Merged Their Return

[Stray Cat]

Because, what we have at Pumu Punku is a truly Wondrous marvel, then a culture rose, and built up and around it, in a less 'Wondrous' manner, but still impressive.

If only the archaeology supported that series of events.
Why would Pumu Punku society be fundamentally different from others around at the time?
We know from archaeological digs around the world roughly how societies were built up. Establish regular food, build permanent shelter, organise workloads, build small shrines to gods. Then as time passes and conditions allow the population to expand, they expand food production to match, build bigger shelters, introduce 'management systems' because farms and other industries have grown beyond family businesses, build a bigger shrine to the gods... etc. Expanding until for various reasons, their society get's too big and out of balance so that rebellion splits it, or invasion destroys it etc. What archaeological evidence makes Pumu Punku different?

 

[carlitos]

I LOVE those kinds of games...

Within them, do the "Wonder" options become available at the beginning, or end of the gaming scenario?

Because, what we have at Pumu Punku is a truly Wondrous marvel, then a culture rose, and built up and around it, in a less 'Wondrous' manner, but still impressive.

The 'peak' is in the wrong place, here.

Or more likely, a culture rose, got its act together and built some amazing temples.

Your argument is like someone from 1000 years in the future saying "the gods built the Sears Tower, and then a city rose up around it" - which is ridiculous.







Just out of curiousity, in the following post you seem to indicate that the stones in question were made of granite (or diorite), and that they were produced in the Stone Age (before 2,000 BC). Is that still your contention?

If you CAN'T replicate this work with modern hand tools, then clearly someone back then had 'advanced technology'...

What we have in Puma Punku is something IMPOSSIBLE to make with stone age tools.

Then again, maybe I'm wrong. Pick up a stone age chisel and prove it.

My current offer remains, leave the stone age tools out of it. Carving a 90 degree angle out of granite is tough. Diorite is even harder.

 

[bruto]

Once again, it's clear from the use of bronze alloys in the hardware holding some of those stones together that the people who did this work had developed some good metallurgical skills, and were well past the stone age. Given that they did, obviously, have bronze at their disposal, it's necessary to disqualify well designed bronze tools before assuming higher technology.

 

[King of the Americas]

You have made a common mistake here. You used the word 'findings' when you meant to use the word 'opinion'.


Another common mistake. You forgot to add '...in my opinion.' And then explain why your opinion isn't based on anything pertinent.


Obviously, these works don't exist here or anywhere else then. Nor does the statue of David nor microchips.


Good, let's go get a beer then.


This describes your beliefs in a nutshell.

1.) No, I meant "findings". It is not my opinion as to how much stone is removed by 1- 5 lb swing of a hammer onto a carbide tipped chisel into a piece of granite. This is a repeatable FACT, and it doesn't matter who does it, the same result will occur.

2.) Marble is different than andesite, is ways you clearly don't get.

3.) They DO exist, they just weren't crafted with copper chisels (http://copperculture.homestead.com/). Thus these monuments were created with a now "lost technology". No one says they KNOW how these were created.

4.) You have completely missed every argument I've made...

 

[King of the Americas]

If only the archaeology supported that series of events.
Why would Pumu Punku society be fundamentally different from others around at the time?
We know from archaeological digs around the world roughly how societies were built up. Establish regular food, build permanent shelter, organise workloads, build small shrines to gods. Then as time passes and conditions allow the population to expand, they expand food production to match, build bigger shelters, introduce 'management systems' because farms and other industries have grown beyond family businesses, build a bigger shrine to the gods... etc. Expanding until for various reasons, their society get's too big and out of balance so that rebellion splits it, or invasion destroys it etc. What archaeological evidence makes Pumu Punku different?

There are two different kinds of stone and building techniques there...or did you not see?

They lacked the tools to accomplish this task. There were no other tools available to them but "copper" ones.

The andesite carvings are what make Pumu Punku different.

 

[RoboTimbo]

1.) No, I meant "findings". It is not my opinion as to how much stone is removed by 1- 5 lb swing of a hammer onto a carbide tipped chisel into a piece of granite. This is a repeatable FACT, and it doesn't matter who does it, the same result will occur.

No, you meant that this is your 'opinion': " Carving repeated descending right angles into andesite With other stones, is NOT possible, regardless of no time constraints. You would NEED hardened tools, and even armed with today's carbide tipped tools, a novice could NOT Make this:" This has been your repeated argument from ignorance throughout the thread.

2.) Marble is different than andesite, is ways you clearly don't get.

No, this is your opinion again: "That some of them were created with this same or similar lost technology."

3.) They DO exist, they just weren't crafted with copper chisels (http://copperculture.homestead.com/). Thus these monuments were created with a now "lost technology". No one says they KNOW how these were created.

