It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Dr Robert Schoch - Ancient Catastrophes The Sphinx, Gobekli Tepe, Easter Island...

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

+53 more 
posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 06:16 AM

This video was Published on Oct 15, 2014.

It's an interesting interview for those of us who entertain the notion of a possible lost/forgotten past. If you have the time, make a pot of coffee, get comfy and let your mind explore this possibility. Some view him as an academics worst nightmare as being one of their own coming out with interesting perspectives.


posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 06:29 AM
Nothing to add right now, just bookmarking to watch this later after work.

I've missed your threads Slayer, They are some of the best here at ATS in this forum.

posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 06:40 AM
Currently watching it, I like his ideas on the Sphinx and I agree with his conclusions about the head being re-carved purely based on the head size to body ratio. Who am I to argue with the professional opinion of a geologist? He seems positive about his results on the weathering and if he was tryna sell me his book I might argue but as of yet he hasn't aha

I don't find it hard to believe it could have been carved a thousand or so years before we think.

posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 07:17 AM
a reply to: SLAYER69

I'm about 20 min in so far. Very interesting interview, thanks for sharing man.

I remember hearing something similar about the weathering and carving of the head but I can't quite place where I saw it. Probably in one of your other threads.

posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 07:27 AM
i enjoy his vids. thanks for sharing!

posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 08:09 AM
a reply to: SLAYER69

Lovely... I was looking for something to watch tonight

Just my style of Documentary too...

Thanks Slayer


posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 08:20 AM
a reply to: SLAYER69

Appreciate the video, I have always enjoyed Dr. Schoch's brand of looking into the past, I will dive into this later when the 4 year old isn't so demanding.

posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 08:49 AM
Just my two cents, but I believe its a doomsday statue.

And the head most likely would have been, based on its advanced age, a cobra. It would explain the pharonic headgear.
In later times the snake would have been replaced by the eagle.

Proverbs 91:13

posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 08:55 AM
Thanks for posting that, enjoyed it immensely, guy has some interesting ideas... I think for once I'm going to track down his book.

posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 08:59 AM
a reply to: SLAYER69
I've been looking for something like this to watch, and here comes Slayer to the rescue. It would be nice to see you follow this up later, with your spin on what he says in the vid.

Thanks. I'll be watching this tonight.

posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 09:00 AM
a reply to: SLAYER69

Great post op ..I like the bringing together of the different sciences to give us a more plausible understanding of our past then the main stream narrative's we are told to believe to be true .If the people in positions to put the truth out can be so off the mark about the ancient past then it's only normal to question even our recent past ,as they would have us believe .

We are told today that co2 is the culprit and it's the human contribution that will either burn or freeze us to death in the future and we need to create taxes to avoid this new boogie man . Rubbish because it's that big orange ball in the sky that keeps us warm and there is nothing we can do to cause it to change in any way at all .

posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 09:17 AM
Since the Admin here consider you as just another Joe, you should create your own website...

I know you can do some Front End work and I can help with the CSS.

Then we work on the Ad program and rack it in!!

In addition, I would be a Super Moderator, just like I should be here...

Yep, standing on the shoulders of others to get ahead is a sweet ass deal indeed.

Another great thread Johnny continue to bring the Goods.

posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 01:44 PM
a reply to: Sparta
I agree. I wrote to Schoch about 6 years ago with the reasoning behind the recarved head. Get any Egyptologist to answer this. No where in the upper or lower kingdoms and through all their pharaohs reigns have there been any painting or carving with so mis matched head and body? The Egyptians were renowned for their pespective in carveing and paintings to the point of very, very high accuracy in physical shape. So it smacks you in the face that the sphinx head was carved after and really anyone who thinks it was a lions body with anything but a lions head is using their imagination too much.

posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 01:46 PM
S & F

Watching now. I remember watching Dr. Schoch and John Anthony West years ago about the Sphinx and thought " I knew it " everything is older than we ever imagined.

posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 03:47 PM
One hour of insights. Thank you Slayer!

posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 04:14 PM
a reply to: watchitburn

probably "FINGERPRINTS OF THE GODS" by Graham Hancock. He put this theory out there in the '80's I believe. Said it was carved about 18000 years ago when the constellation Leo was on the horizon there,and thus the lion's body and head.

posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 09:42 PM
Schock is the best (this is Not my humble opinion). Long story behind the 'why', but I don't have a keyboard ATM.

