Michael Shermer vs. "alternative history" Hancock and Crandall

[King of the Americas]

In his defense, I think that "just found this place" refers to the Chilean tree plantation, not to these forums.

Not that it helps his case.

I noticed in the Atlantis/Menorah thread, KotA was very coy about being explicit about what it was he was claiming and he's not pulling the same trick, implying that he isn't really saying anything about the tree plantation in Chile.

Except he's really saying a lot.

He thinks that it's a preposterous lie that it exists as a result of a 1960s tree planting project by the Chilean government. No reason has been given for why he believes this to be a lie, apparently the idea is just prima facie absurd and should be rejected outright.

He has explicitly claimed that the tree plantation is evidence of a pre-Columbian global trade system. The reason he thinks this is because when looking at Easter Island on Google Earth, he followed a Google Earth mapping artefact created by long stretches of underwater data being higher resolution than the available data in the surrounding sea floor. Following one of these straight lines led him to this tree plantation in Chile. Therefore pre-Columbian global trade routes.

I can't figure out the logic behind this at all. It's not that I disagree with it, I just can't find a coherent argument in KotA's posts regarding the tree plantation that lead to a conclusion of pre-Columbian global trade in order to deconstruct it.

It's all very silly and getting quite pathetic.

The intellectual dishonesty exercised here is the only thing pathetic...

That tree plantation was NOT planted in the 1960's because:

-They couldn't afford it
-ALL of the pictures posted have been of fully matured trees
-There's a bombing run site right next to it, because everyone knows if you want to spend untold billions to plant and maintain a forest, you should definitely practice dropping bombs next to it.
-They're all the same age, seemingly.
-The trees weren't maintained or replanted.

I don't believe the Google Earth lines are mapping artifacts because I have used them to find other plantations and other desert grid patterns.

ETA: Okay, try this look for the spending...The government shows no signs of an increase in budgetary spending in the 1960's...

"During the 1950s inflation become a serious problem in Chile. There was a consensus that inflationary pressures rested on excessive money creation and remarkably lax fiscal policy (Edwards (1985)). Under Alessandri ́s administration, 1958-1964, a stabilization process was launched with the aim of containing inflation and reducing public spending. In 1960 and 1961, inflation declined importantly to single-digit figures, from levels of more than 30% during the previous decade (see Table 1). After 1962, however, inflation came back to its historical levels, with a fiscal deficit that, though not exorbitant, seemed to constitute a source of inflationary pressures in a context in which fiscal debt was an stable proportion of GDP (around 30%) . In subsequent years, during the Frei administration, 1964-1970, some economic reforms were undertaken. One of the first measures was to reduce the public deficit, however, in 1967 and as a consequence of political pressures, this attempt was abandoned. The Frei administration also attempted to liberalize trade, although its success was limited. As consequence of these failed reforms, towards the end of 1970, the performance of the Chilean economy was disappointing: GDP growth was 1.9% whereas inflation reached 35%. (*https://bfi.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/research/Monetary_and_Fiscal.pdf)

 

[King of the Americas]

You 'skeptics'...have become full throat swallowers.

 

[Andy_Ross]

So links to international academic documents and reports, information on similar projects in other countries using the Chilean project as a model aren't enough?

As for the bombing run. In Keilder Forest and the other man made forest areas in Cumbria and Northumberland there are several bomb ranges used by NATO. One of the forests at Spadeadam contains a mock up of an entire air base used for practice attacks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Spadeadam. They make sure the bombs land on the ranges and not at random in the forest.

 

[JesseCuster]

The intellectual dishonesty exercised here is the only thing pathetic...

That tree plantation was NOT planted in the 1960's because:

-They couldn't afford it

What would the cost have been of the tree planting project? What would the budget available to the Chilean government for the project? Unless you can provide those numbers, then this is a completely meaningless objection. There's no reason to think you are right, and given the facts in evidence, you are clearly wrong.

Have you made an attempt whatsoever to show that the Chilean government couldn't have afforded such a thing? Given your rather shoddy desperate early attempt to claim that there were billions of trees, I wouldn't believe any numbers you provided that you couldn't reliably source anyway. All you have is your own personal sense of incredulity based upon a bunch of invented facts.

-ALL of the pictures posted have been of fully matured trees

So what? Can you at least to attempt to fold this into some sort of argument instead of simply mentioning it as if it's obvious what you're implying by it?

When were the photos taken? If the photos you've seen were from decades after the trees were planted, then of course they were mature.

