The Fortress in Sacsayhuaman a Megalithic Mystery

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: Psynic
Because steel or glass or plastic would not have lasted as long as stone?

No?

Besides, they're gone. Why would they care how long anything lasted after they left?

That is the usual feature one looks for in a monument, isn't it?

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: aorAki
a reply to: Hanslune

You have the patience of Job, mate.
I don't envy you

Hey, I use to teach Arab college women IT and business - this is easy!

Not archaeology thank Allah.

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: Psynic
Because steel or glass or plastic would not have lasted as long as stone?

No?

Besides, they're gone. Why would they care how long anything lasted after they left?

That is the usual feature one looks for in a monument, isn't it?

Not if you don't have a long term view. It was also probably built as a fortress or at least it was built on dominant terrain and used as fortress.

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: aorAki
a reply to: Hanslune

You have the patience of Job, mate.
I don't envy you

Hey, I use to teach Arab college women IT and business - this is easy!

Not archaeology thank Allah.

That too but its not that popular a subject but I'm surprized you can even spell the term, lol.

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: aorAki
a reply to: Hanslune

You have the patience of Job, mate.
I don't envy you

Hey, I use to teach Arab college women IT and business - this is easy!

Not archaeology thank Allah.

That too but its not that popular a subject but I'm surprized you can even spell the term, lol.

Somewhere there are some unilingual Arab women who are surprized(sic) their businesses have failed and can't figure out their Iphones.

originally posted by: Psynic
That is the usual feature one looks for in a monument, isn't it?

A monument to what? Human gods? Sure, we always build big stone monuments to other people's gods and heroes.

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: Psynic
That is the usual feature one looks for in a monument, isn't it?

A monument to what? Human gods? Sure, we always build big stone monuments to other people's gods and heroes.

Monuments are letters to ourselves in the future.

Proof that we existed and were smart enough to send the message through time that, once we had the power to do amazing things.

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: aorAki
a reply to: Hanslune

You have the patience of Job, mate.
I don't envy you

Hey, I use to teach Arab college women IT and business - this is easy!

Not archaeology thank Allah.

That too but its not that popular a subject but I'm surprized you can even spell the term, lol.

Somewhere there are some unilingual Arab women who are surprized(sic) their businesses have failed and can't figure out their Iphones.

Oh my a spelling Nazi, how funny. I was born in a non-English speaking country so you must excuse my abuse of English. However, Psynic you failed utterly to troll the board because you cannot even remember what you said a few post before, contradicting yourself completely is a clear sign of your confusion on the matter.

Now I suggest we get back to the question at hand.

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: Psynic
That is the usual feature one looks for in a monument, isn't it?

A monument to what? Human gods? Sure, we always build big stone monuments to other people's gods and heroes.

Monuments are letters to ourselves in the future.

Proof that we existed and were smart enough to send the message through time that, once we had the power to do amazing things.

....and what did the Inca say in those two structures?

Now if they were from a culture not the Inca, then they failed absolutely to convey anything as no one thinks they are anything but Incan structures - including the Inca themselves.

Note to lurkers the Sacsayhuaman structure was initially started by another culture the Killke who were there around 900-1200 AD.

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: aorAki
a reply to: Hanslune

You have the patience of Job, mate.
I don't envy you

Hey, I use to teach Arab college women IT and business - this is easy!

Not archaeology thank Allah.

That too but its not that popular a subject but I'm surprized you can even spell the term, lol.

Says he's "surprized(sic)" I could spell 'archaeology'.

Then calls me a "Spelling Nazi" for commenting on it!

LOL

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: Psynic
That is the usual feature one looks for in a monument, isn't it?

A monument to what? Human gods? Sure, we always build big stone monuments to other people's gods and heroes.

Monuments are letters to ourselves in the future.

Proof that we existed and were smart enough to send the message through time that, once we had the power to do amazing things.

....and what did the Inca say in those two structures?

What the Inca said was this,

"Who the heck moved these huge stones?"

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: Psynic
That is the usual feature one looks for in a monument, isn't it?

A monument to what? Human gods? Sure, we always build big stone monuments to other people's gods and heroes.

Monuments are letters to ourselves in the future.

Proof that we existed and were smart enough to send the message through time that, once we had the power to do amazing things.

....and what did the Inca say in those two structures?

What the Inca said was this,

"Who the heck moved these huge stones?"

No they probably said that is the temple we made for our Sun god and that fortress or religious structure we built atop the other people's (Hilike) structure.

In the Comentarios Reales de los Incas by Inca Garcilaso de la Vega, the first mestizo writer of colonial Andean South America. he noted this story of his ancestors concerning the moving of great stones to the site. Published in 1617.



Link to original publication Book VII page 298

A simplified translation of that from the archaic English is:

One of the Incan kings decided to deliver to one of the “tired stones” to the place of the next construction site. The “tired stones” – this is how the Inca called the large-tonnage processed monoliths which were not yet installed into the constructions, but were laying close to them waiting for their turn. So, for this mission the king appointed 20 000 Indians to drag that stone with the help of ropes. At some place the stone fell down off the cliff and squashed 3 000 people.

Translation from here link

Seriously, it IS POSSIBLE because it exist. We're all looking at these pictures. It's there. Somebody did this. People are saying it's impossible and that there are no theories on how it was built. Hogwash. There are several theories. First of all, lets start with the actual people who've lived there for generations, The Inca. They say matter of factly that the larger stones were placed there by giants. We've found scientific evidence of giants in the area and people actually have some in the local museums. This is a pretty plausible explanation once you accept the fact that giants did exist.

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: Psynic

"Rollers and ropes", a "few hundred people" and "some levers" could NOT fit these stones into position.

Nobody; no scholars or masons, no architects or engineers have EVER come up with an hypothesis for how these structures could have been built.

Actually they have but you appear to be just denying it.

There are lots of ways to move stone and ancient, classical and modern man moved very large weights before we had powered machinery. Just because you personally have failed to study the subject sufficiently does not make it a great mystery.

Any links to back-up your assertions?

I'm not going to hold my breath because NONE EXIST.

We have no explanation whatsoever of how these gigantic stones could have been fitted together.

The process has NEVER been replicated.

I'm just going to gently leave this here for you. Someone HAS figured it out.
www.google.com...

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
I see these ancient wonders and ask myself, "Just how stupid are we, as modern humans, when compared to our ancient ancestors who were able to figure all this out in a way that baffles our poor, dimwitted selves?"

It seems popular to view humans on a steady progression of "improvement" or "evolution". The evidence, however, points to something entirely different. We are not progressing, nor are we evolving. We are simply the same people we have been for thousands of years. Capable of novel and intelligent concepts, and equally capable of forgetting them.

It hurts to admit that "savages" from 2000 years ago are every bit as smart as you and I. I get it. We were all conditioned to believe Neandertals were dumb, cave dwelling oafs. When it turns out that they had a bigger brain and likely had greater processing capability....it hurts our frail human ego's.

Spot on. We can actually prove that our DNA is degrading with time, making us collectively DUMBER as eons pass. thetruthwins.com...

a reply to: evilmonkey

In reference to your link:

Sanford is a creationist who takes a rather different view of world than others.

originally posted by: grumpy64
I think that looks like Inca by the way the stone fit together. It is mindblowing though, the way they did this.

Not only did the Inca build it, but some of the people from the work crews were still alive when the Spanish came.

Harte

Hey, I've been to this site just under ten times (work-related) and will be there at the end of August again.

Do you want some photos?

a reply to: Psynic

Here's your answer:
www.artframer.co.uk...

It's not logs or rollers, but indeed the stone does get rolled. These machines even work as intended for pyramid sized stones. It has to do with rolling resistance, the math even works out that as little as a dozen people can move a stone that a modern modern crane cannot.

Now whether or not such things were used in South America is a mystery. But around the Mediterranean (and even Egypt), it should be obvious since the ancient Greeks documented these things.

originally posted by: MRuss
Hey, I've been to this site just under ten times (work-related) and will be there at the end of August again.

Do you want some photos?

Yes please. Some close ups of the joins would be great too. Bit of everything if you can.

P