Megalyths and ancient advanced technology
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-09-2017, 09:20 AM
RE: Megalyths and ancient advanced technology
(17-09-2017 06:38 AM)Banjo Wrote:  I should have said the word developed.

I'm tired.

Dude, it's cool. I enjoy get stuck in 30 minute long Wiki-holes. Wink

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like EvolutionKills's post
17-09-2017, 11:37 AM
RE: Megalyths and ancient advanced technology
They actually told us how they did it.
http://www.history.com/news/egypts-oldes...nstruction
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/an...180956619/

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
18-09-2017, 05:57 AM
RE: Megalyths and ancient advanced technology
Why do people keep questioning the pyramids when something like the Colosseum in Rome, is just as huge/complex, but you get nobody moaning about that? Is it the shape? Do people get sucked into the triangles and the whole "WHAT DOES IT ALL MEAN" bullshit?

The Helpful Atheist - An Information Blog
Last updated: 08/11/2017 - Want to contribute, drop me a PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-09-2017, 07:18 AM (This post was last modified: 18-09-2017 07:22 AM by morondog.)
RE: Megalyths and ancient advanced technology
(17-09-2017 11:37 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  They actually told us how they did it.
http://www.history.com/news/egypts-oldes...nstruction
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/an...180956619/

Wow. Thanks so much for the links Smile That was helluva interesting. I'm almost OK to forgive DeltaBravo for being such a dingbat, since he started the thread which led you to post this... Almost.

ETA: Jesus Christ Facepalm the comments sections are inhabited by DB clones Dodgy

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
19-09-2017, 01:17 PM
RE: Megalyths and ancient advanced technology
(18-09-2017 07:18 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(17-09-2017 11:37 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  They actually told us how they did it.
http://www.history.com/news/egypts-oldes...nstruction
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/an...180956619/

Wow. Thanks so much for the links Smile That was helluva interesting. I'm almost OK to forgive DeltaBravo for being such a dingbat, since he started the thread which led you to post this... Almost.

ETA: Jesus Christ Facepalm the comments sections are inhabited by DB clones Dodgy

Hey!

I didn't create these theories. I just read them. The internet and Youtube is flooded with channels about ancient technology these days. When I was a kid, back in the 60's it was commonly accepted that the world was about 4000 years old, based on the timeline of the Old Testament. Dinosaurs were an inconvenient fact which people didn't talk much about and nothing was taught about them in any course I took at school.

At university, in undergrad, our student newspaper had a running debate between creationists and evolutionists and it was not unusual for students in science courses to write letters to the editor citing geological findings which they said debunked evolution.

Here's an example of the sort "scientific" evidence put forward:

Robinson31 claimed that overthrusts are based on geophysical evidence and not out-of-order fossils. This is true for some, but the Lewis overthrust in Montana and Alberta (figures 9–11) was identified based on fossils. In the Lewis “overthrust”, Precambrian rocks supposedly slid tens of kilometers eastward up a low slope over “Cretaceous” rocks. There is a 900 Ma out-of-order time gap at the Lewis “overthrust”, and this time gap was first based on out-of-order fossils. Bailey Willis32 first hypothesized the “overthrust” in 1902 after he found “Precambrian crustacean shells” in the upper block above the “Cretaceous” strata. The Lewis Overthrust may or may not be a true overthrust, but the determination should be made by geological and geophysical methods and not by fossils.
https://creation.com/geologic-column-global-sequence

The point is that this type of view is still prevalent, and I didn't spend the next 30 or 40 years of my life looking into ancient history or archaeology so the advent of the internet and all these people with their channels on Youtube about ancient technology is something I only came across or thought about in the past...couple of months.

In Suetonius' "The Twelve Caesars", one of the Caesars (I'd have to hunt for the page) is approached by a builder with a proposal to use a piece of machinery he has designed to move very large stones but the proposal is rejected by the Caesar because the method used at the time, ie., laborers, created jobs and he didn't want to upset workers by using the machine.

My view of all this is that there may have been technologies which the ancients employed which most people don't know about. There's no doubt at all that the Romans used concrete, something I had no inkling of until a year or so ago. They could also move very large blocks of stone. They could also cut straight lines in rock. None of this justifies "alien visitation" theories.

