Great Video On Monolithic Stones !

I have to say this is one of the best videos I've seen on monolithic stones.,
The two guys in this video are David Hatcher Childress and Christopher Dunn.
Pay particular attention to the end part with Christopher Dunn. He seems to be right on the money with his understanding of what he sees. If you have other videos along the same line I would love to see and hear them!
Even though I think David did a spectacular job. I've seen other videos but he seems to bring out really neat things through out the video. Quite interesting for me anyways.

Thanks!

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by thetiler


Thank you for this!
very interesting and amazing....
S&F.

From what I've seen, I understand that we don't have alien tools left behind from these monolithic stones.
From Christoper Dunn's conceptualization, he does't like to say totally this high technology came from an outside source (our earth). But that it is possible we lost that technology. David on the other hand loves to talk about an ancient race or races did it so I like that pattern. As a contractor, when I leave a job I have to take the tools with me, they are too valuable to leave behind. But there are grinding marks in the pyramids of egypt to show high powered tools were used.

Christoper's contribution to the video at Puma Punku is immense. In that his measuring tools seem to nail how it is impossible drill holes in stone so accurate and so well placed in neat rows and depths.

All the mainstream educational videos and lectures I"ve seen stipulate that the crude outdated tools were used that the alloys metals used were adequate

I've worked with tiles and stones and even blocks and drilling and even making these things are not easy.
I was a Sea Bee in Viet Nam during the war and know how hard it is to make block as well.
But what we did during the war was to dump concrete power and sand make cement blocks not to make stone.
Even with that we had to have high tech equipment such as a tractor and large mixing machine and people taking out the blocks with metal trays. Quite a process. But with the megalithic stones, it would be even more advanced!

The could be a plastic like trays that would be structured like an ice-tray, you could fit them in the ground (very large opening and deep). Pour in melted granite stone into the molds. One side would have to be beveled and curved to get that join-locking. When lifted the plastic (but durable under incredibly high temperatures) would more than likely come up with it. Then put down in the same whole.. So that side would be used to pour the melted stone to have the opposite (inverted) side to the right, if the lifted to the left was taken first.
So that would make the interlocking so strong that it would endure centuries even thousands of years of use.

Those nodules (bumps that stick out of the monolithic stones) are more than likely nodes that are to keep the melted stone in the teflon type (only tons stronger, like the material that was at rosewell. Can't dent it and strong under extremely high temperatures. To enter in our atmosphere etc. Those bumps would be part of the encasement.

I really think the only way those monolithic stones (100 ton ones etc.) could of been made was to melt the stone, pour it and cool it down and place them were they should go.

Those dog -bone type matrix's that lock the stones together disappeared over time because of oxidization. But what I found interesting in the video is that you see were there would be using a matric - dog bone type tie -joint stone and next to it would be something a bit more crude. Not even the right stone etc.

Almost like a civilization that wanted to start up a living commune but was not practical. so they left.
It almost reminds me of Ernest Norman being told by Nur El that they (the martians) tried to start up a colony on earth but had to leave. (Not saying true, just a theory) This is in regards to his book: The Truth About Mars

I find it mysterious that they had to have these structures so high up on a mountain etc.I know in the book "The Truth About Mars) even though this is speculation, They told Ernest Norman that they had to go underground because of a solar flare. When they went underground on mars (just a theory)did they loose resistance to the earth's atmosphere? So if they are checking around earth to live to get materials they needed for mars, did they pick a very elevated place so they could exist with out spacesuits?

Was it important to have structures so air tight that they could live in with out spacesuits?
And high so they could have less bacteria influence?

What about Gary Wiloox's testimony of seeing and speaking with two martians? Do you think that is true?

I just spend one and a half hour watching this.
Very interesting and even if you ignore David's comments, it's clear that the Inca's didn't build the megalithic structures.

BTW, here's the video embedded.

reply to post by Regenstorm


Glad you liked it Regenstorm. I thought it was neat how Chris added about certain stone blocks that I hadn't seen before in other megalithic videos. I didn't know there was a small block that had smaller drill holes. Plus a step around it that seemed routed. Plus his tools he used. Glad you took the time to watch it !

Originally posted by Arken
reply to post by thetiler

 

Thank you for this!

very interesting and amazing....
S&F.

Glad you enjoyed this Arken!

reply to post by thetiler


thank you for the video, had footage i had not seen.

it's obvious there is much we don't know about ancient civilizations.

lets hope the research continues.