Have you made any attempt to look for photographs of the plantation when it was young? No, of course you haven't.

What do you think photos of young trees at the site would prove? You think the tree plantation is at least[/u] 500+ years old so what do you think photos of young trees there would prove?

Why would the trees being all the same age or you not being able to find (or more likely, not bothering to attempt to find) photos of the trees when they were young, imply that the site is of pre-Columbian age? I can't make sense of this at all.

Your objections are just a bunch of incoherent nonsense with no rationale behind them.

-There's a bombing run site right next to it, because everyone knows if you want to spend untold billions to plant and maintain a forest, you should definitely practice dropping bombs next to it.

"Untold billions" is assuming facts not in evidence. Given your hilarious attempt to estimate the number of trees planted, without facts to back you up, why should any believe you're made up "countless billions" budget for the project?

-They're all the same age, seemingly.

Given that they were planted at the same time, why wouldn't they be the same age? Again, please explain this objection because it doesn't appear to be an objection at all. Why does the trees being of the same age (and remember you've pointed out that the species has a life expectancy in mere hundreds of years) mean that the tree plantation is 500+ years old?

I don't believe the Google Earth lines are mapping artifacts because I have used them to find other plantations and other desert grid patterns.

You can find all sorts of weird **** on Google Earth without using any sort of methodology. You'll find all sorts of patterns and things in the deserts. Just look for long enough and all sorts of weird and wonderful things will reveal themselves. It has nothing to do with following lines in the sea, which are clearly not ancient "guild posts". Draw your own lines on Google Earth and follow them and you'll find interesting things that have nothing to do with the lines you've followed.

The lines you're looking at are in some cases miles wide and thousands of miles long. How (and more importantly, why) would ancient peoples have produced such epic sea floor engineering back in the day? For what possible purpose could such a thing serve? What kind of manpower and technology would be needed for such a project? This would make the pyramids seem like a kid's Lego constructions.

It's hilarious that you think your tree plantation isn't modern because the Chilean government couldn't possibly have had the budget or logistical capability, but you think that thousands of years ago people were putting miles wide and thousands of miles long constructions thousands of feet below the surface of the Pacific Ocean? Have you any idea just how ridiculous that sounds? How can you believe such nonsense while being so incredulous at a modern government doing a project that is far, far, far smaller and simpler?

ETA: Okay, try this look for the spending...The government shows no signs of an increase in budgetary spending in the 1960's...<snip>

You've shown no evidence that the cost of this project would have prohibitory. You've offered no facts or evidence to make your case, all you have is sheer naked incredulity. And it's obvious that your incredulity is simply the result of you wanting to believe that there's something mysterious or ancient about your desert tree plantation.

Why do you think the Chilean government would make up a lie about planting trees in the desert in the 1960s?

Why did no-one report that the tree plantation they pretended to have created previously exists?

Why would anyone lie about such a bizarre thing and how would they get away with such blatant nonsense?

There's all sorts of implications from what you're claiming (and despite your protests, you're most definitely making claims) but like a lot of fringists, you don't go into the implications because they will show up just how truly odd and bizarre you're claims are.

 

[King of the Americas]

So links to international academic documents and reports, information on similar projects in other countries using the Chilean project as a model aren't enough?

As for the bombing run. In Keilder Forest and the other man made forest areas in Cumbria and Northumberland there are several bomb ranges used by NATO. One of the forests at Spadeadam contains a mock up of an entire air base used for practice attacks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Spadeadam. They make sure the bombs land on the ranges and not at random in the forest.

"on similar projects in other countries"...?

Right, No.

The Chilean government COULD NOT have planted those orchards, when it is claimed to have. There is zero evidence that they could or did spend untold billions planting and watering millions of trees in the desert in the 1960's...from seeds or plants already 14-22 feet tall.

It didn't happen buddy. These artificial forests are much older than a mere 60 years.

Date this ruin, for the actual creation date of this forest:

Lat. 19°49'16.02"S
Long. 69°47'36.48"W

---

Okay, use the other google earth features, turn on EVERYTHING...roads, pictures, borders...and look at the pictures of the rock work on the ruins. Definitely NOT 1960's.

 

[StackOverflow]

You 'skeptics'...have become full throat swallowers.

The "king" has always been a habitual liar

 

[Andy_Ross]

"on similar projects in other countries"...?

Right, No.

The Chilean government COULD NOT have planted those orchards, when it is claimed to have. There is zero evidence that they could or did spend untold billions planting and watering millions of trees in the desert in the 1960's...from seeds or plants already 14-22 feet tall.