As for pyramid building, my guess is that the wealth of the Egypt relates to its geographic location between the Red Sea and the Mediterranean and the possibility that there were canals connecting the two. This placed them at the center of trade between East and West. One way of spreading the wealth and keeping control of the population was to use religion to deify the leaders and to pay people to construct pyramids to glorify the Pharoahs and spread the wealth. I've never had any issue with the idea that the pyramids were build using carved blocks of stone. Neither would I be particularly upset if someone proved scientifically that some of the blocks were poured in situ. I don't have anything invested in either theory.

Beyond that, I don't have anything useful to add to the conversation. I do find it odd to read theories that the pyramids were some kind of electric generation stations or nuclear power plants. I have no idea how or why people come up with these ideas.

Some of the supporters of these theories point to the shafts in the pyramids and suggest they resemble the construction of nuclear power plants.

I also came across another explanation of one of the shafts, one of which at a certain time of the year pointed towards a star representing Isis. Apparently, so the theory goes, the Pharoah would have a golden Phallus strapped on, lie down in the central chamber of the pyramid and point the phallus up the shaft to impregnate Isis.

I don't believe or disbelieve this but, given the smutty nature of Egyptian religion and society I suppose I would "prefer" this explanation to the power plant theories. But then, I have a smutty mind myself.

I do, however, think that the ancients were more advanced than we give them credit for and that "civilization" is much older than most people think. I'd like to get some idea of how old civilization is. That was the purpose of this thread, not to put forward any particular theory, none of which I have any particular preference for (apart from the golden phallus of course...lol)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2017, 02:11 PM
RE: Megalyths and ancient advanced technology
Ever considered spending your time on non-shit topics?
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Gawdzilla's post
19-09-2017, 02:18 PM (This post was last modified: 19-09-2017 02:44 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Megalyths and ancient advanced technology
(19-09-2017 01:17 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  
(18-09-2017 07:18 AM)morondog Wrote:  Wow. Thanks so much for the links Smile That was helluva interesting. I'm almost OK to forgive DeltaBravo for being such a dingbat, since he started the thread which led you to post this... Almost.

ETA: Jesus Christ Facepalm the comments sections are inhabited by DB clones Dodgy

Hey!

I didn't create these theories. I just read them. The internet and Youtube is flooded with channels about ancient technology these days. When I was a kid, back in the 60's it was commonly accepted that the world was about 4000 years old, based on the timeline of the Old Testament. Dinosaurs were an inconvenient fact which people didn't talk much about and nothing was taught about them in any course I took at school.

At university, in undergrad, our student newspaper had a running debate between creationists and evolutionists and it was not unusual for students in science courses to write letters to the editor citing geological findings which they said debunked evolution.

Here's an example of the sort "scientific" evidence put forward:

Robinson31 claimed that overthrusts are based on geophysical evidence and not out-of-order fossils. This is true for some, but the Lewis overthrust in Montana and Alberta (figures 9–11) was identified based on fossils. In the Lewis “overthrust”, Precambrian rocks supposedly slid tens of kilometers eastward up a low slope over “Cretaceous” rocks. There is a 900 Ma out-of-order time gap at the Lewis “overthrust”, and this time gap was first based on out-of-order fossils. Bailey Willis32 first hypothesized the “overthrust” in 1902 after he found “Precambrian crustacean shells” in the upper block above the “Cretaceous” strata. The Lewis Overthrust may or may not be a true overthrust, but the determination should be made by geological and geophysical methods and not by fossils.
https://creation.com/geologic-column-global-sequence

The point is that this type of view is still prevalent, and I didn't spend the next 30 or 40 years of my life looking into ancient history or archaeology so the advent of the internet and all these people with their channels on Youtube about ancient technology is something I only came across or thought about in the past...couple of months.

In Suetonius' "The Twelve Caesars", one of the Caesars (I'd have to hunt for the page) is approached by a builder with a proposal to use a piece of machinery he has designed to move very large stones but the proposal is rejected by the Caesar because the method used at the time, ie., laborers, created jobs and he didn't want to upset workers by using the machine.

My view of all this is that there may have been technologies which the ancients employed which most people don't know about. There's no doubt at all that the Romans used concrete, something I had no inkling of until a year or so ago. They could also move very large blocks of stone. They could also cut straight lines in rock. None of this justifies "alien visitation" theories.

