Michael Shermer vs. "alternative history" Hancock and Crandall

[Craig B]

MY evidence...? I have not been to, or studied GT.

Nor is that the timeline the video discusses.

Please address the actual evidence presented here for discussion, and leave 'me' out of your rebuttal.

Leqve "you" out of a rebuttal of this?

Good grief...seriously, get a helmet. I am concerned for your safety..

Is this another of your jokes?

 

[King of the Americas]

Leqve "you" out of a rebuttal of this? Is this another of your jokes?

Address the video's timeline, not your problem with my posts.

 

[Craig B]

Address the video's timeline, not your problem with my posts.

You're just being silly now. I will address you about problems with your posts if I want, or refer them to the mods if I choose to do so.

You have mentioned the Precolumbian site at Tiwanaku^WP. We are told that

The name by which Tiwanaku was known to its inhabitants may have been lost as they had no written language. The ancient inhabitants of Tiwanaku are believed to have spoken the Puquina language.​

With regard to Puma Punku^WP We are informed that it is a

large temple complex or monument group that is part of the Tiwanaku Site near Tiwanaku, in western Bolivia. It is believed to date to 536 AD and later​

which makes it about the same age as Hagia Sophia in Constantinople, not from the Ice Age.

Now what is your source for your ice age timeline? Tell me what it is, and why you think it is important, in your own words. I never sit down and watch videos because posters tell me I should. What is there that makes you believe the video, or book, or journal, or whatever your source happens to be? That's what I require to know.

 

[King of the Americas]

...

Now what is your source for your ice age timeline? Tell me what it is, and why you think it is important, in your own words. I never sit down and watch videos because posters tell me I should. What is there that makes you believe the video, or book, or journal, or whatever your source happens to be? That's what I require to know.

The video that began this thread.

*How can we discuss information that you refuse to review???

 

[Hans]

I don't know anything about those stones, their make up, or design.

Maybe you could tell me what kind of stone it was, then I could say what would be required to form or shape it.

Really, then why did you make these statements?

These cuts were NOT carved with chisels...

Not Puma Punku...but also NOT carved with stone chisels...

I can state with absolute certainty, that the cuts I posted were not carved with bronze and copper, or stone chisels.

Whatever process or tools that shaped the stones at Puma Punku, are gone, lost to time.

The stones were NOT carved or fashioned by people without a written language.

lol

So in your statements you seem to be pretending that you DO know all about these stones - but now you don't? Tsk tsk.

The first one, is quite famous. If someone who is flouncing about making authoritative statements about Puma Punku stonework and doesn't recognize it immediately is - clearly not the expert they are pretending. The second image is of the quarry where said stones came from. Again not knowing that makes one believe you are a fellow here not for information and a discussion but instead;

A gnarly fellow who lives under a bridge and likes to waste other peoples time.

You also did not address your being wrong about how Troy was found, by Calvert not the other more famous guy.

Wanna give me a reason to continue this discussion or should I just wave goodbye to the fellow sulking under said bridge?

 

[Tolls]

The video that began this thread.

*How can we discuss information that you refuse to review???

Because You Tube vids are a pain in the arse to deal with on a point by point basis.

That's why, in general, it is preferable to provide written sources.
Or argue your own point.

 

[Craig B]

The video that began this thread.

*How can we discuss information that you refuse to review???

Because you can start by telling me what facts are alleged in the video and why you think the source is trustworthy.

I find this often. Very unusual ideas are evidenced by a guru on you tube. Magic energy machines and speculative archaeology are examples of subjects where videos are habitually produced by posters promoting belief in them.

But I for example would never say. "Read such and such book" without saying what it contained as evidence and why I thought it significant, and which passages are most worthy of attention. A video is not itself a source, it is a medium, and usually a very time wasting and exasperating one. With a book you can look at references on pages and paragraphs and think about what you have read. So who says what, and why should I pay attention?

 

[King of the Americas]

Because you can start by telling me what facts are alleged in the video and why you think the source is trustworthy.

I find this often. Very unusual ideas are evidenced by a guru on you tube. Magic energy machines and speculative archaeology are examples of subjects where videos are habitually produced by posters promoting belief in them.

But I for example would never say. "Read such and such book" without saying what it contained as evidence and why I thought it significant, and which passages are most worthy of attention. A video is not itself a source, it is a medium, and usually a very time wasting and exasperating one. With a book you can look at references on pages and paragraphs and think about what you have read. So who says what, and why should I pay attention?

Watch the video or review this thread for such data.

 

[King of the Americas]

Because You Tube vids are a pain in the arse to deal with on a point by point basis.

That's why, in general, it is preferable to provide written sources.
Or argue your own point.

Maybe you should take part in other discussions?

This one is intended for those who watched the attached video.

 

[Craig B]

Maybe you should take part in other discussions?

This one is intended for those who watched the attached video.

That won't work. You have to produce your argument and the evidence that sustains it, as people do when they cite written material as a source. It's not a question of not examining evidence, like people who refused to look through Galileo's telescope at the satellites of Jupiter.

