Why is there so much crackpot physics?

The one I like goes like this:

1) Humans reached the continent
2) All the megabeasts went extinct
3) Why?
4) Climate change
 
dafydd said:
Degree course? I am a layman with an interest in physics and even I can spot his lack of knowledge.
Click to expand...

Sure. I was just relating one or two specific things he said to the period in my personal history when I would have known they were definitely wrong. I wasn't claiming there wasn't even easier stuff he got wrong, or that a laymen with an interest couldn't spot his errors.
 
dasmiller said:
For my own curiousity, could you have done it? Suppose that some local king/baron/whatever said, "You're in charge. I want this project done within the next 20 years. You have 1000 of the best craftsmen, thinkers, laborers, whatever you need, and you have them for the next 20 years. You can even take a couple of years to plan it, and to run tests with various techniques for cutting and moving the blocks, and you'll have the full 1000 of our best men for those years of experiments.

But if you don't get it done, I'll torture and kill your daughters." (I have no idea whether you have daughters, but it seemed like a compelling thing to threaten).

Would you have thrown up your hands and said, "It can't be done?" 1000 skilled laborers, 20 years, and your daughters killed if you don't succeed. Do you think you might have found a way to do it?
Click to expand...

LOL, U R askng what I have asked this forum as a entire whole. My answer is clearly OF COURSE, if I has access to the the tech used!!!

Maybe those who have interest should move on from this site alone (this thread alone) and start to research Coral Castle made in the 1900's by only one weak person. I warned not only in this branch of science, but in many BTW, scientists lacking of answers to questions and logical explainations stemming from what can be seen and proven, would give rise and profit to those promoting 'crackpot psysics'. These examples are but a few proofs of this.
 
tedlazer said:
LOL, U R askng what I have asked this forum as a entire whole. My answer is clearly OF COURSE, if I has access to the the tech used!!!

Maybe those who have interest should move on from this site alone (this thread alone) and start to research Coral Castle made in the 1900's by only one weak person. I warned not only in this branch of science, but in many BTW, scientists lacking of answers to questions and logical explainations stemming from what can be seen and proven, would give rise and profit to those promoting 'crackpot psysics'. These examples are but a few proofs of this.
Click to expand...

Lolwhut? What point are you trying to make? Your post does not make sense.
 
tedlazer said:
Address the second post on page 17 David. Not sure what are talking about.
we are talking not about 4500 years hear but 11000. Thanks
Click to expand...

Oh so you still don't read carefully?

Address the fact that stone tools can be used to shape wood and the like, all it takes to move large stones is rollers and ropes.

I was pointing out the fact that for at least 50 years it is know that civilization did not arise in europe, so any statements that 'the conventional view of the rise of civilization' are false. The knowledge of Catal Hyuk goes back even more than 50 years.
 
Kid Eager said:
I really don't understand the claim being made here. I've read several articles regarding the site, and yes, it does suggest the previous timelines are not correct or incomplete for the spread of civilisations and so forth.

The articles do not however, propose unknown science or physics. Again, a relevant link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Göbekli_Tepe
Click to expand...
Yes the site is an interesting location because it appears to be a transitional one, where the process of changing from nomadic hunter/gatherers to settled agricultural/pastoral practices began. In fact some archaeologists think the creation of the site began organised agriculture in the area to supply the workforce. The implications for our knowledge of early human history, the Neolithic Revolution and the development of civilisation are significant.
Or course the kooks will continue to claim that neolithic humans couldn't have created the site, but real archaeologists disagree.
 
Perpetual Student said:
The archaeological site in question provides insights into mankind"s history. As the wiki article states:
That's it. The crackpot archeology I referred to were your naive comments. To conjecture mysterious lost technology, mysterious forces, gods, whatever is crackpot. Your comment that, "The tools did not exist to build this site 11000 years ago as far as we understand." is patently crackpot since -- obviously -- the site was built, so the tools did exist. Genuine scientific inquiry will eventually tell us more about this site and its implications and provide scientifically based conjectures as to what tools were used. Trying to make it all mysterious and woo is crackpot!
By the way, learn how to spell or use spellcheck.
Click to expand...


Sad that it's allowed to use wiki a source here. Fine you have reversed you stance on using the 'known tech' for the creation of the site (or just to continue ignoring it) congrads! Don't forget after the now 'missing link tools' are found in order to prove your 'theory' you still need to account for the quarring the rock from miles away weighing 12 metric tons and positioning them them into megalith rings 11 thousand years ago.. Good luck

BTW scientists do not conur with you. They are VERY clear that there was no metal tools creted 11000 years ago. Clearly you are not ready for the coral
Castle Discourse. If I find someone above a certain level of at least common sense here I agree to use spell check when addressing them. I'm a poor speller. Too many Dr.'s in the family i guess. LOL

Further I have not stated EVER here any "mysterious and woo", alien or gods ever here. I have made fun of the notion though. I said clearly that the cration of the site does not upend physics either.

My argument was (yet again) to the TS that scientists failure to explain the creation of what can be seen clear as day would open the door to 'crackpot physics' to provide an explanation. The best answer in the thread. There is money on it.
 
tedlazer said:
Address the second post on page 17 David. Not sure what are talking about.
we are talking not about 4500 years hear but 11000. Thanks
Click to expand...