As for pyramid building, my guess is that the wealth of the Egypt relates to its geographic location between the Red Sea and the Mediterranean and the possibility that there were canals connecting the two. This placed them at the center of trade between East and West. One way of spreading the wealth and keeping control of the population was to use religion to deify the leaders and to pay people to construct pyramids to glorify the Pharoahs and spread the wealth. I've never had any issue with the idea that the pyramids were build using carved blocks of stone. Neither would I be particularly upset if someone proved scientifically that some of the blocks were poured in situ. I don't have anything invested in either theory.

Beyond that, I don't have anything useful to add to the conversation. I do find it odd to read theories that the pyramids were some kind of electric generation stations or nuclear power plants. I have no idea how or why people come up with these ideas.

Some of the supporters of these theories point to the shafts in the pyramids and suggest they resemble the construction of nuclear power plants.

I also came across another explanation of one of the shafts, one of which at a certain time of the year pointed towards a star representing Isis. Apparently, so the theory goes, the Pharoah would have a golden Phallus strapped on, lie down in the central chamber of the pyramid and point the phallus up the shaft to impregnate Isis.

I don't believe or disbelieve this but, given the smutty nature of Egyptian religion and society I suppose I would "prefer" this explanation to the power plant theories. But then, I have a smutty mind myself.

I do, however, think that the ancients were more advanced than we give them credit for and that "civilization" is much older than most people think. I'd like to get some idea of how old civilization is. That was the purpose of this thread, not to put forward any particular theory, none of which I have any particular preference for (apart from the golden phallus of course...lol)

I actually have also noticed lately how much of 'thing' what you're describing is on YouTube. Wow. Scary. SO many dingy people who mostly all say "Wow that's amazing, they must have had help from aliens", or the equivalent. So yea, I do get how much crazy is out there, I have to stay away from YouTube, to keep my sanity, or what's left of it. The phallus thing did play a part in the annual celebration (as I remember) of the Egyptian creation myth. I don't remember much about it, or which temple(s) celebrated it .. there are wall paintings in one of the temples concerning it. But, the thing you are right-on about, is the positioning of the shafts. I think astronomers have corrected for precession, and figured out which stars the shafts were aligned with, and their significance. In fact the placement/positioning of the three Giza pyramids reflects the positions of the stars in Orion's belt, in the night sky, according to some.
http://www.math.nus.edu.sg/aslaksen/gem-...page02.htm
http://www.ancientegyptonline.co.uk/pyra...hafts.html

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2017, 03:47 PM
RE: Megalyths and ancient advanced technology
Wally Wallington

--
Dr H

"So, I became an anarchist, and all I got was this lousy T-shirt."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-09-2017, 04:54 AM
RE: Megalyths and ancient advanced technology
(19-09-2017 01:17 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  I do, however, think that the ancients were more advanced than we give them credit for and that "civilization" is much older than most people think. I'd like to get some idea of how old civilization is. That was the purpose of this thread, not to put forward any particular theory, none of which I have any particular preference for (apart from the golden phallus of course...lol)

Do you have any reason to disagree with the findings of archaeologists? What "most people" think is hardly something to worry about. What experts think is what's important. All this crap of alien visitations, or claims that e.g. Egyptians had access to super advanced technology - if it's not backed by actual published science, but propounded by wild-eyed nutcases (like Ralph Ellis, I know you like him but he's a charlatan), then it's irrelevant.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-09-2017, 05:25 AM
RE: Megalyths and ancient advanced technology
(19-09-2017 01:17 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  I do, however, think that the ancients were more advanced than we give them credit for and that "civilization" is much older than most people think.

In terms of people, I do also agree that people where more intelligent than we might think they were, although I'm not sure this is a new thought process these days. Various pieces of evidence show that some people of the ancient world were capable of MANY amazing things, if only slightly held back by common knowledge/known materials of their time.

In terms of how old the world/civilization is, I agree with the consensus on that, as various methods have been used for dating. As with only study, if a proof/evidence where to arise to change our thought process on that, we'd probably all agree as well. But until that time, we have no real evidence to back that up, and only what we currently know in terms of how old things are, which is what I'll stick with.

The Helpful Atheist - An Information Blog
Last updated: 08/11/2017 - Want to contribute, drop me a PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: