Russian Engineer Reveals Evidence for Advanced Ancient Civilisation

a reply to: Marduk

osted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 08:50 AM link quote reply originally posted by: username74 a reply to: Marduk ha ha, yeah ok man, i think i might have to check this guy out just to see why hes upset you so much knock yourself out grahamhancock.com... Its not him. its all of them, Childress, Icke, Hancock, Sitchin, they are all lying for profit, I have issues with people who make a career from dishonesty You should too

well in a sense i do, but you can only deal with whats in front of you, well stitchin, yeah, i know, shocking that it should gain so much traction, icke- another con artist, childress a much more innocent enthusiasm there and some minor discoveries in amongst the flotsam, hancock ....i, ll take your word for it and at a glance, yeah.
but theres no smoke wthout fire
what i am trying to say is dont let your pesonal integrity or academic principles stand in the way of absorbing what people say.
you shouldnt let the chaff stand in the way of a potentially good debate

originally posted by: username74

childress a much more innocent enthusiasm there

Wow, he fooled you, this is Childress we are talking about who claims the ancient Hindus had nuclear weapons at a time that real world research shows they were aceramic....
With the death of Sitchin, Childress is now the worst of the bunch.

originally posted by: username74but theres no smoke wthout fire

Of course there is, because the claim that there is smoke has been invented.

originally posted by: username74what i am trying to say is dont let your pesonal integrity or academic principles stand in the way of absorbing what people say.
you shouldnt let the chaff stand in the way of a potentially good debate

Well excuse me, not only am I very familiar with what orthodoxy says, but my background as a fringer means that I know what everyone else says as well..
One of those sources is made up rubbish, the other is based on scientific empirical evidence and hundreds of years of research and exploration from qualified experts, which would you want to use a foundation to understanding...

And no, there is no conspiracy to cover up the truth, even the most popular conspiracy that of the "Smithsonian cover up" was invented by a fringe author, guess who, yes that's right, David Hatcher Childress....

ok so i should probably just have at it.
lets set up a rough enviromental context of the last 20 000 years
we have the geological record
inc. temperature/climate fluctuations
fossil record
physical geography/erosion
artifacts/remains
the sun cycles and events
cosmic events
sea level
tectonics and vulcanism
any broad factors missing?

originally posted by: username74
a reply to: Harte

ah harte. i ve just noted we have a mood bar at the side. sorry to see you are appalled. dont worry, i am not completely feral.

Don't worry about it. I've been "appalled" here since I first started posting. You're not gonna change that and you are not as appalling as some others here.

originally posted by: username74

Civilization requires more than artwork

ok. what does artwork require?

Imagination and medium.

originally posted by: username74

"My point exactly. If you don't use the term "civilization" properly, then what you say concerning civilization is also improper.
I note you say your concerns were not addressed in my post. In fact, they were:


The answer to all your questions is absence of any evidence.
If we have no evidence for a thing, then belief in that thing is not warranted.
That's "what's wrong" with it."

well technically, thats absence within the discovered evidence, also i am working towards postulating that there is some compelling evidence to suggest that we should expect some of the existing evidence to be revised in a different context. but first i am trying to define some loose parameters to create it

It will take NEW evidence, not a revision of existing evidence.
Chime in anytime you get some new evidence.

originally posted by: username74

"If we have no evidence for a thing, then belief in that thing is not warranted."

and the above is fairly specious, because this entire thread is based on proposed evidence and yet here you are

There has been no evidence proposed in this thread. There has been evidence supposed, but not proposed.

originally posted by: username74
and civilisation
civilisation

the stage of human social development and organization which is considered most advanced.
"the Victorians equated the railways with progress and civilization"
synonyms: human development, advancement, progress, enlightenment, edification, culture, cultivation, refinement, sophistication
"a higher stage of civilization"
the process by which a society or place reaches an advanced stage of social development and organization.
the society, culture, and way of life of a particular area.
plural noun: civilizations; plural noun: civilisations
"the great books of Western civilization"
synonyms: culture, customs, mores, way of life, attainments, achievements; More
society, nation, people, community
"the ancient civilizations of the Mediterranean"
the comfort and convenience of modern

what i was worried about was whether our tree of technology and infra structure was a prerequisite to the definition and scale is a relative point in this definition
i wasnt nit picking its just so i dont trip up on semantics later

Like I said, I would have thought that your interest in Anthropology would have informed you on what Anthropologists mean by the word "civilization."

Historically, societies referred to as civilizations have shared some or all of the following traits (Winks et al 1995, xii):

Toolmaking, which permits the development of intensive agricultural techniques, such as the use of human power, crop rotation, and irrigation. This has enabled farmers to produce a surplus of food beyond what is necessary for their own subsistence.
A significant portion of the population that does not devote most of its time to producing food. This permits a division of labor. Those who do not occupy their time in producing food may obtain it through trade, as in modern capitalism, or may have the food provided to them by the state, as in Ancient_Egypt. This is possible because of the food surplus described above.
The gathering of these non-food producers into permanent settlements, called cities.
Some form of ruling system or government. This can be a chiefdom, in which the chieftain of one noble family or clan rules the people; or a state society in which the ruling class is supported by a government or bureaucracy.
A social hierarchy consisting of different social classes.
A form of writing will have developed, so that communication between groups and generations is possible.
The establishment of complex, formal social institutions such as organized religion and education, as opposed to the less formal traditions of other societies.
Development of complex forms of economic exchange. This includes the expansion of trade and may lead to the creation of money and markets.
A concept of a Higher being, though not necessarily through organized religion, by which a people may develop a common worldview that explains events and finds purpose.
A concept of time, by which the society links itself to the past and looks forward to the future.
A concept of leisure, permitting advanced development of the arts.
Development of a faculty for criticism. This need not be the rationalism of the West, or any specific religious or political mechanism, but its existence is necessary for enabling the society to contemplate change from within rather than suffering attack and destruction from outside.

