New Sphinx in Pakistan?

In Greece, the sphinx had the head of a woman, the wings of an eagle, the body of a lioness, and according to some, the tail of a serpent.4 The colossal statue of the Sphinx of Naxos stood on a towering ionic column, at the sacred Oracle of Delphi, acting as a protector of the site.

powerful magick?

a reply to: yorkshirelad

There is absolutely no features whatsover that can clearly be seen as "carved". If there were I would give it a second thought.

You don't just carve something, you also sand it to it's finale form. Using sanding on sandstone is the easiest way to shape that structure. Sandstone erodes faster than other rocks, but it would still last one hell of a long time.

a reply to: Toolman18

They will only show the pakistan sphinx from one angle?

originally posted by: 3n19m470
a reply to: Toolman18

They will only show the pakistan sphinx from one angle?

I think so.

It's hard to tell if anything there is man-made. It looks cool though!

a reply to: Toolman18
Thank you for sharing. I think it deserves a closer look... literally.

Found this book about the Baloch Race.

a reply to: Revolution9


Why be condescending and rude? You are almost certainly right, but your reply reveals more about you then any fake Pakistani sphinxes.

You’ve got some New Years resolutions to consider my friend. Misery is most often a choice...

Not a big fan of Hancock but this has some intriguing possibilities. What I find compelling the sheer number of elements; sphinx (headdress, face, paws, body), regularity in the upright formations as well as the horizontal. If it was a temple complex it does look extremely old and probably damaged by earthquake, tsunami or if the old stories are to be believed nuclear explosions (yeah, I went there).

Lots of things don't look like anything on Google Earth - the resolution isn't good enough. Unlike an earlier poster, I CAN see the figure on the left, the right-hand hand one not much at all. I can see why it might be identified as an Indian cave temple as I have been to several in India that look very similar - Ajanta, Ellora, Elephanta. It's also reminiscent of Petra in Jordan. It does appear like a Sphinx, but I've no idea why an Egyptian style sphynx would be on top of an Indian temple. Being right on the coast, erosion would be high. I have been down into the Grand Canyon by helicopter and saw no shapes that looked particularly unnatural. I would say there is no comparison. The Giants Causeway is a known repeated crystalline shape so not comparable either.

It's in Baluchistan so I can't imagine it would be very easy for any archaeologists to get permission to go there. No Muslim government would have any interest or motivation in having a Hindu temple uncovered as it would cause no end of trouble for them. Perhaps it's just as well as any temples could end up being blown up by Islamic fundamentalists, like the Buddhas of Banyan were. That part of the world is known to have been particularly rich in monasteries which such a large complex would probably be.

a reply to: Akragon

Seeing things is easy as represented by cloud formations. Knowing that it is or isn't something is reason. Pareidolia is a lame excuse for denial. That's it.

a reply to: Toolman18

I thought this may be real when the thread first brought it to out attention, especially in the way it showed similarity's to Hindu temples in other part's of the site and given the regions (greater region) history and the fact that it is littered with lost city's many of which likely have not yet be classified.

But the argument's against it were too compelling for me to refuse to accept there validity.

However even if it is a natural site this site may still have served as a ceremonial site as if we see this then there is absolutely no reason why those people whom built temples in that form may not themselves also have seen it and so then actually used the site, it is also possible that element's of the site could also have been adapted but had such use been extant for a long period of time then significant human carving would have occurred and of course we would likely see far more evidence.

However the Tsunami or multiple tsunami argument is also compelling.

a reply to: Toolman18
Pareidolia. Giving credit to no one since forever.
I know for a fact that I can discern between a real explanation and total crap. So can most of you. Pareidolia is not real. As real as seeing an elephant in the clouds

a reply to: Revolution9

Those geometric pillars in the second pic are not result of natural erosion any idiot can see that.

originally posted by: AthlonSavage
a reply to: Revolution9

Those geometric pillars in the second pic are not result of natural erosion any idiot can see that.

Don't see anywhere in his post where Revolution9 claimed anything at all about any of his pics involving erosion.

The pillars you mention are columnar basalt. Those are found all over the world.

Slightly closer pic of the faux sphinx in the OP is available at Getty Images. Link

Harte

a reply to: Toolman18

Wow. Thats a fricking sphinx! Why is anyone doubting it? Conduct a survey to detract from the obvious possibility that here is another VERY ancient sphinx.