Did Humans And Dinosaurs Co-exist? (Icca Stones)

Hi ATS.

I was watching Discovery Channel a couple of minutes ago.
The show that was on is called 'Weird Or What'.
I'm sure some of you are familiar with this show.

Today they touched a subject i hadn't heard of before.
A part of the show was about the 'Icca Stones'.

I searched on ATS and i got only 2 hits with very minimal info, so i decided to make a thread about this fascinating subject.

These stones seem to depict:
1. humans and dinosaurs co-existing.
2. medical procedures unheard of at that time.
3. humans stargazing with telescopes.

first some info on the man who got one of these stones for his birthday.


Dr Javier Cabrera

The Ica Stones first came to the attention of the scientific community in 1966 when Dr. Javier Cabrera, a local physician, received a small, carved rock for his birthday from a poor native. The carving on the rock looked ancient to Dr. Cabrera, but intrigued him because it seemed to depict a primitive fish. Hearing that the doctor was interested in the stone, local natives began to bring him more, which they collected from a river bank (not far from the famous Nazca lines). This soon developed into a vast collection of more than 15,000 stones, many etched with impossible scenes. Whereas it might be difficult to prove that the fish represented a long-extinct species, as Dr. Cabrera thought, other scenes carved on other stones are not so ambiguous. They clearly depict such dinosaurs as triceratops, stegosaurus, apatosaurus and human figures riding on the backs of flying pterodactyls. What's more, some of the scenes are of men hunting and killing dinosaurs. Others show men watching the heavens through what look like telescopes, performing open-heart surgery and cesarean section births.

a video and some info about the stones themselves.

The stones themselves are composed of andesite, a very hard mineral that would make etching quite difficult with primitive tools. They are covered with a natural varnish that is created by bacteria over thousands of years. The etching is made by scraping away this dark varnish to reveal the lighter mineral beneath. According to some reports, examinations of the stones show that the grooves of the etchings also bear traces of additional varnish, however, indicating that they are very old.

I'm sorry ATS.
There's a whole lot of info on these stones and i'm not that much of a threadmaker.
So if you're intrigued, one way or the other, i'd advise you to do some research on your own.

I want to close this post of by saying this is not the only evidence of humans and dinosaurs co-existing.
I'd like to refer you to a PDF.

The PDF can be downloaded at the following link.
Photograpic Evidence Of An Alternative History

it contains images like this:





As i see it, we're left with 3 possibilities:
1. a human civilization existed during the age of the dinosaurs
2. dinosaurs survived to coexist with man
3. the stones are an elaborate hoax.

Take your pick.
I hope i've intrigued you either way!

SOURCES USED:

youtube
Photographic evidence of an alternate history
Icca stones
Icca stones

and a couple more.

In my opinion, these stones are with out a doubt proof that humans interacted with dinosaurs someway.
WHO knows? Maybe they found the fossils and just carved what they thought they looked like.

I believed we walked together though.

The Ica stone craze began in 1996 with Dr. Javier Cabrera Darquea, a Peruvian physician who allegedly abandoned a career in medicine in Lima to open up the Museo de Piedras Grabadas (Engraved Stones Museum) in Ica. There he displays his collection of several thousand stones. Dr. Cabrera claims that a farmer found the stones in a cave. The farmer was arrested for selling the stones to tourists.

He told the police that he didn't really find them in a cave, but that he made them himself.

Other modern Ica artists, however, continue to carve stones and sell forgeries of the farmer's forgeries. In 1975, Basilio Uchuya and Irma Gutierrez de Aparcana claimed that they sold Cabrera stones they'd graved themselves and that they'd chosen their subject matter by copying from "comic books, school books, and magazines" (Polidoro 2002).

Linky

Originally posted by boncho

The Ica stone craze began in 1996 with Dr. Javier Cabrera Darquea, a Peruvian physician who allegedly abandoned a career in medicine in Lima to open up the Museo de Piedras Grabadas (Engraved Stones Museum) in Ica. There he displays his collection of several thousand stones. Dr. Cabrera claims that a farmer found the stones in a cave. The farmer was arrested for selling the stones to tourists.

He told the police that he didn't really find them in a cave, but that he made them himself.

Other modern Ica artists, however, continue to carve stones and sell forgeries of the farmer's forgeries. In 1975, Basilio Uchuya and Irma Gutierrez de Aparcana claimed that they sold Cabrera stones they'd graved themselves and that they'd chosen their subject matter by copying from "comic books, school books, and magazines" (Polidoro 2002).

