It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: The Benevolent Adversary
while reading thru this thread something said about the stones at baalbek struck a note with me.
if the romans had drawn the blueprints for their temple of jupiter on top of one the the trilathons this actually speaks against those particular romans having placed the stones there..
if you are planning to construct something you do not usually place your foundation and then draw up plans for your building. i would also doubt that they would draw plans there before moving the stone. this is certainly not the usual way anyone would do this.
this is not to say that other romans might not have done it at some earlier point in time.
personally i do not believe the romans placed those stones but i do not have any proof for this.
below them was discovered a part of a drum to a column. The size of the drum corresponds to the columns used for the Jupiter temple, so this was likely a leftover or no longer useful piece of one of those columns. Because it is underneath the base stones, this drum must have been place there before the trilithon was put into place.
originally posted by: The Benevolent Adversary
a reply to: Marduk
read what i wrote again before ignoring what i actually said.
for your first point if you plans are on top of the stone you are moving just how are you going to see where to place it.
for your second point i didnt say the romans might not have put the stones there but that i did not believe those particular romans did because of the fact that the plans were on top of the stone (which was my main point)..
do you really think they would draw their plans on the material they were to move? i just cannot see that anyone would make such a thing common practice.
do not attribute my saying things that i clearly did not say!
this actually speaks against those particular romans having placed the stones there.
i do not believe the romans placed those stones
edit to add: i suppose you might draw your plans on something that wasnt as large as those stones but even then it really doesnt sound logical
damn i hate prejudice.
originally posted by: The Benevolent Adversary
damn you it is just my opinion backed up by my own thought .
originally posted by: Marduk
So I get what you're saying, someone came along after the trilithium stones were in place, lifted them and then placed an unused part of a Roman column underneath. Or alternatively, the Romans travelled back in time and placed their block under the trilithium just to mess with you guys in the future
Or the Romans built it
originally posted by: Harte
originally posted by: Marduk
So I get what you're saying, someone came along after the trilithium stones were in place, lifted them and then placed an unused part of a Roman column underneath. Or alternatively, the Romans travelled back in time and placed their block under the trilithium just to mess with you guys in the future
Or the Romans built it
If the stones are trilithium, I'd say someone from the Federation of Planets built the place.
Harte