He does have opinions. I don't happen to agree with all of them. What I like about the guy the Very Most, is that he clearly articulates his opinion AS opinion (just that his is based on extensive field work). I forget the name of ATS' pyramid SME ... but I like both of these guys about the same.

If I had a couple million dollars just laying about, I could probably spend the rest of my life following Schock around Egypt and never get bored.

Egypt - Fascinating region. 'Go' if you ever get the chance. Hopefully ISIS won't do any dirty work there.

posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 04:46 AM

originally posted by: Snarl
Schock is the best (this is Not my humble opinion). Long story behind the 'why', but I don't have a keyboard ATM.

He does have opinions. I don't happen to agree with all of them. What I like about the guy the Very Most, is that he clearly articulates his opinion AS opinion (just that his is based on extensive field work).

I like Schoch for this reason too, as well as the fact that he doesn't simply go along with every fringe idea out there like the rest of the fringers do.

Schoch tells us, for example, that Yonaguni is a natural formation, which is true, and not some ancient construct.

I've looked long and hard at what he has said about the sphinx, however, and I can't find any way to agree with him.

There are a couple of explanations for why the head is smaller that have been posted here before. For one, the layer of limestone that makes up the neck is extremely soft and crumbly. A right-sized head couldn't be supported by the neck. Also, there is a large crack in the limestone bedrock, running crossways through the sphinx and the enclosure. If the body was the right length for the head, that crack would be near enough to the sphinx's rear that the rear of the statue could simply fall away.

These two explanations work for why the sphinx looks like it does.

Schoch's data regarding the enclosure floor, which is what he bases his dating on, is pretty iffy, IMO. He uses subsurface degradation of the limestone bed due to exposure to air and that data shows that the enclosure floor on both sides of the sphinx is older than the front, going by his own analysis.

I believe that using such means to test age is pretty meaningless in a limestone bed that is not homogeneous, to say the least. The beds at Giza vary widely in hardness/toughness. There are entire coral reefs embedded in parts of the bed while other parts are very sandy. Given that the beds are not horizontal, one should expect different degrees of degradation in different areas along the same horizontal surface, and hence the depth of the degraded limestone would depend more on the stone itself than on the amount of time of exposure to air.

His data collected for the enclosure floor in the rear of the statue comes from only a meter or two of the floor, BTW. Three readings, IIRC.

It's important to note, I suppose, that Shcoch's claim of antiquity for the sphinx applies only to the front, not the rear.

If you read the results of the Giza Mapping Project concerning the sphinx, you can find evidence that would point to an Old Kingdom date for the carving.


posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 08:00 AM
Will be watching this in a bit! Thanks!

A bit of a side note, has anyone ever looked up Dr. Schoch on rateyourprofessor? It's kind of amusing, and regardless of the students insights, he is well liked. I bet his classes would be fun to attend.

posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 08:11 AM
a reply to: SLAYER69

Thanks for sharing this Slayer. I rarely get the time to watch things this long but have starred and flagged for future perusal.

As such, i can't really comment (for once!) but i have read Professor Schoch's website before and i have to say that i find some of his work extremely interesting. Particularly as he gives no credence to the Bosnian Pyramid or the underwater blocks at Yonaguni, explaining both as natural geological phenomenons. To me, this says he looks at the evidence first. You would think this a pre-requisite but as we all know these sorts tend to get bunched together..."well what about such and such or such and such" and this approach inevitably leads to a descent into chaos!

From memory, he addresses the weathering on the Sphinx in a realistic way. I can't remember though whether he takes into the natural wandering of the Nile or whether the Nile is fixed for his theories and instead he uses a "moat" for the Sphinx discussion. I do remember him saying the sphinx was originally a lion, since recarved.

Anyhoo, for those interested here is a link to his website:


top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in