Some thoughts on pyramids and the Great Flood

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

Doesn't the Antiklithyra mechanism prove that someone knew that the planets moved like a clock and even the moon seemed to slow down and speed up with a regularity? That was even before someone made this calculator. It smells of industrial technology and way more knowledge than they were supposed to have.

Remember that it was create around 205 BC (at the earliest) - BUT - that the Babylonians and Persians (not Egyptians) had been able to do this (as shown by their tablets) for at least 1500 years before the mechanism was created. It's basically a mechanical device that replicated what was known. The Greeks would have gotten this information from older sources and possibly from the Library of Alexandria as well.

tl;dr - the motions were known LONG before the mechanism appeared. It's just a mechanical version of the tables the already had.

originally posted by: lonerpt
the fcking beings -- whatever it were --
made a monument imprisoning US in THEIR fake reality !
imprisoning us by anchoring us into 'Orion' and 'the polar star' !

Orion is a constellation, composed of 81 stars (only 10 are known to have planets) and each of those stars are hundreds of light years from each other and thousands of light years from Earth.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

I couldn't watch more than 15 minutes of it because it is so biased, it's entertainment, nothing more.

originally posted by: ZodYinYang

 

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift

 

Zod start a new thread if you want to bring your theory to ATS. I don't believe you can use links until you've had 20 or so posts. However, if you do an initial thread start I can put the link in for your materials.

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

My point being: the whole "series of progression" is hard to apply here. Time elapsed because nobody was showing any interest. Not because it took twenty generations of dedicated research.

....well because why do so if you have lots of easy to use labor? Which they also had in ancient times. Okay lets try this what tool/machine/thing do you think the ancient invented without a series of progression - they just created it on x date and proceeded along. Now I'm asking because we can then look at what was necessary for such a 'thing' to be made what resources or techniques were required.

The pre-flood ancients had 80,000 years. And much more leisure time per capita than those in the most recent 10,000 years had.

The total population was quite a bit smaller, but the percentage of that population which had leisure time similar to the aristocracy of our era, was a lot higher a percentage.

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

originally posted by: Hanslune

Insulation

power source

Lubrication

Electricity

Metal fabrication

Etc., it took Europeans thousands of years going by those tiny steps to reach steam power and later ICE which led to mechanical drills and saws*

The Roman's did use water power and others animal and human power to have 'machines'.

And yet, it wasn't by those tiny steps that they figured it out. The first electric motor used a combination of glass and brass.

thesplendorofthechurch.com...

The end could have been arrived at thousands of years before it was. Substitute volcanic glass for fabricated glass, and then substitute brass for..... well.... the brass...

Just requires someone to have time to look into it, and the curiosity.

If you read the article you posted, you will see that electricity (electrostatic in this case - which was known at the time) had to be applied to this "motor." Further reading on this will show you that such a motor produces movement, yes, but not enough power to do any real work.
Further development of such a motor for anything useful would require about 500 guys standing around constantly rubbing glass (or amber) rods with cat fur, a situation notably missing from the historical record.

Harte

The motor was a critical step in the history of the discovery of modern electrical theory. It didn't do anything all that great on its own. That is true.

But how much knowledge do you think it was building on? Static electricity from rubbing amber (discovered by the ancient Greeks) would have been known to attract lint from very early on. I don't think Andreas Gordon was working off of much more than that when he came up with the motor.

My point being: the whole "series of progression" is hard to apply here. Time elapsed because nobody was showing any interest. Not because it took twenty generations of dedicated research.

The problem might well have been that the scientific method had not yet been developed.
Hard to overstate the impact of the development of the scientific method.

Harte

True that. Sometimes a philosophical, or societal advancement can matter much more than a technological one, in the long run.

We now have nothing left of the ice age cultures' philosophy. They must have had philosophy, but we don't know what it was. Except maybe whatever we can glean from the carvings at Gobekli Tepe.

This is why the possibility of them having achieved technology interests me. They would have come at it from an entirely different direction. A different philosophy. Different goals. Different methods.

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
We now have nothing left of the ice age cultures' philosophy. They must have had philosophy, but we don't know what it was. Except maybe whatever we can glean from the carvings at Gobekli Tepe.

