KHAAAANNNNnnnn (Genghis, not Noonian Singh)

Construction workers employed in road building near the Onon River in the Khentii province ofMongolia, have discovered a mass grave containing the remains of many dozens of human corpses lying upon a large rudimentary stone structure. Forensic experts and archaeologists were called on the site, which was revealed to be a Mongolian royal tomb from the 13th century that the scientists believe to be Genghis Khan’s.

A total of 68 skeletons were found buried together, directly over the top of a rather crude stone structure.
The content of the tomb was scattered and badly deteriorated, presumably due to the fact that the site was located beneath the river bed for hundreds of years, until the course of the Onon river changed in the 18th century. The remains of a tall male and sixteen female skeletons were identified among hundreds of gold and silver artefacts and thousands of coins. The women are presumed to have been wives and concubines of the leader, who were killed to accompany the warlord in the afterlife.

The amount of treasure and the number of sacrificed animals and people, have immediately led the archaeologists to consider that the site was certainly the burial site of a really powerful Mongol warlord. After realizing an extensive set of tests and analysis, they were able to confirm that the body belonged to a man aged between 60 and 75, who died between 1215 and 1235 AD. Both the age, the date, the location and the opulence of the site seem to confirm that the tomb does indeed belong to Genghis Khan.

undergroundscience.net...
Now then Gilgamesh next,

originally posted by: Marduk

Construction workers employed in road building near the Onon River in the Khentii province ofMongolia, have discovered a mass grave containing the remains of many dozens of human corpses lying upon a large rudimentary stone structure. Forensic experts and archaeologists were called on the site, which was revealed to be a Mongolian royal tomb from the 13th century that the scientists believe to be Genghis Khan’s.

A total of 68 skeletons were found buried together, directly over the top of a rather crude stone structure.
The content of the tomb was scattered and badly deteriorated, presumably due to the fact that the site was located beneath the river bed for hundreds of years, until the course of the Onon river changed in the 18th century. The remains of a tall male and sixteen female skeletons were identified among hundreds of gold and silver artefacts and thousands of coins. The women are presumed to have been wives and concubines of the leader, who were killed to accompany the warlord in the afterlife.

The amount of treasure and the number of sacrificed animals and people, have immediately led the archaeologists to consider that the site was certainly the burial site of a really powerful Mongol warlord. After realizing an extensive set of tests and analysis, they were able to confirm that the body belonged to a man aged between 60 and 75, who died between 1215 and 1235 AD. Both the age, the date, the location and the opulence of the site seem to confirm that the tomb does indeed belong to Genghis Khan.

Now then Gilgamesh next,

Interesting and most significant.

a reply to: Marduk

Very interesting.
Thanks.

Really cool.

I always thought Gengis Khan was supposed to have been buried with a ridiculously huge treasure from looting across such a vast area.

Like treasure hunters have been looking for his tomb for ever.

Maybe the article doesn't describe the treasure well enough or maybe I just watched too many movies and imagined a Scrooge McDuck mountain of gold.

a reply to: Marduk

Original article is from worldnewsdaily

worldnewsdailyreport.com...

Hoax

originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: Marduk

Original article is from worldnewsdaily

worldnewsdailyreport.com...

Hoax

a reply to: Chadwickus

Possibly and possibly not, personally I agree with you but if this is Temugen than it matches the legend, maybe too closely plus the site does post spoof story as you point out.
en.wikipedia.org...
No mention of his cat's though (probably cheetah's).

originally posted by: LABTECH767
a reply to: Chadwickus

Possibly and possibly not, personally I agree with you but if this is Temugen than it matches the legend, maybe too closely plus the site does post spoof story as you point out.
en.wikipedia.org...
No mention of his cat's though (probably cheetah's).

The pictures were swiped from genuine reports, the one of all the skulls for instance is from a Viking grave in Dorset

a reply to: Marduk
You need to research a bit more, OP. (Have you heard of "tineye" image search?) A couple of minutes just searching your first pic will show you the following:

That opening pic in the OP was used in an article published on Sept 13, 2013 and entitled Extraordinary kurgan burial shines new light on Sarmatian life, which is located on the Past Horizons archaeological site. The find was located in Russia's Southern Ural Steppes, not Mongolia.

Long story short, this has nothing to do with Genghis Khan. The article is a poorly assembled hoax.

originally posted by: JustMike
a reply to: Marduk

Long story short, this has nothing to do with Genghis Khan. The article is a poorly assembled hoax.

And, unless this was moved from a different forum to this forum, my take on why the OP put it here was because they were regarding this as a hoax. Hence "Now then Gilgamesh, next".

Perhaps reading deeper and not being so quick to judge is in order?

a reply to: antiguaEstrella

The OP posted the thread in Ancient & Lost Civilizations. After staff discussion it was moved to Ludicrous Online Lies.

Perhaps using your own intellectual abilities and doing a bit of research is order. That archeaological site has nothing to do with Genghis Khan. That was not a matter of being "quick to judge". It was a simple enough process to check out where the images came from.

I you prefer to criticize people who use their own analysis of the readily available evidence to call something by what it is, rather than "reading deeper" yourself, then you are more likely to be taken in by hoaxes that are so poorly put together that they are almost laughable.

The biggest laugh is on those who accept them without question.

originally posted by: JustMike
a reply to: antiguaEstrella

The OP posted the thread in Ancient & Lost Civilizations. After staff discussion it was moved to Ludicrous Online Lies.

Perhaps using your own intellectual abilities and doing a bit of research is order. That aracheaological site has nothing to do with Genghis Khan. That was not a matter of being "quick to judge". It was a simple enough process to check out where the images came from.