It didn't happen buddy. These artificial forests are much older than a mere 60 years.

Date this ruin, for the actual creation date of this forest:

Lat. 19°49'16.02"S
Long. 69°47'36.48"W

I posted a link to a study paper detailing similar projects in Spain that use the Chilean project as a model and even use the same trees. You obviously haven't looked at any of the links people have been providing.


As for your 'ruin' What tells you it is a ruin?
I see a rectangle of cleared ground around what could be a building or merely an enclosed area in what looks like cultivated ground.
It is alongside a modern road a short distance away from modern agricultural buildings.
It's not even close to the tree plantations. How does it say anything about their age?

Why would these plantations cost 'untold billions' to plant and maintain?
In addition the plantations have been added to and expanded since the 60s. They weren't all put in at the same time.
Do plantations around the world cost 'untold billions'?

 

[King of the Americas]

I posted a link to a study paper detailing similar projects in Spain that use the Chilean project as a model and even use the same trees. You obviously haven't looked at any of the links people have been providing.


As for your 'ruin' What tells you it is a ruin?
I see a rectangle of cleared ground around what could be a building or merely an enclosed area in what looks like cultivated ground.
It is alongside a modern road a short distance away from modern agricultural buildings.
It's not even close to the tree plantations. How does it say anything about their age?

Why would these plantations cost 'untold billions' to plant and maintain?
In addition the plantations have been added to and expanded since the 60s. They weren't all put in at the same time.
Do plantations around the world cost 'untold billions'?

I check out every link you provided. NO pictures of digging, planting, or watering seeds into saplings, or planting fully grown 14 ft tall trees in Chile in the 1960's.

If you'll zoom out and look to the surrounding area, you'll see the old support mechanisms for this orchard. There are roads with small swelling, and smaller garden plots can still be seen.

Why or How, untold "billions"...?

Do you know how much diesel it takes to plow ONE strip 12 miles long in a tractor from the 1960's? (*http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1446&context=tractormuseumlit) 17 gpm with a 48 gallon tank. One tractor's tank = 3 miles = $10-12 (?)...the tractor is a few thousand, pay a driver a day's wages. Each square requires a row every 45 feet, .61 miles long. That 144 rows multiplied by .61 = 87 miles of plowing for one square (of which there are hundreds). One tractor could plow one square is say a month, with no days off...? Do the rest of the math!

And that's just the first plowing...someone surveyed the land laying out perfectly straight rows for miles, then planters places three seeds OR fully grown trees into 'holes' and then watered until established...all to feed some goats and sheep...REALLY?

Doesn't swallowing such non-sense make you ill?

Check out the pictures of the ruins made available by Google Earth.

 

[King of the Americas]

The "king" has always been a habitual liar

Pardon me kettle...

 

[Andy_Ross]

I check out every link you provided. NO pictures of digging, planting, or watering seeds into saplings, or planting fully grown 14 ft tall trees in Chile in the 1960's.

If you'll zoom out and look to the surrounding area, you'll see the old support mechanisms for this orchard. There are roads with small swelling, and smaller garden plots can still be seen.

Why or How, untold "billions"...?

Do you know how much diesel it takes to plow ONE strip 12 miles long in a tractor from the 1960's? (*http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1446&context=tractormuseumlit) 17 gpm with a 48 gallon tank. One tractor's tank = 3 miles = $10-12 (?)...the tractor is a few thousand, pay a driver a day's wages. Each square requires a row every 45 feet, .61 miles long. That 144 rows multiplied by .61 = 87 miles of plowing for one square (of which there are hundreds). One tractor could plow one square is say a month, with no days off...? Do the rest of the math!

And that's just the first plowing...someone surveyed the land laying out perfectly straight rows for miles, then planters places three seeds OR fully grown trees into 'holes' and then watered until established...all to feed some goats and sheep...REALLY?

Doesn't swallowing such non-sense make you ill?

Check out the pictures of the ruins made available by Google Earth.

It seems everone else in the world thinks these are plantations that were started in the 60s and have been developed over the last fifty years.

Why do you assume only 14ft saplings?

At the moment for pine the seedling costs are about $25 per acre, for hardwoods it's around $60 per acre at 800 trees per acre. Planting costs are about $40 per acre on open range.

 

[Andy_Ross]

I am no longer responding to any further posts on the forests. It is a standard CT tactic to bog a losing argument down in some irrelevant specific claim that has no bearing on the main topic. See any 9/11 or Apollohoax thread.

