The Real Meaning of the Statues on Easter Island

originally posted by: micpsi


Science: Publication of ALL evidence, peer review, constant review of theories to see if the facts fit

Only partial publication of some evidence. If the evidence, say, disproved Darwinism, the editor would not risk losing his job by publishing such paradigm-shattering data. Peer review is not always by unbiassed peers. If it refutes their life-long research, don't expect them to be fair and impartial! Scientists are also human.

No a creationist scientist would publish it immediately. Long standing theories fall every day so I suspect those biased Peers are doing a suckie job.

Alternative Science same procedures above but use innovative and unproven/non consensus interpretations of the same evidence

But the interpretations of the evidence published in academic journals are also unproven, otherwise those in alternative science would not bother offering different ones. Alternative Science research is "non-consensus" because mainstream science deliberately excludes theories and research challenging orthodox views, so that it has no chance of becoming accepted by the majority of scientists.

You've never been to a scientific conference or worked in an academic department have you? I hate to tell you but 'infighting' is common place, expected and vigorous - and on going - in the Western world there are no monolithic hierarchies to 'force' a consensus.

"No review" is the result of deliberate exclusion by academic journals and the refusal of scientists to comment on highly unorthodox ideas. "Selected use of evidence" is not unusual to find in academic journal papers, either!

"Evidence made up" is rare and often exposed by fellow fringe researchers.

Everywhere, common and widespread, I would say that fake evidence out does real on the web by 10 to 1. Most fringe attack the mainstream not each other. Most fringe and alt is based on 19th alt and fringe, little actual research is done.

Of course, evidence is fabricated as well in mainstream research - there are many notorious cases.

Yep and they were notorious because they were exposed. Fake stuff is commonly touted on a regular basis.

It is just not so easy to spot, as it usually requires specialised knowledge, a Ph.D, etc. Well, of course there is no "proper publication". Academic publishers wanting not to ruin their reputations or to rock the boat by publishing controversial research like homeopathy make sure of that.

Ah no I meant publishing generalist books instead of evidence filled papers - like Graham Hancock does.

Nonsense. The population is brainwashed regularly by the Carl Sagans and the Sir David Attenboroughs to believe in the official scientific scenario or paradigm.

Sagan has been dead for since 1996......who is in charge of the 'official scientific scenario' ??? LOL . Who is that and where are their offices? I mean to keep track of every scientist in the world you'd need one heck of an administration system.

But these did not destroy any scientific paradigm. They merely pushed back the date of civilised man a few thousand years. Big deal!

No but they changed theories which was the point. It was a big deal. If you are going to 'destroy a scientific paradigm' you're gonna need some real heavy duty evidence - the lack of which causes that not to happen.

In the world I live in (centered around archaeology) big changes were from the findings of Deep time DNA, the hobbits, GT, etc) and no we haven't found Atlantis, aliens or Lemuria either - no evidence.

Ony if you ignore the evidence of alternative, non-mainstream research that suggests a different, ancient scenario. As you obviously do, your appraisal is worthles because it is based upon cherry-picking of evidence.

My apprasial is based on 50+ years of looking for an early rise of Human civilization in the Eemian era. I'm well versed in the 'evidence' of the conflicting alternative, fringe and fantasy worlds. Someone may be blind but I think its not me.

There is MUCH persuasive evidence of ancient, high civilisation. You just choose to ignore it all because it does not fit the presupposition of orthodox science that scientific and technological progress always increases with time. This is wrong, wrong, wrong! That's why scientists ignore Ooparts and dishonestly explain the anomalies of engineering and building found in megalithic, archaeological sites. We can now expose their deceptions and shallow explanations. The problem, however, is: we are not allowed to do so by publishing our exposures of their inadequate work in scientific journals. So we have to write and self-publish our own books. As the reward for exposing their shortcomings, we are delegated to the "Alternative science" - or even worse - the "Lunatic fringe"!

Oh my a good and completely wrong rant - okay show me the three pieces of hard evidence that proves the above?

So stop white-washing scientists as though they are not responsible for the existence of an alternative science. It is the inadequacies of THEIR theories or explanations and the unfairness of the peer-review process stifling radical thinking which gave birth to an opposing and alternative view. It is only "alternative science " because it contradicts mainstream science.

What scientists like Robert Schoch? You seem to forget that 'real' scientists are making alternative claims all the time, fringe one much less but a few even go into fantasy (usually out side the area of their expertise) - its pretty common.

So explain to me the existence of Robert Schoch? A spitter outer of fringe, alt and fantasy and yet a respected member of Academia?

www.robertschoch.com...
en.wikipedia.org...

In your world view he shouldn't exist but he does.

Your white/black world is really a reversed Oreo, only a bit of white some black and a lot of grey inbetween.

Truth is, we don’t know the meaning of the maoi, and that’s that.

Since most are buried then we’d need to unbury them to get any sense of their original appearance/ purpose.

