Can Someone Falsify My Claim: Humans Built “Basalt Columns” on Earth and on Mars?

a reply to: FossilLin

Here are some hand cut rocks from Pumapunku in Bolivia. Dated around 600ish AD. Cut using primitive hand tools. Yeah, totally impossible to hand cut smooth 90 degree surfaces.....

a reply to: Badams

"Here are some hand cut rocks from Pumapunku in Bolivia."
Question EVERYTHING. How do you know the rocks were hand cut? Any proof?
" Yeah, totally impossible to hand cut smooth 90 degree surfaces..... "
So?

a reply to: ignorant_ape

Where did I challenge "basalt" in wretchfossil.blogspot.com... ?

originally posted by: FossilLin
a reply to: SeaWorthy

"basalt columns " are not crystalline structures. Crystalline structures have no relation whatsoever to the production of "basalt" columns. Regarding "Giant selenium crystals.",they are rare, not found all over world. Starch is not the same as rocks.

Ok
So entire mountains of tight nit stone have been created for some purpose and there they sit, not many things have been built with the stuff world wide.
So what was the point for making these mountains?

a reply to: FossilLin

originally posted by: FossilLin
a reply to: InhaleExhale
Hand tools (without an engine) cannot produce such surfaces."
NOW I REMEMBER: BY HAND TOOLS, I MEANT PRIMITIVE HAND TOOLS, NOT MODERN HAND TOOLS.

You must have a painfully short memory, not a few posts ago, you were saying primitive hand tools cannot produce these shapes. I'm saying, just like everything else you're prattling on about - you're very wrong and ignorant of facts. I can find you plenty of more images from many different cultures who have produced smooth right angles in stone with primitive hand tools.

And my proof? I don't think there were power tools in 600AD. Pretty logical assumption.

a reply to: airforce47

Human kind must CLEAN (cleanse) a planet before leaving a planet for good. Perchlorate was used on Mars AFTER humans had lived on Mars for many millions of years.

a reply to: FossilLin

you did it right here :

Basically I claim geological processes did not and could not produce basalt columns. So, I infer that they were produced by life of a human kind.

I SPECULATE that they were molded from CONCRETE-like material.

so stop being so dammed dishonest

a reply to: ignorant_ape

That's not in my ORIGINAL POST: wretchfossil.blogspot.com...
"I SPECULATE that they were molded from CONCRETE-like material." That's not in my original post.

a reply to: Badams

A concrete blocks manufacturer commented on my post "Numerous Concrete Blocks Mistaken for Rocks":
Quote:
Suchita Singh November 24, 2016 at 1:11 AM
nice blog.
concrete blocks manufacturers
Unquote
It's displayed at wretchfossil.blogspot.com...

a reply to: Badams

" Dated around 600ish AD. "
Remember: question EVERYTHING.

a reply to: ignorant_ape

The photo is zero evidence that basalt columns were formed naturally.

a reply to: FossilLin

There is no evidence for anything your putting forward. You’re also not accepting any evidence to the contrary. I suggest you go do some real research, not just typing your opinion about online images. Go study some geology and you’ll realise everything you’re saying is wrong and baseless.

a reply to: Badams

So, you think the second photo at wretchfossil.blogspot.com...
shows objects made from hand tools of 600AD? Think again.

a reply to: FossilLin


Interested to know what you think the Pyramids are made of. Generally accepted that they were constructed from blocks of limestone/granite. Do you think they are made of concrete too?

a reply to: FossilLin

Yes, the curved stone in the second photo was made with hand tools. Prove to me it wasn’t. Oh wait, you can’t prove literally anything you’re saying.

Speaking as someone who has repeatedly driven down the Columbia River Gorge in Oregon and seen the spectacular basalt columns in the cliffs there, can I just stand over here and laugh at this thread please?

originally posted by: FossilLin
a reply to: Badams

So, you think the second photo at wretchfossil.blogspot.com...
shows objects made from hand tools of 600AD? Think again.

You dont even know what your looking at do you? Looks like its igneous andesite to me. Doesn't look like concrete but hey if your right its incredibly easy to prove. Petrographic and chemical analyses are relatively trivial to carry out, and even allow us to determine exactly where the rocks were quarried.

So did you have any tests run in fact you can find local companies to do petrographic analysis on concrete its often used to test bridges.

Of course he doesn’t you’ve seen the effort the OP put into this thread.

a reply to: FossilLin

To repeat, I did NOT challenge BASALT in my original post.

Who cares?


I quoted exactly what I was addressing and that was you saying that there is an issue with the definition of basalt.

I just talked about morphology, shape, evidence for formation, mechanism, etc. I did not talk about material itself.

seeing as the material will likely give a clue as to why and how and when things formed and why they may have changed or morphed saying you don't want talk about it when you have been throughout your whole thread is just what exactly?

NOW I REMEMBER: BY HAND TOOLS, I MEANT PRIMITIVE HAND TOOLS, NOT MODERN HAND TOOLS.

whats the difference between a primitive hand tool and a modern one?

What hand tool are talking about?

How primitive are you thinking?

hand tools haven't changed in their abilities, just the designs have changed and material used changed.

Now they are easier and more comfortable to use and more durable that what they were in the past.

Primitive hand tools do the same jobs as modern hand tools.

Well let’s see first being materials, then we move on to construction,engineering, testing, a hundred years+ of mass manufacturing and we’re just breaking the surface. You’d be lucky to have an early copper alloy (laced with arsenic to make the material tougher and make life interesting) and copper hand tools aren’t used for a reason, aside from insane cost today it’s a terribly tool material it’s soft until it work hardens then it becomes brittle and has to be annealed to get back it’s malubility and de-stress the grain structure. So making the 90’s would just require more time and skill, think of it like drilling a hole in wood with a bit and brace versus an electric cordless drill, same job gets done but the amount of time and effort are vastly different.