The Oldest Religious Structures & Ancient Aliens?

[Lothian]

People underestimate what can be acheived with simple tools such as levers, Pulleys, wheels and whips.

 

[edge]

Legends
Some cities which are considered lost are (or may be) places of legend such as the Arthurian Camelot, Russian Kitezh, Lyonesse, the Seven Cities of Gold, El Dorado, and Atlantis. Others, such as Troy and Bjarmaland, having once been considered legendary, are now known to have existed.

Maybe it's time to listen to the more than 600 ancient flood myths from around the world. Whether they tell of Manu in India or Noah in the Bible, the myths say civilization was created by the survivors of a former urban civilizations destroyed by great floods.
But new scientific discoveries have rewritten our understanding of the past. We now know the world's sea level rose by 400 ft as the continental icecaps melted. Science raises the possibility that the flood myths were right and civilizations could have been drowned at the end of the Ice Age and now lies on the seabed.

This site is part of Dharma Universe LLC websites. Copyrighted 2009-2011, Dharma Universe.

http://www.hvk.org/articles/0102/137.html


So here’s two right off the Indians west coast.

This article on the incredibly ancient sunken city recently found off the gulf of Cambay in India
According to the news releases, they have done a radiocarbon testing on a piece of wood from the underwater site that is now yielding an age of 9,500 years which would place it near the end of the last Ice Age.

http://www.hermetics.org/cambay.html

North Queensland marine researchers have opened a window into the past by exposing ancient mangrove forests entombed beneath the Great Barrier Reef.Dr Dan Alongi from the Australian Institute of Marine Science says they have unearthed 9,000-year-old mangroves in old river channels that were swamped when sea levels rose after the last ice age.He says the relic mangroves show an abrupt rise in the sea level, 20 times faster than previously thought."Material was very much intact, it didn't even have time to fully decompose when it was buried, so it does tell us that when climate change happened at least when it happened in the past it was comparatively quick," he said.

http://www.s8int.com/water21.html


ANCIENT HIGH TECHNOLOGY
--Evidence of Noah's Flood?


http://www.s8int.com/water22.html


What the ancient sand scripts of India are saying is that civilized men extended back hundreds of thousands of year back in time.
So is it possible that they made a technological leap in their sciences similar to what we are experiencing in only 5,000 years? I would like to believe at least12, 000- years since most of these sites seem to describe a flood event, which makes that myth more likely.
They also describe a war fought with exotic weaponry with fall out present at these sites were these wars were held.
????
Any thoughts?
True or not?

 

[Foster Zygote]

I believe they aren’t to the bottom of the site yet.

Do you even know what neolithic means? We have a record of the gradual increase in sophistication at the site, what do you think that digging further will uncover, an alien spacecraft?

400 tons would be difficult for any one to move let alone Stone Age peoples.

Difficult, but not impossible. Especially with lots of manpower.

Don’t know if it was quick for the Sumerians, seems to be, but what are they saying themselves?

It wasn't quick. The post you just replied to pointed out that there is a continuous record of habitation going back to neolithic culture.

Anyway it's fasinating that there are such extreams to explane it.

It's fascinating that some people feel the need to resort to extremely improbable and fantastic hypotheses to explain things because the most likely explanations apparently are not interesting enough to them.

Let me add this:
There are certain things that they could do and there are certain masonry things even we can't do, it's not just about standing obelisks.

What things? What can we not do today that we find in the construction of ancient monuments and structures? Be specific.

 

[edge]

When excavations of Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro reached the street level, they discovered skeletons scattered about the cities, many holding hands and sprawling in the streets as if some instant, horrible doom had taken place. People were just lying, unburied, in the streets of the city.

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ancientatomicwar/esp_ancient_atomic_12.htm

 

[ddt]

400 tons would be difficult for any one to move let alone Stone Age peoples.

Stonehenge isn’t that big a deal.

