Two pics from Oilantaytambo that 100% defy evolution

I think it's pretty safe to say that it's ok to go ahead and sh!t can this thread now. To even stop here and leave it existing wouldn't even be good enough. Something this pointless should be removed before it makes someone even more stupid by reading it.

I kinda want the time back that I even wasted with it....But will just cut my losses and move on....

I don't remember reading anything about ancient rock cutters pre or post-flood anywhere in the bible.

So if this magical apparatus suddenly appears during some archeological dig, this would also have to disprove the bible since it was never mentioned..

Using randy's logic of course..

originally posted by: theantediluvian
Well then. It's pretty rare that somebody drops such a blatant non sequitur that he can't find a single word of agreement.

Something of a double whammy of the Non Sequiter order in 'fact' since he mentions, 'Ancient Aliens' as if in fallacy mode, while being friendly to the AA conception of, ' The Flood' which is entirely possible by natural means anyway. This is like having your cake and eat it almost before you get it. I think one has fell out of one's tree here.

I believe that things evolve, but I do not believe in the theory that man has formed about it. Now, I don't see how these two examples can prove anything myself. Just because there is no evidence that a civilization long ago possessed the tools to cut grooves in rock does not mean that they didn't do it. It just means there is no evidence.

Now the second photo, it could be that very long ago someone had carved that stone and some event buried it in something that stuck to the stone. This could have cleaved off easily. Depending on the crystaline structure of rock, stuff can break off to form things like that also. You can't say that nature is what caused this and you can't discount it being a manmade creation either because these things occur. Many times archeological finds are discounted because the people looking at them do not believe that there was someone around to make them. Some of these are out in plain sight. Believing we were the first intelligent civilization on earth is an err in these sciences, there could have been many advanced cultures in the last three million years. most evidence would either have been recycled or relabeled or it could have prematurely been called a hoax and probably destroyed in the past. Unless of course, it was something with massive stones....even then they could have been resplit and reused. Belief governs recognition and perception, anything that showed civilizations older than that expressed in the bible might have been destroyed.

a reply to: rickymouse

I believe that things evolve, but I do not believe in the theory that man has formed about it. Now, I don't see how these two examples can prove anything myself. Just because there is no evidence that a civilization long ago possessed the tools to cut grooves in rock does not mean that they didn't do it. It just means there is no evidence.

But you have at least made everyone else in this thread
look intellectually dishonest. Just by ubderstanding what
I'm saying. I believe the grooves in ther rocks show man
has come to a point far beyond the technology we have
today. If that doesn't DEFY evolution, which is the only
claim I made in the OP, then I don't know what does.

a reply to: Akragon

IF it says "the bible is true"... Christians jump on board by the boat load... regardless of the argument

Obviously everyone can see your ignorance if only by
how many Christians have advanced to my aid.

An off topic and pathetic post.

a reply to: randyvs

But factually true no matter how much you choose to mock me...

the fact that your OP is confusing to most to say the least, lacking any logic in your conclusions... yet theres flags and stars proves my point

originally posted by: randyvs

I believe the grooves in ther rocks show man
has come to a point far beyond the technology we have
today. If that doesn't DEFY evolution, which is the only
claim I made in the OP, then I don't know what does.

Then, not to put too fine a point on it, you actually "don't know what does".

The two are not connected. Simply not connected.

Furthermore, your argument completely fails to address the possibility than those ancient stonemasons were themselves the product of evolution, and that whoever followed this "Flood" were also simply the product of evolution - whether just as survivors of the catastrophe drawn from the society of the builders or (and here we're heading off into Ancient Alien territory) as a parallel evolutionary strand that out-survived these mysterious-possibly-not-quite-human builders, or whatever it is that you are implying. I will acknowledge the latter argument, though I do not give it any credence.

Roman engineering built some marvellous things in England. When the Romans withdrew, much of that knowledge was lost to the locals - or certainly enough was removed that the locals either lacked the access or inclination to try and replicate it.

The Romans withdrawing from Britain has about as much relevance to evolution as your mysterious stonemasons. In other words - none.

a reply to: EvillerBob


And still an off topic and pathetic post .

originally posted by: randyvs
But you have at least made everyone else in this thread
look intellectually dishonest. Just by ubderstanding what
I'm saying. I believe the grooves in ther rocks show man
has come to a point far beyond the technology we have
today. If that doesn't DEFY evolution, which is the only
claim I made in the OP, then I don't know what does.

Ah ha. So that's your claim??? Why didn't you just say that to begin with when I asked you??? That is the first clear thing you've said so far. Thank you for finally putting that forward.

So now let me ask you this so we can continue.

Why would ancient man having more advanced tech than we currently think was possible disprove evolution???

In fact why would that have anything at all to do with evolution???

I actually agree with you as far as your theory about ancient humans having more advanced civilizations and tech than what is currently known. Although I may not go so far as to say it was more advanced than our tech today. We have factual examples even where this has been shown to be true in the past and we then adjust what we know and consider to be accurate. However, I still don't see what any of that has to do with evolution or the bible or anything else. All it shows is that we aren't always 100% accurate in our historical discoveries.

a reply to: randyvs
"All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made." this verse alone tells me evolution is not so against christian scripture as so many like to claim, i mean if every living creature in existence was made by god without exception then to deny evolution is to deny his works itself is it not?

a reply to: mOjOm

Ah ha. So that's your claim???

Yes and forgive me for believing that it was hopelessly clear.

a reply to: mOjOm

And as far as your own beliefs about such matters I have no problem.
But I believe if mans history is more cyclical than linear. It definitely
works full bore in the defiance of evolutionary theory.

a reply to: randyvs

cool pics.

I dont see the evolution connection. S&F for wording in Op alone though. LOL

I am not a proponent of AA theory, I do however firmly believe in ancient advanced civilizations. IMO Neanderthal was the super race of "mighty men of old" talked about in the bible.

Homo-sapiens are the result of their civilization interbreeding with us for what ever reason so as to preserve their own culture...which failed for the most part.

Gold wasnt mined for niburu. Our own atmosphere changed after a bubble like layer of water collapsed (firmament) and the "waters of heaven mixed with the waters of earth". This layer of water acted like a hyperbaric chamber for all life. Things are known to grow very large in such highly oxygenated and pressurized atmosphere(less energy is spent by cells getting oxygen so they produce more) (Google large insects hyperbaric chamber experiments). Life spans may have been MUCH longer too.The civilizations that existed then saw their life spans suddenly fall drastically and their society collapsed as a result. Imagine if suddenly we only lived to 12. Look what living to 80 has done for us. They tried to use fine gold powder to expand their life spans by ingesting it and using it for medicine but were also ultimately unsuccessful. That is why there was an obsession by demi gods and ancient kings to try to attain immortality. It wasnt so much immortality as it was an obsession with the lifespans of their founders /patriarchs.

Neanderthal had elongated skulls in the back. this practice of head binding to imitate the Gods is global. Homo-sapiens lived as a tribute culture to neanderthal which was spread throughout the globe, providing food and mineral resources for their then collapsed civilization. There is a big link between red headed giants and aggressive tendencies. Neanderthal were largely red headed and blond. IMO we rebelled and killed them off. Most neanderthal DNA comes from maternal lines telling of a male neanderthal kill off leaving only female neanderthal to pass on genes. This often happens in conquest. Genetic records show most violent invasions are reflected genetically by the invading force leaving the predominant male genetic contributions into one population where the native population only has maternal DNA preserved and mixed with the conquerors.

Neanderthal technological supremacy wouldnt have lasted long after their collapse. Most would have reverted to instinctual survival. Think to preppers being the surviving culture of our civilization. Flash lights run out of batteries and knowledge of science and advance mechanics wouldnt be viable for survival. The upper echelon of neanderthal culture probably lived in relative leisure showing off technology to humans in order to be treated like gods and receive tribute, a practice violent tribal culture learned from somewhere. Think to our own VIPS coming out of their bunker societies after 300 years of a great fall. They would need allot lacking any infrastructure they were used to. As the technology broke down without being maintained, repaired, or replaced... the presence of "gods" diminished.

We imitated much from neanderthals and learned all we attribute to advanced hominid culture from them. Fishing, hunting, herding, farming, projectile weapons, ect.

The upper echelon of neanderthal culture founded advanced kingdoms like Egypt, Sumeria, Olmecs, and MANY others long lost to our recent interest in the remote past.

There have been societies and royal orders which tried to document our true history, but alas....we were the slaves of those we still carried on our backs like Gods...so many kings and kingdoms were destroyed by angry idiot homosapiens with an inferiority complex, sending remaining lineages of upper echelon neanderthal to oblivion. The lower caste of average neanderthal probably just got bred out of existence or were hunted and killed. I think the latter is true. We probably forcefully erased allot of written records telling of our infancy and true origin as slaves. Its not very uplifting to aspiring civilizations trying to reproduce the wonders of their former oppressors.

One thing about size....the words used to describe Giants in the bible dont necessarily relate to stature but instead strength. Not all but most. Also, the hyperbaric like environment of the "firmament" of heaven...I.E water bubble, would have had a gradual change in all size of species after it was collapsed. It wouldnt happen in one generation, but eventually all life would diminish in size since more energy would then be required to oxygenate themselves. After a long enough process of natural selection the heavy breathers would have bred less and died off more than the smaller, less robust species. We see that not only animals but plant life shrunk dramatically between "ages".

There is plenty of mythological and cultural references to different ages of men from ALL OVER the globe, just like a flood story. We were not part of the first two ages give or take, no matter the reference. Mayans, Greeks, whoever,. We came late to the scene AFTER the old civilization was long dead. There is also a common thread of WAR between Gods for control of resources. This could have killed off all remaining technological traces of their former glory, sending neanderthal into a lasting stone age...and then we came about.

Just my thoughts after years of this type of stuff. I missed allot but I just realized I am writing a post, not a thread.

I hope this helps. Ask if you have any questions.

later alligator.

Tadaman

S&F for wording in Op alone though.

Thank you, very observant of you.

a reply to: tadaman

Wow, do a thread then allready. That makes sense of things rather well!

a reply to: caterpillage

Im still gathering material and going through the research process. I have a rough draft done under another user name from some time back.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I am still working on it. There is ALLOT to read. I think in about a year it will be ready....

Stay tuned. Do your own reading in the mean time and help a guy out. I would appreciate any help.

a reply to: tadaman


I'l be looking for that one Tadaman.

a reply to: tadaman

You may be better off looking at writing a book... And I would volunteer to help any way I can, though I'm more of a worker bee type with a reading hobby than a researcher/writer.



Would be fun though, looks to me like you are into something VERY interesting indeed.

Edit: my apologies Randy I didn't intend to derail your thread. I'll quietly back out now.

a reply to: tadaman

An interesting read. I am wondering; What formed the basis of your hypothesis? AKA: What lead to the 'click,' or "Wait a second..." moment that lead you to neanderthals?

I am of the impression that hominids like Sasquatch, and yeti, are actually neanderthals that live into the modern age. Do you mind giving your opinion on such?