If food offerings were made then it’s still not the original purpose unless it was unburied and then analyzed at the deepest original level.

So if the soil analyzed is 10 feet or 25 feet above the original level, then it’s not the original situation that’s being analyzed.

Anyway food offerings are very natural — people do small food offerings everyday to Buddha altars, Hindu altars etc.

Hardly the original purpose of the Maoi though imo.

originally posted by: JamesChessman
Truth is, we don’t know the meaning of the maoi, and that’s that.

Since most are buried then we’d need to unbury them to get any sense of their original appearance/ purpose.

If food offerings were made then it’s still not the original purpose unless it was unburied and then analyzed at the deepest original level.

So if the soil analyzed is 10 feet or 25 feet above the original level, then it’s not the original situation that’s being analyzed.

Anyway food offerings are very natural — people do small food offerings everyday to Buddha altars, Hindu altars etc.

Hardly the original purpose of the Maoi though imo.

Most aren't buried just the ones on the slopes of the former main quarry Raraku Rano those were not moved for some reason a large number on the coastal area were not covered by sediments from erosion and face inward except for one ahu that does face out to sea.

887 Moai still exist and remain on the island. 397 are in situ around the quarry the rest are as I noted before along the coast except for handful that were abandoned during transport. So around 30% are covered by various level of erosion the rest aren't.

As with all of these large monuments, I often wonder what the pitch was like when whoever got the bright idea to build these big things stood up in front of the king and everybody and outlined the plan.
"So if we build a whole lot of these huge statues and make offerings to them, I can almost guarantee that we'll stop having this stupid drought and everything will be great again. They'll be a little tricky to carve and get to the prayer platform, but it'll be worth it!"
"Well, that sounds like a good plan. What are they going to look like?"
Guy shows them crude drawing of a moai. Raised eyebrows.
"Uh... are you sure the gods look like this?"
"You got a better idea?"
Silence.
"Okay, then! Let's start carving!"

originally posted by: Blue Shift
As with all of these large monuments, I often wonder what the pitch was like when whoever got the bright idea to build these big things stood up in front of the king and everybody and outlined the plan.
"So if we build a whole lot of these huge statues and make offerings to them, I can almost guarantee that we'll stop having this stupid drought and everything will be great again. They'll be a little tricky to carve and get to the prayer platform, but it'll be worth it!"
"Well, that sounds like a good plan. What are they going to look like?"
Guy shows them crude drawing of a moai. Raised eyebrows.
"Uh... are you sure the gods look like this?"
"You got a better idea?"
Silence.
"Okay, then! Let's start carving!"

That or they were symbolic reprensentations of local shamans and chiefs - but then its all speculation.

originally posted by: Hanslune
That or they were symbolic reprensentations of local shamans and chiefs - but then its all speculation.

Whatever the construction, whether it was Stonehenge or the Maoi or Gobekli Tepe, you gotta give the organizers credit. They must have been the greatest salesmen in the world to get people to put that much time and effort into building these things. Pretty ambitious for a relatively small number of people living in huts.

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: JamesChessman
Truth is, we don’t know the meaning of the maoi, and that’s that.

Since most are buried then we’d need to unbury them to get any sense of their original appearance/ purpose.

If food offerings were made then it’s still not the original purpose unless it was unburied and then analyzed at the deepest original level.

So if the soil analyzed is 10 feet or 25 feet above the original level, then it’s not the original situation that’s being analyzed.

Anyway food offerings are very natural — people do small food offerings everyday to Buddha altars, Hindu altars etc.

Hardly the original purpose of the Maoi though imo.

Most aren't buried just the ones on the slopes of the former main quarry Raraku Rano those were not moved for some reason a large number on the coastal area were not covered by sediments from erosion and face inward except for one ahu that does face out to sea.

887 Moai still exist and remain on the island. 397 are in situ around the quarry the rest are as I noted before along the coast except for handful that were abandoned during transport. So around 30% are covered by various level of erosion the rest aren't.

Thanks I wasn’t thinking of those coastal unburied statues, when I posted.

I suppose it’s probably accurate to say that most of the non-coastal statues are buried, to various degrees.

Regardless, food offerings are a very natural human inclination, and it’s very common to make such offerings to various kinds of altars, even present day.

My point is that this very natural, common practice reflects universal human nature and is not a good explanation for the original constructions imo.

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: Hanslune
That or they were symbolic reprensentations of local shamans and chiefs - but then its all speculation.

Whatever the construction, whether it was Stonehenge or the Maoi or Gobekli Tepe, you gotta give the organizers credit. They must have been the greatest salesmen in the world to get people to put that much time and effort into building these things. Pretty ambitious for a relatively small number of people living in huts.

Yeah one thinks of those people living in medieval squalor building cathedrals - madness!

People did and do crazy stuff in regards to religion - 3,000 cathedrals , 10,000 large mosques, countless Hindu temples, etc., etc.