See bruto's post.

4.) You have completely missed every argument I've made...

No, you simply missed my responses.

 

[King of the Americas]

...


Just out of curiousity, in the following post you seem to indicate that the stones in question were made of granite (or diorite), and that they were produced in the Stone Age (before 2,000 BC). Is that still your contention?

That is a quote from earlier in the thread.

All that anyone has found has been made of copper. Even if they managed to make bronze alloys that's only got a hardness of 3. Andesite is harder.

My contention is that we don't know how these works were done. That the technology to recreate these things, no longer exists.

 

[carlitos]

I found a really interesting story online. A team of archeologists built their own boat using designs from the Puma Punku era and successfully brought a nine ton andesite stone (as big as the one in the monolith at Puma Punku) from the quarry across lake Titicaca. All using technology that the natives would have had. They have a whole interactive dig posted online as well (unfortunately the 'captains log' is on a slow Bolivian server).

http://www.archaeology.org/interactive/tiwanaku/project/experiment.html

On edit - they planned to have a local artist carve the thing as a replica of the original. I wonder if that happened.

 

[Stray Cat]

There are two different kinds of stone and building techniques there...or did you not see?

Yes, well differing materials are another common trait of large buildings.

They lacked the tools to accomplish this task. There were no other tools available to them but "copper" ones.

We know the tools to carve stone were available in other parts of the world. Why not in this one?

The andesite carvings are what make Pumu Punku different.

Pffft... they were carving andesite in Scotland way back then.
http://heritage-key.com/britain/neo...s-andesite-and-sandstone-carved-balls-item-48

Mexico: http://www.ocregister.com/entertainment/museum-270732-resnick-fashion.html?pic=20

Easter Island (figure 58): http://www.chauvet-translation.com/figurelegends.htm

And plenty more besides.

 

[Elizabeth I]

My contention is that we don't know how these works were done. That the technology to recreate these things, no longer exists.

Are you saying that no one today could reproduce that work? If so, that's just so much ****** de toro.

e) That all sounds nice...

Why so dismissive? We know that guild organizations existed - there are records and history, and the terms "master," "journeyman" and "apprentice" are used by modern unions.

That's more than anyone except you can say for your dei ex machina.

 

[bruto]

People have been carving, riving, splitting, chipping, sawing, drilling and milling granite, andesite, basalt and all sorts of other hard rocks for millennia. The fact that KingoftheAmericas can't figure out an effective way to do it is immaterial.

What they had was not advanced technology, but advanced technique.

 

[Correa Neto]

How did they presume they completed this work?

At that elevation, the number of workers is expounded, due to the lack of oxygen at that level. How many men DOES it take to move 1 ton, vertically at that elevation? It CAN'T be the same as at sea level...

What technique did they use to surface those stones?

Stick your neck above the pool of ignorance you are sunken in to and you'll find the answers.

The quarry from where the Incas took the stones was located, there are stones in several stages of carving and removal; unfinished walls were found with stones at various stages of placement and fitting. The techniques, wich were demonstrated, by the way, were surprisingly simple and effective. Stuff of geniuses, I would say.

As for the altitude, well, here's one more example of how your ignorance cripples your extrapolations. People practice sports at that altitude. Try checking the Copa Libertadores da América, a Latin American soccer competition. All it takes is your body getting used to it. Coca leaves may also help.

So, quit that arrogant attitude of yours, start realizing you know much less than you think. Your limited experiences and poor knowledge are not enough for many extrapolations.

I'll bet they DON'T know. If ALL those stones are andesite, then there was an advanced technology at work there too. That stuff isn't soft, and take massive amount of energy to shape.

Wrong bet. All it takes to carve a material with a given hardness is another piece of material with the same hardness. So, guess what can be used to carve andesite (wich by the way is a rock composed o several minerals, each one with its own hardness)?

What it looks like was that the stones were stacked into place, within molds, then softened and smashed together like so much clay, then hardened again. THIS would indeed be an 'advanced technology', that we lack today.

This is nothing but an argument of ignorance and arrogance. YOU don't know how they could made it. YOU think it LOOKS like and this is far from being equal to "is". Stop watching woostuff and go check that documentary on Macchu Picchu.

These works are anything but 'easy' or even possible without modern/advanced technology.

Bullcrap.

Those people lived centuries ago and had no advanced technology. They were more much more skilled, intelligent and smarter than you. Deal with it.

a) I can only provide you MY findings, and encourage you to gather your own, in regards to how much time it takes to remove how much stone.

Your "findings" are nothing but the product of poor skills, ignorance and arrogance. Those guys lived hundreds of years ago and beated your skills and intelligence. Deal with it.