I think you haven't really looked.
There's no way to know of a pre-literate culture's "philosophy," but we have all kinds of examples of Ice Age cultures. Some things about these cultures can certainly be deduced from what we have.

One thing we can absolutely say about them - they weren't high tech.

Harte

So I watched a few episodes of Graham Hancock's new series on Netflix where he goes around the world looking for evidence of an ancient advanced civilization which was destroyed by a large global flood near the end of the last ice age.

While this has definitely its merits, keep in mind that Hancock's main purpose for many years now is to make money and to bath in cheers of the crowd that religiously follow him.

That being said, Hancock's stories and points of view are definitely worth a second look and further examination. But one must go through the presented evidence piece by piece and not simply believe what is being said.

Let's gather the facts:
1. Huge structures made of enormous blocks of stone exist all over the world. These structures are very old. How old exactly, we don't know.

2. Ancient cities around the end of the last ice age, far older than originally believed. The oldest cities are at least 11.000 years old and already quite sophisticated (Göbekli Tepe at least 11 ky old, the city of Jericho in Palestine at least 10 ky, Catalhoyuk in Turkey at least 9.5 ky). The end of the last ice age is believed to be around 11.000 years ago.

3. The sea level has risen at least 60 meters since the end of the last ice age 11.000 years ago. It appears there were several relatively quick pulses with elevated the sea level by dozens of meters around 15 ky ago (meltwater puls 1a), 13 ky and 11ky (MWP-2A) ago. While traditional analysis cannot tell us exactly how fast those sea level rises were (time resolution is not good enough), we know from ice core samples in Greenland that the temperature drastically increased between years. This could indicate some disastrous event of which all great ancient stories worldwide report.

4. We know of underwater sites of great antiquity (e.g. caves of Cosquer in France which are 29 ky (!) old, ancient city of Dwarka in India, 9ky old). We also know that vast swaths of land got submerged since the end of the last ice age (e.g. Doggerland in the North Sea between Great Britain and Denmark, 10 ky old).

From these facts alone it becomes evident that high civilizations of great sophistication existed at least 11.000 years ago.

It can be speculated that a disastrous event destroyed those civilizations. Was it a comet? Was it a solar outburst? Was it something else? We don't know yet.

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

The pre-flood ancients had 80,000 years. And much more leisure time per capita than those in the most recent 10,000 years had.

Well lets so no flood so that reference falls flat - however how would you know that about leisure time? HG don't work as hard as agriculturists - is that what you are referring too?

And yet, it wasn't by those tiny steps that they figured it out. The first electric motor used a combination of glass and brass.

thesplendorofthechurch.com...

The end could have been arrived at thousands of years before it was. Substitute volcanic glass for fabricated glass, and then substitute brass for..... well.... the brass...

Just requires someone to have time to look into it, and the curiosity.

Okay lets say that some fellow or gal created an electric motor in 15,000 BCE - what exactly do they do with it?

This is why the possibility of them having achieved technology interests me. They would have come at it from an entirely different direction. A different philosophy. Different goals. Different methods.

That is your assumption, the evidence we currently have shows no indication of their knowledge of it. Again some genius might have made such a machine - but of course we don't know about it and never will.

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

The pre-flood ancients had 80,000 years. And much more leisure time per capita than those in the most recent 10,000 years had.

Well lets so no flood so that reference falls flat - however how would you know that about leisure time? HG don't work as hard as agriculturists - is that what you are referring too?

Yeah. HG don't work hard as agriculturalist, but even more than that. HG who hunt larger prey work even less than HG who have to settle for smaller kills.

There is strong evidence they were population stable. That means they weren't trying to achieve a high young to old ratio. Societies that need a lot of labor in order to survive always strive to achieve a high young to old ratio.



I call it pre-flood because I think the Younger Dryas event is the real story behind the "flood" mythos.

And yet, it wasn't by those tiny steps that they figured it out. The first electric motor used a combination of glass and brass.

thesplendorofthechurch.com...

The end could have been arrived at thousands of years before it was. Substitute volcanic glass for fabricated glass, and then substitute brass for..... well.... the brass...

Just requires someone to have time to look into it, and the curiosity.

Okay lets say that some fellow or gal created an electric motor in 15,000 BCE - what exactly do they do with it?