The way I see it is, people like David Childress and other ancient alien theorist's are the dreamers with a vivid imagination. Then there's people like Christopher Dunn a real no B.S. scientist only looking for the truth and wants the world to know about it, not cover it up or lock it away from prying eyes. Dunn's book the Giza Powerplant is simply an amazing book that talks about the Great Pyramid of Giza and the stonework that went into building it and he mentions some other very interesting things too but I'll let you read about it.

reply to post by DemonSpeedN


I am am certainly not sure whether the aliens if they were on the earth (I think there is a very good chance they were) are really good people or not. But I think that Chris has done a lot to bring in the mainstream educational people in the direction of realizing their are alternatives to just what we've been taught. Thanks for the post!

reply to post by citizen6511


I agree, thanks for the post!

Then there's people like Christopher Dunn a real no B.S. scientist only looking for the truth and wants the world to know about it, not cover it up or lock it away from prying eyes.

Mr. Dunn is not a scientist, far from it, nor does he claim to be one; people with actual expertise in the fields he ventures into consider him at best poorly educated on the subjects or just ignore the stuff he makes up.

Question when you have compared what Dunn puts out whawith the counter-arguments how do you evaluate the evidence?

Chris has done a lot to bring in the mainstream educational people in the direction of realizing their are alternatives to just what we've been taught

He has? It isn't what you call, 'what people have been taught' its the evidence which refutes Dunn's material. May I ask what you feel is the strongest evidence Dunn has?

His book is full of scientific howlers such as:

Page 221 of his book

The Northern Shaft served as a conduit, or a waveguide, and its original metal lining--which passed with extreme precision through the pyramid from the outside--served to channel a microwave signal into the King's Chamber.

Since we have now explored this passage - are they metal lined? Nope. Do they pass thru the pyramid in 'extreme precision'? Nope, they twist and turn and as we learned they were sealed off in ancient times.......

Etc

That was an interesting video, thanks or posting it up I think the title of the video will put alot of people off, I can't really remember aliens being mentioned as such. Hinted at maybe once or twice, but it's not really an ancient alien type of video. It's a nice little tour around some amazing sites which hold great mystery as to their construction. I enjoyed it

reply to post by Hanslune


Don't tell me Hanslune that you are buying the "mainstream" theory of hemp ropes - listen I don't know what the truth is - but I'll be dang skippy if anyone really knows the truth. We have been sold the "mainstream" interpratation which is obviously influenced by the religion/dogma/fear of rocking the boat mentality of most egyptologists.
I wont say there are alien artifacts under the paw of the Sphinx - but it seems very obvouis there was much to our ancient world we are still grasping to understand. A personal aside, Chris is interesting - and I like his appeal that there may be more then meets the eye going on. He may not be right in his personal theory - but he has a point . . . we are not being told the exact truth. The question is why????

Originally posted by Hanslune

Then there's people like Christopher Dunn a real no B.S. scientist only looking for the truth and wants the world to know about it, not cover it up or lock it away from prying eyes.

Mr. Dunn is not a scientist, far from it, nor does he claim to be one; people with actual expertise in the fields he ventures into consider him at best poorly educated on the subjects or just ignore the stuff he makes up.

Question when you have compared what Dunn puts out whawith the counter-arguments how do you evaluate the evidence?

Even Chris says that he will bow his hat to those who prove him wrong. He even says his idea about the pyramid is just a theory.

I was thinking earlier today, what if someone came in and drilled those wholes lets say 50 years ago. Is there clear evidence that those holes drilled in the stone at the same age as the civilization proposed? Just wondering! But I have to think the measuring he did is mighty impressive and I've seen a ton of ufo - ancient alien documentaries
Chris has done a lot to bring in the mainstream educational people in the direction of realizing their are alternatives to just what we've been taught

He has? It isn't what you call, 'what people have been taught' its the evidence which refutes Dunn's material. May I ask what you feel is the strongest evidence Dunn has?

His book is full of scientific howlers such as:

Page 221 of his book

The Northern Shaft served as a conduit, or a waveguide, and its original metal lining--which passed with extreme precision through the pyramid from the outside--served to channel a microwave signal into the King's Chamber.

Since we have now explored this passage - are they metal lined? Nope. Do they pass thru the pyramid in 'extreme precision'? Nope, they twist and turn and as we learned they were sealed off in ancient times.......

