear weapons of those days were made by using alchemy. Alchemy was the science of their days. They probably summoned some demons to do it for them. Thats why they went under, they were into black magic & stuff.

That doesnt make much sense. Alchemy was a word used to define an at the time undefined and wide field of research. Now we call it chemistry, or most of it anyway. The science is pretty much the same, except people figured out that the magic part of it didnt hold ground.

Nuclear weapons however, require a feat far greater than "alchemy" could ever provide. If they summoned demons, I fail to see why you would say it was made using alchemy: obviously said demons needed to use more than just alchemy.

[edit on 5-1-2008 by merka]

There is more out than there than the eye can see, more out there than are crappy science of today can explain.

Alchemy was the art of manipulating the world around them in the ancient days. You do know that uranium is to be found in nature? Maybe you dont have the occult knowledge to know such things are possible in our universe.

reply to post by drexciya

I dont have occult knowledge, but I do know that taking a lump of mined uranium and sticking it in a wooden crate filled with say mercury doesnt turn it into nuclear bomb.

My point: alchemy can make the *basics* of things, true that. It could make say explosives and combustable fuel. But it cant make the jet engine and airframe needed for a bomber to deliver the explosives. That's a whole other field of research... Just like a nuclear bomb is.

Hey ive been reading this thread for a while now and i must agree that without sufficient evidence to back up this claim it is basically guessing.

Nuclear weaponry is not extraordinarily difficult to make as the basic nukes in ww2 were hemispheres of active uranium clapped together to create a chain reaction which would lead to a nuclear explosion.

Although methodically this isnt hard the science and reasoning behind this invention is. The ancient race (if it did exist) would need knowledge of how atomic structures work and hence they would need some very advanced tech for that to happen.

Without a doubt the past would hold many more answers to our future than we assume. The accuracy involved in the construction of the pyramids far exceeds our modern technologies. You can actually hang a thread from the tip of a pyramid and it would hang in the exact centre to the base of the pyramid which is pretty amazing from a bunch of people working with bronze tools and ropes.

Another note is that many famous mathematicians believe in a fundamental relationship between nature and mathematics. An example of such a person would be Pythagoras the greek mathematician that went on to establish the order of pythagoras that developed pythagora's theorum before being wiped out in one of the many hundreds of wars that plagued the greek cities.

Although all of this is great and all adding to the mystery of the past, without supporting evidence it means jack all. What would be cool is if we could look back in the past 10000 years and see what the earths surface looked like. However time travel, althoguh possible in terms of physics, is a long way off.

There has been some great shows on the History Channel looking specifically at ancient technology. I have had a chance to watch a few myself and thought they were very well documented.

Ancient Robots

This one was rather interesting as it had working vending machines, programmable theatres, and other nifty gadgets dating back 2000 years ago.

Ancient Super Ships

A detailed explanation on how an extremely large ship could be made without using a single piece of metal. Also detailed a war galley that had 7,250 people at full complement.

Ancient Chinese Inventions

Drilling machines, etc. Impressive stuff.

Hi all, I had to pipe in here.

The biggest flaw in the super advanced civilization argument is the dentistry of the remains found.

Even Ramses died in horrible pain from untreated abcesses from decayed teeth.

Forget advanced dentistry, there are no simple fillings seen either. Gold fillings are very simple to do and if the egyptians had advanced technology to build pyramids and fly and such, they would have had access to some bulk of knowledge from the ancients.. but dentistry and the basic theory of decay escaped them?