Let's see, Stonehenge 3 II is the phase we're mostly seeing now:

Stonehenge 3 II (2600 BC to 2400 BC)
During the next major phase of activity, 30 enormous Oligocene-Miocene sarsen stones (shown grey on the plan) were brought to the site. [...] Each standing stone was around 4.1 metres (13 ft) high, 2.1 metres (6 ft 11 in) wide and weighed around 25 tons.

Basic arithmetic says that 30 * 25 tons = 750 tons, and that's not counting the lintels.

 

[edge]

Do you even know what neolithic means? We have a record of the gradual increase in sophistication at the site, what do you think that digging further will uncover, an alien spacecraft?


Difficult, but not impossible. Especially with lots of manpower.


It wasn't quick. The post you just replied to pointed out that there is a continuous record of habitation going back to neolithic culture.


It's fascinating that some people feel the need to resort to extremely improbable and fantastic hypotheses to explain things because the most likely explanations apparently are not interesting enough to them.


What things? What can we not do today that we find in the construction of ancient monuments and structures? Be specific.

This is just a small example.

Inca walls show numerous design details that also help protect them from collapsing in an earthquake. Doors and windows are trapezoidal and tilt inward from bottom to top; corners usually are rounded; inside corners often incline slightly into the rooms; and "L"-shaped blocks often were used to tie outside corners of the structure together. These walls do not rise straight from bottom to top but are offset slightly from row to row.

The Incas never used the wheel in any practical manner. Its use in toys demonstrates that the principle was well-known to them, although it was not applied in their engineering. The lack of strong draft animals as well as terrain and dense vegetation issues may have rendered it impractical. How they moved and placed enormous blocks of stones remains a mystery, although the general belief is that they used hundreds of men to push the stones up inclined planes. A few of the stones still have knobs on them that could have been used to lever them into position; it is believed that after the stones were placed, the Incas would have sanded the knobs away, but a few were overlooked.

http://www.world-mysteries.com/mpl_8.htm

That's just some of them.

 

[Cainkane1]

As an atheist I see the existence of aliens less likely than the existence of god. I'm sure the reasons for their creation in the human mind are very similar, and therenwould be a lot more perceived evidence for god. But neither are provable, and in my opinion both about as likely as Santa Claus.

Not that I'm saying I believe there is no life anywhere else in space, like us it is quite conceivable that something somewhere has evolved, but the chances of this creature or creatures exhibiting such similarities and having the ability to cross space is pretty slim I would think.

I feel that there is more evidence for aliens than there is for gods. I mean we exist don't we? I don't feel that aliens have ever visited earth but the fact that we exist is proof that they exist or at least its very good evidence.

 

[Cainkane1]

If scientists found 5000 year old plastic and exotic blends of metals that could only be mixed in a weightless environment I'd be more apt to believe in aliens having been on earth. Impressive buildings merely show the ingenuity of man rather than a guiding race of beings from outer space.

 

[edge]

Let's see, Stonehenge 3 II is the phase we're mostly seeing now:

Basic arithmetic says that 30 * 25 tons = 750 tons, and that's not counting the lintels.

In the 12th century, Geoffrey of Monmouth included a fanciful story in his work Historia Regum Britanniae that attributed the monument's construction to Merlin.[22] Geoffrey's story spread widely, appearing in more and less elaborate form in adaptations of his work such as Wace's Norman French Roman de Brut, Layamon's Middle English Brut, and the Welsh Brut y Brenhinedd. According to Geoffrey, Merlin directed its removal from Ireland, where it had been constructed on Mount Killaraus by Giants, who brought the stones from Africa. After it had been rebuilt near Amesbury, Geoffrey further narrates how first Ambrosius Aurelianus, then Uther Pendragon, and finally Constantine III, were buried inside the ring of stones. In many places in his Historia Regum Britanniae Geoffrey mixes British legend and his own imagination; it is intriguing that he connects Ambrosius Aurelianus with this prehistoric monument as there is place-name evidence to connect Ambrosius with nearby Amesbury.
According to Geoffrey of Monmouth, the rocks of Stonehenge were healing rocks, called the Giant's dance, which giants brought from Africa to Ireland for their healing properties. Aurelius Ambrosias (5th century), wishing to erect a memorial to the 3,000 nobles, who had died in battle with the Saxons and were buried at Salisbury, chose Stonehenge (at Merlin's advice) to be their monument. So the King sent Merlin, Uther Pendragon (Arthur's father), and 15,000 knights to Ireland to retrieve the rocks. They slew 7,000 Irish but, as the knights tried to move the rocks with ropes and force, they failed. Then Merlin, using "gear" and skill, easily dismantled the stones and sent them over to Britain, where Stonehenge was dedicated. Shortly after, Aurelius died and was buried within the Stonehenge monument, or "The Giants' Ring of Stonehenge".
In another legend of Saxons and Britons, in 472 the invading king Hengist invited Brythonic warriors to a feast, but treacherously ordered his men to draw their weapons from concealment and fall upon the guests, killing 420 of them. Hengist erected the stone monument—Stonehenge—on the site to show his remorse for the deed.[23]

Giants so far separated from the Middle East, from your link?

I found this also.
http://www.accuracyingenesis.com/adam.html

 

[edge]

I feel that there is more evidence for aliens than there is for gods. I mean we exist don't we? I don't feel that aliens have ever visited earth but the fact that we exist is proof that they exist or at least its very good evidence.

But they are discribing the Gods as coming from the heavens.
We would call them aliens today.

And you say:

Cainkane1 If scientists found 5000 year old plastic and exotic blends of metals that could only be mixed in a weightless environment I'd be more apt to believe in aliens having been on earth. Impressive buildings merely show the ingenuity of man rather than a guiding race of beings from outer space.

The evedience is what it is, and maybe they were only permited to do what they did and this is only coming to light at this time for a certain reason.

There were factions described as benevolent and malevolent.
Who knows where they would have went if not stopped.

 

[ddt]

Giants so far separated from the Middle East, from your link?

You excised out the section heading "Arthurian legend" and conveniently overlooked the word "fanciful". And so what if it's from "my link" - it's an encyclopedia entry, so it includes all aspects of the monument, as well the hard cold facts how much the stones weigh, as the legends spun around it throughout history. You seem unable to separate those categories "facts" and "myth".

Really, edge, I'm confused about this thread. What is the purpose? A few thoughts have crossed my mind.

1) You want to show us with your links how many nutters are out there who lack the utter imagination how ancient humans could have made those constructions with simple wooden and stone tools.

2) You're channelling Von Däniken and you now are convinced that the Gods were actually aliens.

3) You're still convinced God exists and that he visited Earth in alien form.

But you don't seriously argue that all those structures were not man-made, do you?

 

[Foster Zygote]

This is just a small example.


http://www.world-mysteries.com/mpl_8.htm

That's just some of them.

Edge, I asked you to specifically point to construction that we cannot achieve today. You have failed to do this. In fact, what you have linked to points to the Inca having built their monuments using manpower and simple machines like ramps and levers.

 

[Foster Zygote]

If scientists found 5000 year old plastic and exotic blends of metals that could only be mixed in a weightless environment I'd be more apt to believe in aliens having been on earth. Impressive buildings merely show the ingenuity of man rather than a guiding race of beings from outer space.

This is what gets me. It's like a case of modernist chauvinism, an assumption that earlier humans were too simple and dumb to have built things that are still impressive thousands of years later. It shows a complete failure to grasp the fact that these people had the same brains we have today and that many of their cultures were highly complex and organized. Proposing aliens as the source of these monuments is an insult to the achievements of those people.

 

[Foster Zygote]

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ancientatomicwar/esp_ancient_atomic_12.htm

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/22284e0c72ce7f104.jpg[/qimg]

There were just 37 skeletons found at the site. There is no ancient nuclear weapon.

"It is an absolute lie that bodies littered the streets of these ruins. There isn’t a shred of evidence of an instantaneous mass death, as evidenced in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Some of these skeletons were actually buried at different ground level, pointing to different periods of time. In case of an instantaneous death, it is impossible to happen. There isn’t any evidence of any major war or invasion."