Etc

edit on 5/12/11 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)

reply to post by Hanslune


I was using "Scientist" as a general term, whether he was a archaeologist, egyptologist or whatever. My source for compare Christopher Dunn is my gut instinct, I just read about his work and Know its right, maybe not 100% but pretty close. Anyway lets just agree to disagree.

lots of sites I've never seen before and thank goodness for guys like Childress who can go to the dizzying heights of the Andes and not die.

so interesting all the huge well cut stonework with rubble based stone work on top. Here is a video in which David Flynn speaks of the fact that South American Shamans of this region say that a series of advanced previous civilisations left these ruins, and if one goes back far enough in time those builders are not human.




I am particularly entranced by the many sites that all have the hallmark of the T shaped impressions for pouring hot metal and joining the stones, but no idea how such a seemingly flimsy staple would be necessary to build these huge sites?? Weird!!

Originally posted by LittleBirdSaid
reply to post by Hanslune

 

Don't tell me Hanslune that you are buying the "mainstream" theory of hemp ropes - listen I don't know what the truth is - but I'll be dang skippy if anyone really knows the truth.

In archaeology you can only arrived at what one thinks is the truth for most things. Why do you reject fibre rope - of which we have many examples. So explain to me why you think the AE couldn't make strong rope? They certainly seemed to have thought they could.

We have been sold the "mainstream" interpratation which is obviously influenced by the religion/dogma/fear of rocking the boat mentality of most egyptologists.

Oh and how do you know that, give an example - the boat gets rocked in archaeology all the time

I wont say there are alien artifacts under the paw of the Sphinx - but it seems very obvouis there was much to our ancient world we are still grasping to understand.

Yes there is a great deal to learn but some things - like rope we aren't clueless on

but he has a point . . . we are not being told the exact truth. The question is why????

So who is running this macro level multi-generational conspiracy? What is the 'exact' truth that is being hidden?

Dunn is just poorly educated on the subject and swayed by subjective bias so why should we consider him a source of information? It would seem to me that he is spraying a great deal of disinformation - however he is a better source of information that Childress!

Originally posted by MrsBlonde


I am particularly entranced by the many sites that all have the hallmark of the T shaped impressions for pouring hot metal and joining the stones, but no idea how such a seemingly flimsy staple would be necessary to build these huge sites?? Weird!!

I think you mean 'I' shaped staples; its one of the ways to firmly join stones together - particularly if you have no concrete or competent mortar

Debunking David Hatcher-Childress' new book on ancient megaliths in South America -- I have a response from a professor in archaeology, Dennis Ogburn, who specializes in South American archaeology in Peru and Ecuador:

The stones were shaped by hand, primarily using harder rounded stones (often quartz river cobbles), and I've seen a number of these in the stone quarries. They also used some bronze tools to extract blocks, but the shaping involving battering the blocks with the hammerstones. Moving the largest stones involved dragging them with ropes, and often required a thousand men or more. They only moved the largest stones over short distances of a few kilometers. The stones they moved up to Ecuador were still quite large, but only up to about 700 kg/1,500 lbs - these I suspect were carried on something made from wooden poles, like a litter. Archaeologists and other researchers have done quite a bit of work on these questions, and there is plenty of historical and archaeological evidence to show that the Incas were quite capable of doing these things using very basic technology in combination with the labor of many thousands of their subjects.

Originally posted by fulllotusqigong
Debunking David Hatcher-Childress' new book on ancient megaliths in South America -- I have a response from a professor in archaeology, Dennis Ogburn, who specializes in South American archaeology in Peru and Ecuador:

The stones were shaped by hand, primarily using harder rounded stones (often quartz river cobbles), and I've seen a number of these in the stone quarries. They also used some bronze tools to extract blocks, but the shaping involving battering the blocks with the hammerstones. Moving the largest stones involved dragging them with ropes, and often required a thousand men or more. They only moved the largest stones over short distances of a few kilometers. The stones they moved up to Ecuador were still quite large, but only up to about 700 kg/1,500 lbs - these I suspect were carried on something made from wooden poles, like a litter. Archaeologists and other researchers have done quite a bit of work on these questions, and there is plenty of historical and archaeological evidence to show that the Incas were quite capable of doing these things using very basic technology in combination with the labor of many thousands of their subjects.

One uncharitable wag once said that the abbreviation of David Hatcher Childress initials stood for, Deeper, Higher and C---- well something else! Not that I agree with that but David is very much a dreamer who rarely meets a conspiracy or fringe theory he doesn't embrace.