Linky

Sounds like someone forced him to say he faked them.

reply to post by kn0wh0w


Just food for thought. In many centuries after our present day, researchers might find artifacts from our civilization depicting dinosaurs and men.

We, I can assure you, have not co-existed with them during recorded history.

Who is to say they didn't find fossilized remains themselves?

I wouldn't discount it entirely, nature is tough and finds a way, it is possible that some isolated areas were spared from the great die off, and some specifies survived long enough to encounter humans.

I just don't see it being that likely as the oldest remains we find of humans are long after the dinosaurs disappeared.

Originally posted by boncho

The Ica stone craze began in 1996 with Dr. Javier Cabrera Darquea, a Peruvian physician who allegedly abandoned a career in medicine in Lima to open up the Museo de Piedras Grabadas (Engraved Stones Museum) in Ica. There he displays his collection of several thousand stones. Dr. Cabrera claims that a farmer found the stones in a cave. The farmer was arrested for selling the stones to tourists.

He told the police that he didn't really find them in a cave, but that he made them himself.

Other modern Ica artists, however, continue to carve stones and sell forgeries of the farmer's forgeries. In 1975, Basilio Uchuya and Irma Gutierrez de Aparcana claimed that they sold Cabrera stones they'd graved themselves and that they'd chosen their subject matter by copying from "comic books, school books, and magazines" (Polidoro 2002).

Linky

Hi Boncho

I've read this as well and he later retracted that statement.

Some say to avoid a jail sentence.

The jury is still out.

They are covered with a natural varnish that is created by bacteria over thousands of years. The etching is made by scraping away this dark varnish to reveal the lighter mineral beneath. According to some reports, examinations of the stones show that the grooves of the etchings also bear traces of additional varnish, however, indicating that they are very old.

Because there is also this.

Seems pretty hard to fake.

reply to post by phishyblankwaters

We, I can assure you, have not co-existed with them during recorded history.

That would mean the stones are fake then?

Because some of these stones (there are 15000 in total) depict humans riding dinosaurs.

reply to post by kn0wh0w

According to some reports...

Which reports exactly?

I believe it.
I remember reading something about a mammoth with a perfect hole on is skull, and someone said that was made by some kind of weapeon. Dont know if is truth.

Originally posted by CowabungaPT
I believe it.
I remember reading something about a mamote with a perfect hole on is skull, and someone said that was made by some kind of weapeon. Dont know if is truth.

What's a mamote?

Originally posted by boncho

Originally posted by CowabungaPT
I believe it.
I remember reading something about a mamote with a perfect hole on is skull, and someone said that was made by some kind of weapeon. Dont know if is truth.

What's a mamote?

come on now.

you know damn well what he meant.

i´m still looking for a report online.

the only thing i can give you is the episode on DC.

Originally posted by kn0wh0w

Originally posted by boncho

Originally posted by CowabungaPT
I believe it.
I remember reading something about a mamote with a perfect hole on is skull, and someone said that was made by some kind of weapeon. Dont know if is truth.

What's a mamote?

come on now.

you know damn well what he meant.

i´m still looking for a report online.

the only thing i can give you is the episode on DC.

If he means Mammoth it's not particularly impressive as they did coexist with humans. There is a big difference between a creature that was alive 10,000 years ago and one that was alive a 100,000,000 years ago.

Originally posted by boncho

Originally posted by kn0wh0w

Originally posted by boncho

Originally posted by CowabungaPT
I believe it.
I remember reading something about a mamote with a perfect hole on is skull, and someone said that was made by some kind of weapeon. Dont know if is truth.

What's a mamote?

come on now.

you know damn well what he meant.

i´m still looking for a report online.

the only thing i can give you is the episode on DC.

If he means Mammoth it's not particularly impressive as they did coexist with humans. There is a big difference between a creature that as alive 10,000 years ago and one that was alive a 100,000,000 years ago.

I´m not denying what you say here.

But you called him out on a grammar mistake.

Imho a person of your intelligence should be above that.

I know you´re pretty sceptical and i always appreciate your input in threads because you keep most of us down to earth.

But there is no need to call people out on a grammar mistake, like you did two posts back.

Or is there...?

reply to post by boncho

the only thing i can give you is the episode on DC.

Forget DC as this picture shows the type of reliable information they have:



A lab report or a reputable group/entity that did carbon dating would presumably be suffice. Mind you, take into account it is said that these stones have been likely mixed with some valid ones. The ones that depicted the extraordinary would have to be tested, yet it's hard to carbon date something without organic matter. Like these stones.