 

[caniswalensis]

This is what gets me. It's like a case of modernist chauvinism, an assumption that earlier humans were too simple and dumb to have built things that are still impressive thousands of years later. It shows a complete failure to grasp the fact that these people had the same brains we have today and that many of their cultures were highly complex and organized. Proposing aliens as the source of these monuments is an insult to the achievements of those people.

Good point,

Also, without direct evidence of an alien precence, it is unnecessary to hypothesize about them to explain the structures we see.

Razor cuts Alien.

 

[Dancing David]

The Idea is that there was a greater purpose besides mining but what ever it was it had to be cost effective.
Don't know, but it depends on how you see all this and if the true God is involved and what the legends are. If you leave God out then the reason goes somewhere else as in genetic acceleration.

It's what they said it was all about wherever there are recordings about these sites.
If you ask a local in Northern California why the aliens show up in that region they will tell you they are getting natural resources, or mining.

When they see, you’re shocked about it, they will say don’t be, it happens all the time.
The weird part about that area and the Mount Shasta area is…they are right to an extent, been there and seen that.

I tried translating this on Google, into Dutch and back it still makes no sense:

The idea is that a larger purpose in addition to mining, but what ever it was it was cost effective.
Do not know, but it depends on how you do it and if it were God is involved and what the legends. If you are God then why go anywhere else as genetic acceleration.

That's what they said it was all about, where recordings of these sites.
If you are a local in Northern California to see why the aliens in that region, they will tell you they are natural resources, mining or receive.

If they see you're shocked, they say not to be, it happens all the time.
The strange part about that area and the Mount Shasta area ... They are right to some extent, been there and seen that

 

[Maddparrot]

I tried translating this on Google, into Dutch and back it still makes no sense:

I think what he is saying that is you do not think there is a god, you have to think that aliens helped accelerate human evolution.
In other words, changing goddidit to aliensdidit.
I think he goes on to say that the aliens were interested in mining and we should see that as normal.
The thing he does not get is that we do not think mankind needed any outside help evolving.
There is no proof showing aliens ever visited this planet.

 

[Dinwar]

edge, you posted a picture drawn in the Middle Ages as evidence for giants. That's simply rediculous, and shows you know very little about ancient cultures. The issue is that in the Middle Ages, scale wasn't widely used--I have books showing known humans, who's bones we have, as large as castles. And by "pictures" I mean "page after page of pictures". It as a common style, and as much evidence for giants as differences in perspective in early monster movies is! If you can't get THAT right, something which is trivially easy to uncover, I feel safe in assuming the rest of your archaeological "knowledge" is crap as well.

This is what gets me. It's like a case of modernist chauvinism

It's not "a case", it's a textbook example. edge hasn't bothered to learn what the stuff they were working with IS, let alone what technology they had. They're ancient, therefore they're stupid, and because he (edge) can't do something neither could they.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Allow me, if I may, to answer your question with a question, or rather a series of them.

Which, in your estimation, requires greater skill: To draw a single ovoid shape to represent the frontal view of the human face, and fill it with symbolic pictures of facial features which were developed by another artist prior to your time, and which you have been trained to emulate, regardless of the rules of perspective or the basic facts of human individuality...

... or to draw an accurate portrait of a real human face, with all its unique features and proportions, each with millimetric distinctions in their shape and position compared to other faces, in correct perspective with the background, and utilizing the technique of chiaroscuro to render light and shadow according to the reality before your eyes?

Please answer, and I'll respond in full, though surely you can see where this is headed.

And the same was said of Turner, Pre Raphaelites, Impressionists, Van Gogh, Expressionists, the Surrealists, Cubists, Bauhaus, De Stijl etc etc.
It all comes down to your culture and what you are representing.

This is very off topic for the subject at hand though, sorry for the hijack.

 

[Andy_Ross]

There used to be a guy on the old Usenet sci.skeptic group I think it was back in the 90s used to argue that Ancient Egypt had high technology but it all got Recycled by the inhabitants before they all left for wherever they went so there aren't any old TV sets, razor blades etc left to find. What we think of as the Egyptians just used a pre existing site.

What I liked was his idea that the complete lack of evidence was the evidence.