If Galileo had offered them the telescope without saying how it worked, what phenomena they would see, and why Galileo thought they were significant, and why he was convinced that his optical instrument was trustworthy, then they would have been justified in telling Galileo to stick his telescope up his bum. But Galileo explained his evidence clearly and even wrote a treatise describing the whole thing.

So where is your Siderius Nuncius^WP?

Galileo's text ... includes descriptions, explanations, and theories of his observations.​

Where are these indispensable aspects of your arguments?

 

[King of the Americas]

That won't work. You have to produce your argument and the evidence that sustains it, as people do when they cite written material as a source. It's not a question of not examining evidence, like people who refused to look through Galileo's telescope at the satellites of Jupiter.

If Galileo had offered them the telescope without saying how it worked, what phenomena they would see, and why Galileo thought they were significant, and why he was convinced that his optical instrument was trustworthy, then they would have been justified in telling Galileo to stick his telescope up his bum. But Galileo explained his evidence clearly and even wrote a treatise describing the whole thing.

So where is your Siderius Nuncius^WP?

Galileo's text ... includes descriptions, explanations, and theories of his observations.​

Where are these indispensable aspects of your arguments?

My apologies sir, I have nothing further to discuss if you have not reviewed the provided material.

 

[King of the Americas]

...




lol

So in your statements you seem to be pretending that you DO know all about these stones - but now you don't? Tsk tsk.

The first one, is quite famous. If someone who is flouncing about making authoritative statements about Puma Punku stonework and doesn't recognize it immediately is - clearly not the expert they are pretending. The second image is of the quarry where said stones came from. Again not knowing that makes one believe you are a fellow here not for information and a discussion but instead;

A gnarly fellow who lives under a bridge and likes to waste other peoples time.

You also did not address your being wrong about how Troy was found, by Calvert not the other more famous guy.

Wanna give me a reason to continue this discussion or should I just wave goodbye to the fellow sulking under said bridge?

My expertise comes from my stonework, not comparative analysis of ruin sites' stone makeup.

In order to identify what tools are necessary to make a certain cut, I need to know what kind of stone it is, and what time period it is supposed to have come from.

Cutting descending squares into diorite can NOT be done with bronze, copper, or stone chisels.

 

[King of the Americas]

This stone also was not chiseled...It was cut with a very precise 'saw.'

Most likely the pedestal was carved afterwards...

 

[dudalb]

Where was Atlantis?

Way Down Below The Ocean,
Where I Want To Be
She May Be....

 

[Matthew Ellard]

I have not been to, or studied GT.

I am not saying GT was wiped out by the flood. The flood date merely shows where GT began to decline.

If you haven't studied Göbekli Tepe why are you pretending there was a magical flood there? What was the date of this magic flood?

I've carved granite with a carbide tipped chisel and diamond tipped grinding tips

The pillars of Göbekli Tepe are limestone. I can see why you are so totally confused about the construction techniques used at Göbekli Tepe. You can't identify different basic types of stone.

 

[King of the Americas]

If you haven't studied Göbekli Tepe why are you pretending there was a magical flood there? What was the date of this magic flood?

The pillars of Göbekli Tepe are limestone. I can see why you are so totally confused about the construction techniques used at Göbekli Tepe. You can't identify different basic types of stone.

You're conflating issues.

There was nothing magical about the scablands flood. I am sure many died and were displaced. It literally marks the downfall of a global civilization that made monuments that dwarf our best efforts. Take heed, we live upon a bubble.

As for actual impossible stone removal, I was referring to Puma Punku and the ruins supposedly created without a written language and copper and bronze or stone chisels. *They were not carved...

 

[Matthew Ellard]

This stone also was not chiseled...It was cut with a very precise 'saw.

You mean the rock naturally split along a flat axis like thousands of other natural rock formations?

 

[King of the Americas]

You mean the rock naturally split along a flat axis like thousands of other natural rock formations?

So,, you're the funny one...

 

[Matthew Ellard]

There was nothing magical about the scablands flood.

The Scabalands Flood was in Washington USA and happened when glaciers melted 13,000 year ago. Göbekli Tepe is in modern Turkey. You are on the wrong continent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channeled_Scablands

I am sure many died and were displaced.

Washington wasn't inhabited 13,000 year ago. Didn't you know?

Mesopotamia was over irrigated after the start of agricultural evolution and the salt tables rose and ended farming. It is from measuring the legacy minerals, archaeologists can date this. Yet these is no evidence of this at Göbekli Tepe, further indicating there was no advanced agriculture.

(The Old testament was by herders and is anti-agriculture and Lot's wife metaphorically turned into a pillar of salt for "looking back" at the over-irrigated and barren Jordan agricultural river plains.)

 

[Hans]

My expertise comes from my stonework, not comparative analysis of ruin sites' stone makeup.

In order to identify what tools are necessary to make a certain cut, I need to know what kind of stone it is, and what time period it is supposed to have come from.

Cutting descending squares into diorite can NOT be done with bronze, copper, or stone chisels.

I apologize but since you haven't read Protzen's appropriate materials on stone working you simply aren't worth talking to. Let me know when you've read that.

Wanna give me a reason to continue this discussion or should I just wave goodbye to the fellow sulking under said bridge?

You have failed to do so to my satisfaction you are downgraded to the jester of Newfoundland.