I you prefer to criticize people who use their own analysis of the readily available evidence to call something by what it is, rather than "reading deeper" yourself, then you are more likely to be taken in by hoaxes that are so poorly put toether that they are almost laughable.

The biggest laugh is on those who accept them without question.

And here we are, yet again...with you making assumptions. And also apparently not fully digesting what I had to say.

I did not say I believed the story. I also did not realize it was not posted here first. However, what I did say was that to me the OP's statements were such that I do not think it was meant to be taken as truth. Even in the harsh light of the idea that it was originally posted in the other forum, I still think the OP's statements and intent were at least in part sarcastic.

Again, where you thought I was criticizing you for using your own analytical critic of the information, that was nowhere near the truth. The truth was that I felt you were mistaken in your reaction to the OP's post.

a reply to: antiguaEstrella

Since you are new...I think you yourself may be mistaken when a site moderator tells you research is available to them and to anyone...and one fails to do so.

The mods generally are quite thorough here...and are helpful in guiding member-posters and readers to do the work first...then post.

They do! Respectfully speaking of course....welcome.

a reply to: antiguaEstrella

Oh. And additionally speaking..when a thread posted elsewhere ends up in the HOAX or LOL Forums...its because its been discussed, dissected and searched, verified or discounted...every-time...by the Mods here who do their job as such.

Where it ends up or is moved to...is the answer in itself.

MS

a reply to: mysterioustranger



I have been here much longer as a lurker. I am well aware of these things. And even you appear to be not fully digesting what it was I said.

Oh, and mods may be mods, but other than following the T&C posted here, I could care less who they are.

a reply to: antiguaEstrella

That explains it. And therein is your problem...especially the long-time-only-lurking without any participating part...

Quite clear now, thanks. Carry-on....

MS

originally posted by: antiguaEstrella

originally posted by: JustMike
a reply to: antiguaEstrella

The OP posted the thread in Ancient & Lost Civilizations. After staff discussion it was moved to Ludicrous Online Lies.

Perhaps using your own intellectual abilities and doing a bit of research is order. That aracheaological site has nothing to do with Genghis Khan. That was not a matter of being "quick to judge". It was a simple enough process to check out where the images came from.

I you prefer to criticize people who use their own analysis of the readily available evidence to call something by what it is, rather than "reading deeper" yourself, then you are more likely to be taken in by hoaxes that are so poorly put together that they are almost laughable.

The biggest laugh is on those who accept them without question.

And here we are, yet again...with you making assumptions. And also apparently not fully digesting what I had to say.

I did not say I believed the story. I also did not realize it was not posted here first. However, what I did say was that to me the OP's statements were such that I do not think it was meant to be taken as truth. Even in the harsh light of the idea that it was originally posted in the other forum, I still think the OP's statements and intent were at least in part sarcastic.

Again, where you thought I was criticizing you for using your own analytical critic of the information, that was nowhere near the truth. The truth was that I felt you were mistaken in your reaction to the OP's post.

I was not mistaken. All you had to do was follow-up the source at the link I provided and you would see there was no mistake. The OP's material is fraudulent.

I never said you believed the story. I was criticizing the way you reacted to having factual information debunking the OP's source material. I said

I[f] you prefer to criticize people who use their own analysis of the readily available evidence to call something by what it is, rather than "reading deeper" yourself, then you are more likely to be taken in by hoaxes that are so poorly put together that they are almost laughable.

In other words, I believe you were more concerned with criticizing my own opinion than with considering the actual subject matter of the OP and its alleged source.

You also said

I also did not realize it was not posted here first.

Now, that is puzzling. It seems that either you did not read the posts prior to mine that made that clear, or you did not understand them. Mine purely elaborated the information, with specific links to the source material. Namely, to show it was not published here first (or on the site referenced in the OP).

I also opened my post by stating that the OP's thread was moved from Ancient & Lost Civilizations to Ludicrous Online Lies. That move was not made by me personally. It was done by ATS staff after research and discussion.

If the post was intended as sarcastic or in jest, then it should have been posted in the appropriate forum. It was not, hence it was moved to a more appropriate one.

You said

unless this was moved from a different forum to this forum, my take on why the OP put it here was because they were regarding this as a hoax.

Unless? Well... Yes. A fair assumption, if the "unless" is supportable. But in this case, as I made clear at the outset, it wasn't.

wow arguments as to my motives
Here's the truth

A friend I trust posted the link (not the weekly world news one) on Facebook and I didn't realise it was a hoax, but being a big star Trek fan, I couldn't help post the Khaaaaan title.

I freely admit that I didn't check it out before posting and realised I'd been had only when Chadwickus posted the original link for which I thank him.

The two main reasons that I didn't check it are because I got carried away with Trekkin and because having been a long time fan of Mr Genghis I have been waiting for his tomb discovery for years, so this just fed into my expectations. I apologise if this thread has upset anyone, that wasn't my intent and it wasn't a deliberate hoax on my part, I was fooled too

The other tomb I'm waiting for is that of Gilgamesh, who was also buried in the bed of a river which had been rerouted for the purpose and then sent back on its course to submerge the tomb. The Mesopotamians were happy with water burials because they believed the sky was made from water (its blue, rain comes from it). So that's why I mentioned that at the end, in case you didn't realise from my name, I am Mesopotamia nuts, moreso than a Trekker. I can't wait for the landing party to get sent back in time, buying their freedom when Scotty shows the Sumerians how to make bronze

a reply to: Marduk
It's all good, Marduk. Anyone can be had and most of us have been at some time or other. Don't worry about it.