The motor was just a step on the way to developing electrical theory. It's the moment when it became apparent electricity might have uses beyond just shocking yourself and feeling funny for a few minutes.

The earliest telegraphs were basically taking that very slight motor effect, and attempting to make it happen at a longer distance.

en.wikipedia.org...


It opened up a crack, and then others came along and widened that crack.

This is why the possibility of them having achieved technology interests me. They would have come at it from an entirely different direction. A different philosophy. Different goals. Different methods.

That is your assumption, the evidence we currently have shows no indication of their knowledge of it. Again some genius might have made such a machine - but of course we don't know about it and never will.

The evidence does show indication of it. Just not conclusive proof of it.

We have barely anything to go on, so to find anything at all is spectacular. About as much as can be expected. Just a matter of having reasonable expectations, and avoiding false , or emotional certainties.

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
We now have nothing left of the ice age cultures' philosophy. They must have had philosophy, but we don't know what it was. Except maybe whatever we can glean from the carvings at Gobekli Tepe.

I think you haven't really looked.
There's no way to know of a pre-literate culture's "philosophy," but we have all kinds of examples of Ice Age cultures. Some things about these cultures can certainly be deduced from what we have.

One thing we can absolutely say about them - they weren't high tech.

Harte

There are people just as primitive living in the Amazon Jungle right now. One group achieving technology doesn't preclude another group living at the same time and having no technology.

Even within a single combined population, the nobility could be hoarding technology. (If there is a nobility.)

Also people who feel they have no need for it might choose intentionally to opt out (like the Quakers in the USA.) It's always possible the mammoth hunters were happy with what they had, and didn't feel the need to strain their minds trying to understand wave physics. Felt it was corrupting the younger generation, and decided to stay away from it.



However, within that possibility, they also could have hired the technologically advanced civilization to build a fortress or two for them. Paying them in mammoth meat or tallow, or working for them in the mines, or something. So products of technology could appear alongside completely primitive villages/

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous


The evidence does show indication of it.

What is this evidence that shows an 'indication'?

Surely you jest.

As previously stated, conclusive evidence is a whole different thing from suggestive evidence. Take for example, the blocks found at Puma Punku that measure exactly one meter.

(starting at 58:20 they measure an H block and it's exactly 1 meter tall)

www.youtube.com...

Or the really smooth caves in India:

en.wikipedia.org...

It doesn't make it impossible for them to have been primitive. But "impossible to be wrong" is a pretty big goal post. It suggests high technology, where that term "high technology" might not mean quite modern. Just more than historically well documented cultures had.

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
Surely you jest.

As previously stated, conclusive evidence is a whole different thing from suggestive evidence. Take for example, the blocks found at Puma Punku that measure exactly one meter.

How is that suggestive of electric motors?

www.youtube.com...

Oh are you going instead for mechanical power tools instead?

Sorry while its a nice coincidence about the measurement that can be done with simple tools

Or the really smooth caves in India:

en.wikipedia.org...

It doesn't make it impossible for them to have been primitive. But "impossible to be wrong" is a pretty big goal post. It suggests high technology, where that term "high technology" might not mean quite modern. Just more than historically well documented cultures had.

If people in all these ancient and classical civilizations were making mechanical or electrical powered tools - and in all of them - we can find no evidence to support it - AND they didn't use this vast technical advancement for weapons or other areas what are we to make of that?

Like what exactly? The first mechanical 'aid' to stone cutting was by the Romans - that we know about - The Greeks and Romans all worked hard stone without mechanical/electrial power tools - and did so at a level superior to the AE, Sumer, etc.