Source
One of many such sources - not all have the same criteria but you get the idea, I hope.

Harte

a reply to: Marduk

easy tiger, i dont know that you should let these guys get to you so much. you know theres a whole slew of these guys in there 50s who troll around the world looking at # procrastinating, it doesnt mean you have to take it on board. thats what early retirement and the baby booms done for us. some of them start off with a little credibility and soon end up lecturing to nudist colonies about pyramid power. (remember that in the 70s, never did try to sharpen that razorblade). my parents got a caravan and got interested in dog shows but its essentially the same thing

a reply to: username74

Well excuse me, not only am I very familiar with what orthodoxy says, but my background as a fringer means that I know what everyone else says as well.. One of those sources is made up cow#, the other is based on scientific empirical evidenceand hundreds of years of research from qualified experts, which would you want to use a foundation to understanding...

hang on what sources?

a reply to: Marduk

And no, there is no conspiracy to cover up the truth

i never said there was, in fact initially i made it very clear

originally posted by: username74
a reply to: username74

Well excuse me, not only am I very familiar with what orthodoxy says, but my background as a fringer means that I know what everyone else says as well.. One of those sources is made up cow#, the other is based on scientific empirical evidenceand hundreds of years of research from qualified experts, which would you want to use a foundation to understanding...

hang on what sources?

Fringe woo Vs Orthodoxy

originally posted by: username74
a reply to: Marduk

And no, there is no conspiracy to cover up the truth

i never said there was, in fact initially i made it very clear

I never said you did say there was, but about 99% of the fringe posters here will disagree with you because according to them, there is a vast global conspiracy to cover up the truth going back hundreds of years. Its a typical gap of the Gods argument fostered by fringe authors. This they explain, is why there isn't any real evidence to support their beliefs...
I can think of a simpler reason, can you ?

a reply to: Harte

Imagination and medium.

well to give you credit harte i hadnt finished answering that question to my own satisfaction, but i would suggest an addition of motivation and pencils, although i suppose pencils are part of the medium.

One of many such sources - not all have the same criteria but you get the idea, I hope.

yes harte i get the idea, but we dont need many sources, we just need something that is fit for purpose
its not so much an empirical definition as something we can all agree on. so our internal dictionaries match

It will take NEW evidence, not a revision of existing evidence. Chime in anytime you get some new evidence.

well, its a start i suppose.

a reply to: Marduk

I never said you did say there was, but about 99% of the fringe posters here will disagree with you because according to them, there is a vast global conspiracy to cover up the truth going back hundreds of years. Its a typical gap of the Gods argument fostered by fringe authors. This they explain, is why there isn't any real evidence to support their beliefs... I can think of a simpler reason, can you ?

i just think that more grounded members like you and harte get pilloried by fringers as you define them and then you just hand it out back. and its just a # fight really. you guys are too inflexible in your defence and they cant see past their emotive beliefs. certainly i would regard orthodoxy as a safe starting point, and still for me there are a few specific problems with some aspects, but not within the past 4-6000 years

originally posted by: username74

but not within the past 4-6000 years

Now I'm intrigued, start a thread and lets discuss that.

a reply to: Marduk
yeah dont thinks thats permitted yet
still too new

originally posted by: username74
a reply to: Marduk
yeah dont thinks thats permitted yet
still too new

You need 20 posts
You've done 30

originally posted by: username74
a reply to: peter vlar

This here is one of the most outlandish statements I've seen in awhile. You have got to be holding some really fine goodies in your stash box if you think any and every Anthropologist and/or Archaeologist wouldn't give their first born to Beelzebub to have their entire career made in the shade by authoring a paper proving the existence of an earlier, paradigm displacing civilization that supersedes what is currently accepted as the beginning of civilization as we know it.

you sure about that, bro?
maybe rebury it
academia is littered with reputations sent to hell in their lifetimes only to be exonerated later

Am I sure? No, Im positive. My degree is I. anthropology so I think I've got a pretty good handle on the motivations of many in this or related fields.

a reply to: peter vlar

yep. no offence meant, i started off a little tight but since then i ve been trying to inject a little levity into this somewhat neccesarily speculative thread, getting mixed results

a reply to: Marduk

You need 20 posts You've done 30

they just fly by dont they
i will give it some consideration
i just hurled myself into this thread although it could have been any one of 4 or 5 other related subjects

egyptraveluxe.blogspot.hr...

a reply to: Ove38

per-storemyr.net...

a reply to: username74
A complete (but different) paper on the subject by the same authors: Link

Harte

a reply to: Harte

thanks for that harte i ve only had a cursory skim, yet, and as i said mostly for egyptology i dont really have a problem accepting the results.
however there are a few qualms which i will get to when i have had a few more cups of tea. monday monday