The location of the dig site was never disclosed. No proper investigation of it could be preformed. No proper carbon dating could be done around the site.

reply to post by kn0wh0w


The information about the varnish is really interesting thanks.

That really adds another layer to this. I wonder if they have gone through all of them and tested for this to separate out any fakes from the "authentic ones".

Oh and that photo with the stegosaurus carved on the wall, that's a totally different case across the Pacific ocean, on a temple wall in Cambodia. (Strange how that case is totally unrelated but shows something that looks like a common dinosaur).

There are thousands of random websites with pics of it, and this is the first one I found through Google.
Cambodian stegosaurus carving

reply to post by boncho


The Cambodian temple carving also linked in the OP will require a much more elaborate dismissal. This is a really mysterious topic because we actually don't know what the hell is going on here, sure most will rationalize it and force cognitive dissonance, but really this is indeed a legit mystery.

Then we have a plethora of other cases, including things like the footprints found underneath slabs of limestone, etc.

I just think we should be very careful here and come to terms with the reality that what we consider to be accepted history ( dino's went extinct 60 some odd million yr ago , etc) , could be totally misdated and out of context due to our lack of pertinent data. That pertinent data is not accessible for practical reasons, we simply don't know what we are looking for in the first place.

There are some things that you know you know, and there are some things that you know you don't know, and there are some things you don't know that you don't know. And it's what we don't know that we don't know, that is causing us to be incapable of coming to grips with this topic and the history of life on Earth.

I know everyone wishes this was easy, and it probably is really easy to just go back to believing the "official establishment position on dinosaurs", but in reality that isn't logical because there are major issues with that authoritative statement, namely the lack of pertinent data to verify the claims thoroughly.

So I am forced to stick with the "wait and see, open mind, this is totally possible but not fully verified and explained" position.

When did dinosaurs live? Who knows, and I sure as heck don't trust "modern humans" from all sides of the spectrum, science, religion, etc. They are all trying to protect their belief systems and are willing to skew the story heavily to their point of view, and willing to cover up conflicting evidence... So I don't trust anyone but my own gut instinct (which tells me not to trust until complete detailed verification that resolves all discrepancies).

reply to post by boncho

Forget DC as this picture shows the type of reliable information they have:

Pretty funny how can you dismiss a whole channel.

And you follow it up by posting a picture who takes a stab at a guy who happens to believe in the AA theory.

Sure the guy may seem fanatic, but the times i´ve seen him he has made some valid points.

I have to agree with muzzleflash in this one, he put it much more eloquently than i ever could

reply to post by boncho


You posted one of the Georgio (*spelling?*) meme pics which are usually pretty funny.

And it's a great point that mixes with what I was saying about "what we don't know that we don't know".
What about aliens? See we don't know anything about them at all, most don't even believe they exist despite the overwhelming clues indicating that possibility is statistically reasonable.

What do aliens have to do with the human-dinosaur controversy? We don't even know what possible connections there might be, if any at all. No one really knows definitively the answers to many of these questions.

Aliens are like a wildcard in this equation, it can change everything drastically. The story can be rewritten in countless ways, all hosts of explanations become viable in that instance.

Did aliens create all life on Earth? Or did they arrive later on, say 200,000yrs ago, and merely intervene in the genetics of a natural ecosystem? Or did none of this occur?

Who knows...
But I do know one thing, humans don't know for sure yet.

Just one more example of muddying the waters so the real truth gets buried under a mountain of excrement.

If something legitimate surfaces, discredit it. Then put out a fake story with the intention of it being discredited, to do even more damage to the original story you discredited. Same old tired game. Over and over and over. But it works every damn time.

The truth is out there, but we'll most likely never be privy to more than a smidgen of it here and there mixed with the aforementioned pile of manure.

reply to post by muzzleflash


There's a difference between people doing scientific research and people marketing ideas and selling them to the masses. DC does not endorse or back claims of the hustlers they are on the channel, but at the same time, they are willing to air it. For the ones that are making money off their own creations, they are preying on the want and need of some to believe in the extraordinary.

It's a fun an fine for something to spark your imagination on the weekend, but it's not meant to be taken as factual. Because it isn't. Half of it is insinuation and rhetorical questions, designed for the reader/viewer to come to a suggested conclusion. Yet I will not take that as evidence of how the world is, for good reason.

I like Sara Ross' overview on Ica Stones., she links a number of sites and gives a breakdown on their opinion of the stones.

Her quote of another site sums it up:

-This article systematically considers both points of view in analyzing whether the Ica Stones are authentic or a hoax but eventually concludes they are a hoax but in need of more scientific research to put the matter to rest.