Here is the Constantia coffin made of porphyry in the 3rd century AD (mohs 7 the same as granite)

www.museivaticani.va...:content/ren ditions/cq5dam.web.1280.1280.jpeg

www.museivaticani.va... chick on it to get the full image

a reply to: Harte

Except you don't know that it didn't happen either.
The biggest issue with the philosophy of archeology is the reluctance to actually practice it as a science.
If it did, all of the machinists, geologists, and professional masons that are telling you your archeological theories are incorrect and accept the evidence that is presented...instead of pitching a fit because the nonsense you've been preaching (most of it regurgitated from the musings of non scientific bumblers whose favorite investigative tool was frigging dynamite).
The simple fact that the academic peanut gallery still pushes the "Great Pyramid was built in 20 years" bullsnip, logic and pure mathematical impossibility be damned tells everyone everything they need to know about the philosophical field of archeology.
20 years, lol...and Robert Schoch is out there?

a reply to: Hanslune
Well...since Zahi and his buddy Mark failed miserably trying to prove pounding stones and copper sand saws were used to accomplish anything other than 3 days of futility gained blisters and no cut stone, I'll be happy to consider other possibilities.
Why?
Because science is a search for answers.
Not ignoring the evidence that disproves your theory simply because in your opinion, it had to be that way.
The usual culprits are quick with the "where's the potsherds-a-derp"...
OK, where's the tools that WERE used to make these objects we would have a hard time making today?
Thousands of vases that were clearly made on a lathe out of materials like schist and granite, yet we see no record of a lathe anywhere?
Overcuts on on huge granite blocks.
Clear evidence of machining.
Yet we are to believe this stuff was done with the only tools available at the time that the liar that feebly scratched their glyph into it suggests it was?

Fringe and out there?
Archeologist heal thyself.

a reply to: Hanslune

If people in all these ancient and classical civilizations were making mechanical or electrical powered tools - and in all of them - we can find no evidence to support it - AND they didn't use this vast technical advancement for weapons or other areas what are we to make of that?

Disingenuous argument.
Nobody is suggesting that either of those civilizations did any such thing.
What's being suggested is that pre-Younger-Dryas civilization, possibly as advanced in some areas as pre industrial revolution Europe may have existed and was destroyed by the cataclysm that caused the Y-D to occur.
If this civilization was real and global as suspected, it would be seafaring, thus coastal.
The cataclysm theory for that Era (and not some millennia long sea rise dribble either) suggests it was violent and somewhat quick.
That would mean any of these port cities would be non existent or buried under 100's of feet of mud and silt.
Why haven't we found them you ask?
Because archeology has a bad case of clovis culture effect.
In otherwords, who's looking?
Hard to find stuff when your head is so far up your own a☆☆.

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
Surely you jest.

As previously stated, conclusive evidence is a whole different thing from suggestive evidence. Take for example, the blocks found at Puma Punku that measure exactly one meter.

How is that suggestive of electric motors?

www.youtube.com...

Oh are you going instead for mechanical power tools instead?


You're missing the point with the motors. It's not about mechanical devices. It's about developing electrical theory.

If their motors never got better than the Andrew Gordon static electricity motor, but they learned how to send signals, or tried oscillating signals in antennas, then they could have developed radio. Much more important than the electric motor.

The tech they are most suspected of having isn't motors. It's wave physics related stuff, and understanding of celestial mechanics.

The ability to carve rock so smoothly that it ends up having less deviance over its surface than modern glass suggests some kind of novel technology, but it's not electric motors.

Sorry while its a nice coincidence about the measurement that can be done with simple tools

The meter is based off the size of the Earth, so its use in their construction suggests they knew the size of the Earth.

It's always possible they might use primitive means to deduce it, of course, provided they realized the Earth was a globe and not truly flat.

a reply to: bloodymarvelous
Friend, the discovery that the manufacturer of the blocks used metric is the mic drop on the whole idea that people who didn't have the wheel (and in the case of puma punku, no written language) were capable of that stonework.
Coincidence and simple tools.
Can you believe that sh!7?

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous


The evidence does show indication of it.

What is this evidence that shows an 'indication'?

What evidence was there that showed an indication that technology like the Antikythera device existed...until it was found, I mean?

You'd think after being proven wrong (on nearly everything) after new information is inevitably found, $cience would learn to keep its collective fossil holder shut on what is possible.
You'd think.

a reply to: ARM1968
That's the modus operandi of the Egyptology Scam artists.
They can't explain how an object of such perfection and technical skill that rivals are own was made
Or when.
Or by whom.
So it had to be the clearly inferior chicken scratch saying "Djoser wuz here".

I'll say this: There is no way in hell third, second, or first dynasty Egyptians had anything to do with the manufacture and placement of the boxes in the Serapeum.