You say they used modern technology. Prove it. As I wrote before, each tool leaves at its product an unique signature. Show these marks. Marks produced only by modern tools such as high-velocity rotary drills with vidia bits, for example.

Ever wondered why there are no works published showing these marks?

 

[King of the Americas]

I found a really interesting story online. A team of archeologists built their own boat using designs from the Puma Punku era and successfully brought a nine ton andesite stone (as big as the one in the monolith at Puma Punku) from the quarry across lake Titicaca. All using technology that the natives would have had. They have a whole interactive dig posted online as well (unfortunately the 'captains log' is on a slow Bolivian server).

http://www.archaeology.org/interactive/tiwanaku/project/experiment.html

On edit - they planned to have a local artist carve the thing as a replica of the original. I wonder if that happened.

Moving stone, and shaping it are two very different endeavors...

If you can show me a team replicating one of those stones with period tools, then you'll have won the argument here.

This is irrelevant.

 

[King of the Americas]

Yes, well differing materials are another common trait of large buildings.


We know the tools to carve stone were available in other parts of the world. Why not in this one?


Pffft... they were carving andesite in Scotland way back then.
http://heritage-key.com/britain/neo...s-andesite-and-sandstone-carved-balls-item-48

Mexico: http://www.ocregister.com/entertainment/museum-270732-resnick-fashion.html?pic=20

Easter Island (figure 58): http://www.chauvet-translation.com/figurelegends.htm

And plenty more besides.

The sandstones were/are the large, more ornately carved stones, while the andesite ones are the ones shaped with the flat, 90 degree angled descending squares, with like 40 faces per stone.

ALL of the tools from the period wherein your balls were created, in the Americas, were copper. NO other harder, more capable tools have been found.

The cuts on your balls could be made with a flexible twine, water, and sand.

I DON'T know how you make a square cut the same size: http://www.paleoseti.com/bilder/pumapunku/Puma Punku011.jpg

In short your balls are no match for Puma Punku master masonry: http://www.coasttocoastam.com/cimag...-US/Puma-Punku-Stone-Carving_photo_medium.jpg

*I sure mentioned your balls a lot in that retort, but I'd just like to add that they were not at all impressive.

 

[carlitos]

In short your balls are no match for Puma Punku master masonry:

In a nutshell, there is your entire argument.

 

[Marduk]

ALL of the tools from the period wherein your balls were created, in the Americas, were copper. NO other harder, more capable tools have been found.

Those same stone blocks youre taking about were held together with "bronze I clamps", this I ascertain is some kind of evidence that they had more than copper technology.

 

[Stray Cat]

*I sure mentioned your balls a lot in that retort, but I'd just like to add that they were not at all impressive.

I don't remember presenting my balls as evidence...

You ignore two facts:
1. I provided three examples (from many available), the other two show more detailed carving.
2. Your contention is that such hard rock could not be carved without advanced technology and yet in the three examples I provided, hard rock has been carved without advanced technology.

This Egyptian andesite jug carved and hollowed out, shows the level of expertise from 2920-2649 BC
http://www.christies.com/LotFinder/lot_details.aspx?pos=6&intObjectID=4821472&sid=

How could they get a chisel into that and hollow it out without advanced technology?

 

[carlitos]

I've been following the thread, and I think it's because KotA's incredulity on the Egyptian stuff is due to moving stone (every nine seconds...), while his incredulity on Puma Punku is due to carving stone (right angles!!1!1!). It can be tough to follow his logic, though.

ETA - Personally, I don't find it hard to believe that, 3,000 years after the Eqyptians did, the Inka figured out how to carve hard stone. Then again, I'm trying to think logically about this, and not presume that other cultures are stupid.

 

[King of the Americas]

Stick your neck above the pool of ignorance you are sunken in to and you'll find the answers.

...

Bullcrap.

Those people lived centuries ago and had no advanced technology. They were more much more skilled, intelligent and smarter than you. Deal with it.



Your "findings" are nothing but the product of poor skills, ignorance and arrogance. Those guys lived hundreds of years ago and beated your skills and intelligence. Deal with it.

You say they used modern technology. Prove it. As I wrote before, each tool leaves at its product an unique signature. Show these marks. Marks produced only by modern tools such as high-velocity rotary drills with vidia bits, for example.

Ever wondered why there are no works published showing these marks?

They beated our skills and intelligence, but weren't advanced.

We just got dumber?

I said the job couldn't be done with period tools.

*I have seen no study of these rocks for tool marks. Have you?

 

[carlitos]

You may notice that, in 2011, university graduates in the US don't speak Latin or read Greek, like they did 200 years ago. Did we get dumber, or do we just not place a premium on those skills anymore?