Address teh actual artcile!

Did you even read it?

To Schmidt and others, these new findings suggest a novel theory of civilization. Scholars have long believed that only after people learned to farm and live in settled communities did they have the time, organization and resources to construct temples and support complicated social structures. But Schmidt argues it was the other way around: the extensive, coordinated effort to build the monoliths literally laid the groundwork for the development of complex societies.
Click to expand...

Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/gobekli-tepe.html#ixzz1q880LT6r

The amazing overturning?

That it may be that the humans at the site had not used agriculture first?

Geesh, you can't even read the article itself?

So what do you think they are talking about?
 
tedlazer said:
That's it Mike! Don't let us down!

Tell us please how cavemen eleven thousand years ago constructed the site with the technology your 'fellow scientists' here say they did so with!

Flint tools, and strong cavemen to quarry the rock from miles away weighing 12 metric tons. Then carve, shape and position them them into megalith rings.
Click to expand...
As I pointed out previously it's simple. And your claims that the builders has to "quarry the rock from miles away" is untrue, as you'd know if you bothered to do some research.

tedlazer said:
I can tell U R a winner! It's your quality eduation that helps you and your fellow scientists with their posts!

And U wonder why there are so much crackpot psysics after reading your fellow scientists posts, no way!
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:
 
tedlazer said:
Meaning their known available tech was not far from that sir 11K years ago. How do you you propose the site was built? Clearly at least you have the brain enough to dismiss flint tools! The issue even the poster above you fails (yet again) to see as the primary issue in my responce.
Click to expand...

Um, what?

Log rollers, ropes and stone tools are all it takes. What exactly did they do that requires something else?
 
Dancing David said:
Address teh actual artcile!

Did you even read it?



Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/gobekli-tepe.html#ixzz1q880LT6r

The amazing overturning?

That it may be that the humans at the site had not used agriculture first?

Geesh, you can't even read the article itself?

So what do you think they are talking about?
Click to expand...

WTF are the caps about david? When did I ever address anything other then the logical abilty to create this site 11000 years ago. What does that have to do with it? My studies here are far beyond this article. One of us has been at the site david. WGAF if humans at the site had not used agriculture first as far as having any implacation relating to the logical abilty to create this site 11000 years ago whith known tech? What are you talking about David?
 
tedlazer said:
LOL, U R askng what I have asked this forum as a entire whole. My answer is clearly OF COURSE, if I has access to the the tech used!!!

Maybe those who have interest should move on from this site alone (this thread alone) and start to research Coral Castle made in the 1900's by only one weak person. I warned not only in this branch of science, but in many BTW, scientists lacking of answers to questions and logical explainations stemming from what can be seen and proven, would give rise and profit to those promoting 'crackpot psysics'. These examples are but a few proofs of this.
Click to expand...

How do you think that they did it? Stones cut with lasers and raised by anti-gravity machines?
 
Dancing David said:
Um, what?

Log rollers, ropes and stone tools are all it takes. What exactly did they do that requires something else?
Click to expand...

As far as we know the wheel itself dates was from about 3500 B.C. The Neolithic (New Stone) Revolution occurred about 10,000 years ago and dramatically changed the way that early humans lived is the conventional answer to the' rise of civilization question as it is currently tought David. Please refrain from these type of simple types questions, thanks.

You would need to cut out the megalithic rock from the stone quarry it came out of shape it to a flat surface all with other rock, move the rock from miles away weighing 12 metric tons and positioning them them into megalith rings 11 thousand years ago. You would need Pulleys and other tech no?

So if this was completed 11000 years ago when did it start? 35000 years ago with this tech David?

The technolghy did not exise to do this david. As an example David, advanced technical skills - Sometime around 3000 BC, the Neolithic peoples around these river valleys learned how to make and use bronze tools and weapons. This in part allowed these peoples to construct permanent shelters and homes since they no longer were nomads, following their food source and looking for caves as shelter.
 
Last edited:
dafydd said:
How do you think that they did it? Stones cut with lasers and raised by anti-gravity machines?
Click to expand...

I have stated that it (now also stated like with coral castle as well), was made with an alternate tech. It's clear, as there is no other rational explantion at all.
 
Last edited:
Kid Eager said:
And again, what is your point? Yes, its discovery changes the conventional view of the rise of civilisation.

Let's suppose, just for a moment, that this does make the *entire* conventional theory of the rise of civilisation invalid (something that is NOT in evidence).

So what? This does not equal mysterious science or physics. Nothing in any of your referenced articles makes a case for it either. Indeed, the Smithsonian article mentions the flint tools and observes that the stones were dragged from *yards* (not miles) further down the slope of the hill.

Your argument from ignorance, as presented in the last para of the quoted post, pretty much sums it up (noting you should have said "I", not we, as evidently the tools *did* exist....).
Click to expand...

With all due respect you are clearly the ignorant one.

All I said per my initial post when I was dragged into this, is that sciences failure to explain the creation of what can be clearly seen would open the door to crackpot psysics to explain it. Indeed in this case it has. There ae dozens of other examples as well. Good day!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom