It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Marduk
originally posted by: Marduk
I'm wondering if you have an answer for the dating issue, the vast majority of the lines date from 200 BC to 500 AD.
Your claim would have to be that they got the dating wrong because you need them to be about 2500 years earlier, are you just going to say "radiocarbon dating is unreliable, when we all know its accurate, or did they have time travel
originally posted by: aorAki
You guys both let yourselves down when you bicker and name call.
I know, it's ironic that one such as I is calling you both out, but can we actually address the points you're both making in a mature and reasoned manner. no matter how ridiculous you BOTH may find the notion.
The best way to counter an argument is with a well-constructed counter argument and reason, not bickering and name calling.
Above all, deny ignorance
The Nazca culture (also Nasca) was the archaeological culture that flourished from 100 BC to 800 AD beside the dry southern coast of Peru in the river valleys of the Rio Grande de Nazca drainage and the Ica Valley
originally posted by: Marduk
Well excuse me, but Mr trumpet seems blissfully unaware that the lines were dated by the moss that died on the underside of the rocks when they were turned over to create the lines. So the lines have been scientifically dated to 200 BC to 500 AD, which was of course, the period when the Nazca culture was at its height
originally posted by: Marduk
Mr trumpet seems blissfully unaware that the lines were dated by the moss that died on the underside of the rocks when they were turned over to create the lines. So the lines have been scientifically dated to 200 BC to 500 AD, which was of course, the period when the Nazca culture was at its height
The Nazca culture (also Nasca) was the archaeological culture that flourished from 100 BC to 800 AD beside the dry southern coast of Peru in the river valleys of the Rio Grande de Nazca drainage and the Ica Valley
So that leaves him either
1. claiming a cover up - not credible
2. claiming that the radiocarbon dating is wrong - not credible
3. Time travelling aliens - not credible.
Either way, I think its I think its clear that his claims are a result of self delusion.ote]
Personally I don't believe in Alien intervention nor do I believe in time travel..and I believe that RCD is flawed as is much of archaeology due to this fact.
Now is it a cover up? interesting thought....look at the world Governments and you decide.
Now is it self delusion?
Let's decide this tomorrow when I finish this expose and hopefully other members have a say
whether this new age technology self studied Aquarian brings a new light to the question of a pre technological civilization truly once existing.
originally posted by: AquarianTrumpet
Personally I don't believe in Alien intervention nor do I believe in time travel..and I believe that RCD is flawed as is much of archaeology due to this fact.
Now is it a cover up? interesting thought....look at the world Governments and you decide.
Now is it self delusion?
Let's decide this tomorrow when I finish this expose and hopefully other members have a say
whether this new age technology self studied Aquarian brings a new light to the question of a pre technological civilization truly once existing.
originally posted by: Marduk
originally posted by: AquarianTrumpet
Personally I don't believe in Alien intervention nor do I believe in time travel..and I believe that RCD is flawed as is much of archaeology due to this fact.
Now is it a cover up? interesting thought....look at the world Governments and you decide.
Now is it self delusion?
Let's decide this tomorrow when I finish this expose and hopefully other members have a say
whether this new age technology self studied Aquarian brings a new light to the question of a pre technological civilization truly once existing.
Your belief that Radiocarbon dating is flawed is not credible. Do you have any evidence at all to support your "belief"
A pre technological civilisation, for which there is no evidence, no records, no archaeology and no mythology
Sure, run with that. But could you admit that you stole the idea from the unqualified journalist Graham Hancock while you're at it...
originally posted by: AquarianTrumpet
Archaeology was basically founded around Egyptology
originally posted by: UniFinity
do you have any source about the validity of carbon dating. If I google it than it is evident that it is not valid for older dates, as I said in my previous posts already.
originally posted by: AquarianTrumpet
Northing wrong with what I said..and it was accurate. The Great Pyramid is off exact alignment by less than 3 minutes of arc..quite an achievement that wasn't surpassed until modern times. Go ahead and nit pick the 3 minutes of arc, but in reality - it is what I said and aligned to the cardinal points; only people with an agenda will misconstrue the statement.
The Ancient Egyptians managed to line up the sides of their pyramids to the points of the compass, with extraordinary accuracy. The most accurate is the Pyramid of Khufu, also called the Great Pyramid. The east and west sides miss true north by less than three minutes of arc (roughly one tenth the diameter of the full moon). With this kind of accuracy, it's no wonder they were one of the Seven Wonders of the World. It took over 4,000 years before the astronomer, Tycho Brahe, was able to take astronomical measurements to a greater accuracy.
So you accuse me of cherry picking and yet, you have seem to be the one with a cherry picking exercise.