Russian Engineer Reveals Evidence for Advanced Ancient Civilisation

originally posted by: bottleslingguy
Anything that's been provided so far has been a bunch of nonsense.

Oh really, this from the guy who got caught flat out lying about the evidence just last week. You're hardly credible...

lying?

a reply to: Marduk

originally posted by: Marduk

originally posted by: bottleslingguy
Anything that's been provided so far has been a bunch of nonsense.

Oh really, this from the guy who got caught flat out lying about the evidence just last week. You're hardly credible...

the hell are you talking about? you guys are losing this subject big time. stick to music videos

originally posted by: bottleslingguy

originally posted by: Marduk

originally posted by: bottleslingguy
Anything that's been provided so far has been a bunch of nonsense.

Oh really, this from the guy who got caught flat out lying about the evidence just last week. You're hardly credible...

the hell are you talking about? you guys are losing this subject big time. stick to music videos

ok so now you're lying about lying
can you just state for the record that you are not a liar
so I can then show everyone just how dishonest you are
thanks

a reply to: jovan

There are some here that are ONLY here to dispute anything that is different then what they were taught 30+ years ago. Most of them are grumpy old men with nothing better to do then troll.

Ive been a member since 2007 and these same members have NEVER once EVER been wrong in their own mind. They are always right and will ALWAYS dispute anything you bring to the table.

originally posted by: Triton1128
a reply to: jovan

There are some here that are ONLY here to dispute anything that is different then what they were taught 30+ years ago. Most of them are grumpy old men with nothing better to do then troll.

Ive been a member since 2007 and these same members have NEVER once EVER been wrong in their own mind. They are always right and will ALWAYS dispute anything you bring to the table.

I take it, then, that you'd prefer that whatever you bring to the table be regarded as indisputable?

Harte

If there is a stalemate in this quagmire, let me offer my opinion having
seen the videos and the stones in question.

If no other people were able to use advanced engineering techniques but
the ancient Egyptians and their fore-fathers then the skill was theirs and
perhaps the other, megalithic societies.

Once the societies reaches the apex of their achievement, something went
wrong and the culture and infrastructure is almost entirely destroyed.

a reply to: Harte

The rudimentary earliest structures of the Egyptians were not as
advanced as the later ones, e.g. the step or the bent pyramids.
I guess this proves a simple progression from them to the great
and red pyramids and the Serapeum.

Not to mention the temples and quarries where some of the
fantastic stonework and some megalithic buildings , the Colossi
of Memnon, is that it still exists today.


Proving the theory that all of the above was accomplished without
advanced skill and using tools and methods available to them it at
the at the time and was all designed constructed without skill at a
level beyond their knowledge and ability.

anybody who takes the time to read what transpired will realize you have been playing rap music too loud. if the context was there you would post it so until you explain yourself you just look silly.


a reply to: Marduk

The complexity is reduced to identifying the object that made those saw kerfs, and how it could have been engineered and powered. Why nothing has been found is the biggest mystery to me, unless some things have been found that we have yet to see.

think about all the extra work that would have to be done to make all those unnecessary cuts. How much time and wear and tear on the tools. Remember if they are using copper saws they MUST make them all consistently the same size. How did they accomplish that? what method of tool production did they have in order to continually maintain such high tolerances of symmetry? the people who say they used crude tools at hand speeds are not thinking clearly. They are jumping over too many details that can't be overlooked.


a reply to: charlyv

originally posted by: bottleslingguy the people who say they used crude tools at hand speeds are not thinking clearly. They are jumping over too many details that can't be overlooked.

So you're saying that they didn't cut any granite for any of the sarcophagi found in the butlers' tombs, in the tombs of the nobles, or the stones for the (thousands of) temples or the stones for all the other pyramids or any of the stone vessels and stone statues?

How interesting. If you don't accept the scholarly explanation and research, then please explain how they did the millions of stone items found (from predynastic times to Greco-Roman times.) If you think they acquired this from somewhere, please do explain where.

originally posted by: bottleslingguy
Remember if they are using copper saws they MUST make them all consistently the same size. How did they accomplish that?

I can't even see the point being made here, so not much luck of me conceding it.

originally posted by: bottleslingguywhat method of tool production did they have in order to continually maintain such high tolerances of symmetry?

Months ago I pointed out how you always claim some fantastic symmetry and tolerances.

I'll ask you again now like I did then - do you have any evidence of anomalously too-perfect symmetry? Any evidence of the use of even the idea of "tolerance," and evidence of any adherence to precision over a large number of applications?

You talk about these two items a lot. I would have thought that you would have collected at least a small number of links to evidence for these claims.

I mean, surely, you've looked into this. Haven't you?

Harte

that's your fantasy not mine. it has NOTHING TO DO with the tool marks that are not from crude slow speed hand tools. no one and I repeat no one has shown how this is done repetitively MILLIONS OF TIMES with how many identical tools like circular saws and cutting tools like what we find. no one can explain how they made these identical tools which would wear out before blocks were done yet the kerf widths are consistently symmetrical. chipping with stones and rubbing abrasives does not in any way leave the same kinds of marks. there is no arguing that, you can complain about history but it does you no good, these tool marks are empirical and tangible. I wouldn't give any contemporary experts one bit of credibility. The more light is shed on this subject the better and we can focus on the important evidence.


a reply to: Byrd

yes Mr Fharte Sniffer it's called look at the evidence. I can't make you see something you refuse to see or more likely can't understand.


a reply to: Harte

originally posted by: bottleslingguy
yes Mr Fharte Sniffer it's called look at the evidence. I can't make you see something you refuse to see or more likely can't understand.


a reply to: Harte

You mean not looking at stuff you refuse to post, or even describe?

Harte

I'm not going to hold your hand nor am I going to whack you off you weirdo. I couldn't care less how you feel about this subject or who thinks who is right or what you call evidence. like I said earlier after you insulted my wife I lost all respect for you and of course you thought I meant respect for your intellect but you'd be wrong I never had respect for your intellect I had respect for the sake of you being human and now not even that.



a reply to: Harte

a reply to: Harte

I mentioned a statue a few pages back with perfect symmetry.

originally posted by: CheckPointCharlie
a reply to: Harte

I mentioned a statue a few pages back with perfect symmetry.

Okay, it's a start.

Do you have any measurements?

Harte

originally posted by: bottleslingguy
yes Mr Fharte Sniffer it's called look at the evidence. I can't make you see something you refuse to see or more likely can't understand.


a reply to: Harte

So, in other words, you got nothin'.