 

[King of the Americas]

It seems everone else in the world thinks these are plantations that were started in the 60s and have been developed over the last fifty years.

Why do you assume only 14ft saplings?

At the moment for pine the seedling costs are about $25 per acre, for hardwoods it's around $60 per acre at 800 trees per acre. Planting costs are about $40 per acre on open range.

One, I am not assuming anything...

Two different links provided said two different things. The first said they were saplings, the second said they were planted as three seeds to each spot.

Two, NO SUCH SPENDING ALLOCATION APPEARS IN THE CHILEAN GOVERNMENT.

Lastly...LOOK AT THE PICTURES. Those stone ruins are not from the 1960's.

 

[JesseCuster]

Two, NO SUCH SPENDING ALLOCATION APPEARS IN THE CHILEAN GOVERNMENT.

But we all know that you have made no attempt whatsoever to look for such spending allocation. You're just assuming that such spending doesn't exist because of your oddball conclusion that this is some sort of ancient thingamajig instead of something more modern.

So how do you know that this is true? You're just making this up.

Lastly...LOOK AT THE PICTURES. Those stone ruins are not from the 1960's.

Even if this is true, then so what? An old stone ruin beside a tree plantation does not make the tree plantation the same age as the ruins. What the hell are you talking about?

Old things can exist beside new things. You've truly jumped the shark here.

 

[StackOverflow]

One, I am not assuming anything...

Lie

Two different links provided said two different things. The first said they were saplings, the second said they were planted as three seeds to each spot.

Lie

Two, NO SUCH SPENDING ALLOCATION APPEARS IN THE CHILEAN GOVERNMENT.

Lie

Lastly...LOOK AT THE PICTURES. Those stone ruins are not from the 1960's.

Lie

When did you become a full time liar?

 

[Cosmic Yak]

The "king" has always been a habitual liar

Pardon me kettle...

Please provide links to posts by StackOverflow that are lies, or admit you were wrong.
Again.

 

[Sparhafoc]

King of the Americas - are you pulling everyone's leg?

I can't see any logic behind your contentions.

You say the Chilean government couldn't afford to forest the area, but the area is clearly forested by design, and documents show that it is a well known and studied public work.

You say that 14 foot saplings couldn't have been planted, but who is saying that the saplings were 14 foot tall? Obviously, the saplings were smaller, much smaller, and have since grown.

You say that a nearby ruin somehow dates the site, but there's simply no logic in the notion that something nearby provides a date for the planting of an orchard in its locality.

I asked you before about your contention that a society couldn't cut interlocking stones without a written language, because that seems similarly lacking in any logical connection between the two parts of the claim.

So even if I were to assume you're on to something, and that you've discovered something amazing, you're still going to need to justify these contentions because they all amount to non-sequiturs.

 

[Hans]

I am no longer responding to any further posts on the forests. It is a standard CT tactic to bog a losing argument down in some irrelevant specific claim that has no bearing on the main topic. See any 9/11 or Apollohoax thread.

Yep he is trying to kill it because he was torn to pieces earlier - I am out too. I came originally when I noted a person trying to pretend to be an expert on Andean stone carving - he certainly wasn't.

Thanks to all the other folks who provided interesting information - you are wasting your time with this troll.

 

[John Jones]

Argumentum ad Caps Lock - Invalid

 

[King of the Americas]

Alright, it is times like this, that I need a batwing.

I have a theory, and partial proofs that these lines on google earth oceans, that I followed to find the initial orchard are NOT anomalies, all. Some ARE indeed more detailed scans, but others are trails that lead to inland forest resources both natural and artificial.

I'll assemble a report shortly, and create another thread to discuss my findings.

I've found natural forest management that stretches across two states, multiple artificial orchards, grid patterns laid out, that may or may not have ever been planted, and "an Atlantis"...no joke!

"Follow the lines..."

 

[John Jones]

Alright, it is times like this, that I need a batwing.

I have a theory, and partial proofs that these lines on google earth oceans, that I followed to find the initial orchard are NOT anomalies, all. Some ARE indeed more detailed scans, but others are trails that lead to inland forest resources both natural and artificial.

I'll assemble a report shortly, and create another thread to discuss my findings.

I've found natural forest management that stretches across two states, multiple artificial orchards, grid patterns laid out, that may or may not have ever been planted, and "an Atlantis"...no joke!

"Follow the lines..."

I've had a bit of clairvoyance. I see the future. you will present nothing but wild, unsupported conjecture with your typical hyperbole.