Laser mapping reveals largest and oldest Mayan temple - Aguada Fénix

As Graham Hancock likes to say, Stuff just keeps on getting older...

"Without lidar, we probably would recognize the importance of this site eventually. But it would have taken many seasons of laborious mapping on the ground," he said.
Called Aguada Fénix, this previously unknown Maya site in Tabasco, Mexico, was built between 1,000 BC and 800 BC. The huge elevated platform stands 10 to 15 meters above the surrounding area with nine causeways extending from the platform.
Inomata said its volume, 3.8 million cubic meters, is larger than the Great Pyramid of Giza, Egypt (2.6 million cubic meters) --- although it's much shorter than the pyramid.
The platform would have been used for rituals and the team found jade axes and other precious objects in its center, said Inomata.

Link to the source > edition.cnn.com...
Link to the article (20 pages) in Nature.com



Enjoy.

originally posted by: iasenko

The platform would have been used for rituals and the team found jade axes and other precious objects in its center, said Inomata.

Might have ... long after it was re-discovered.

People running about in loincloths weren't inclined to build megalithic structures.

a reply to: Snarl

Read the article...that data does not agree with you.

Which is a more shocking finding than the building itself ...possibly over turning the causal relationship in ritualistic society and sedentary lifestyle.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
Read the article...that data does not agree with you.

I know.

If you look critically, you can apply a little common sense and utterly destroy their narrative. I'll give you one thought (because it is incredibly time consuming to type stuff out and I have other things I'd rather be doing).

You're in your kitchen. Nice tile floors. You have an accident and drop a plate or a drinking glass. Crash!! It shatters and splinters go everywhere. What do you do?

Now ... shplain to me ... why these error-free scientists are always talking about the pottery shards they find _inside_ the structures they're excavating?

Don't jump like you just got scalded by a little truth. Go back into that article and tear it apart with your mind. Ask yourself, why did they simply discredit (and conveniently dispose of) findings indicating 'something older'. Ask yourself why that always happens in modern archaeology. The one real modern exception has been Göbekli Tepe ... and the bastards are still trying to adjust the dates of that site younger.

The truth is that there was a civilization (and I mean a real civilization) that existed thousands and thousands and thousands of years before the ancient Egyptians and Mayans. They built megalithic structures because they could ... it was easy for them. These megalithic sites had a purpose and they were built with natural resources because of that purpose.

I want you to think about how incredibly destructive 'time' is. Go look it up. How long would it take for evidence of our ultra modern (I'm laughing here) civilization to completely disappear if we all died out tomorrow. How long? What would 'future' people find out about us if they went a-digging? Say ... 30,000 years from now. Throw in a little ice age maybe. Glaciers of depths measured in miles sliding across the Great Plains of America once again. (There are two basic reasons you find flat spots. Know what they are?)

People way smarter'n me have utterly destroyed the narrative of mainstream (1950ish) archaeology. They're just not mainstream. That's all. When they're put to task they'll admit they don't have answers either ... and the fallback is 'just use the mainstream narrative' because no one likes a void ... everyone has to know/has to have 'the answer'.

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
Read the article...that data does not agree with you.

I know.

If you look critically, you can apply a little common sense and utterly destroy their narrative. I'll give you one thought (because it is incredibly time consuming to type stuff out and I have other things I'd rather be doing).

You're in your kitchen. Nice tile floors. You have an accident and drop a plate or a drinking glass. Crash!! It shatters and splinters go everywhere. What do you do?

Now ... shplain to me ... why these error-free scientists are always talking about the pottery shards they find _inside_ the structures they're excavating?

Don't jump like you just got scalded by a little truth. Go back into that article and tear it apart with your mind. Ask yourself, why did they simply discredit (and conveniently dispose of) findings indicating 'something older'. Ask yourself why that always happens in modern archaeology. The one real modern exception has been Göbekli Tepe ... and the bastards are still trying to adjust the dates of that site younger.

The truth is that there was a civilization (and I mean a real civilization) that existed thousands and thousands and thousands of years before the ancient Egyptians and Mayans. They built megalithic structures because they could ... it was easy for them. These megalithic sites had a purpose and they were built with natural resources because of that purpose.

I want you to think about how incredibly destructive 'time' is. Go look it up. How long would it take for evidence of our ultra modern (I'm laughing here) civilization to completely disappear if we all died out tomorrow. How long? What would 'future' people find out about us if they went a-digging? Say ... 30,000 years from now. Throw in a little ice age maybe. Glaciers of depths measured in miles sliding across the Great Plains of America once again. (There are two basic reasons you find flat spots. Know what they are?)

People way smarter'n me have utterly destroyed the narrative of mainstream (1950ish) archaeology. They're just not mainstream. That's all. When they're put to task they'll admit they don't have answers either ... and the fallback is 'just use the mainstream narrative' because no one likes a void ... everyone has to know/has to have 'the answer'.

edit on 462020 by Snarl because:

Maybe there are a lot more secrets hidden in breccia than we realise...
(Great post btw)

a reply to: Snarl

Agree'd, I am of the very strong opinion that there have been many former great civilization's, perhaps even several global civilization's and despite the inconvenience and controversy of certain finds' that have a habit of either going missing or being attacked furiously that humanity itself is either not the first HUMAN like race native to this planet or is indeed far older than it is currently accepted to be.

There is just too much that has been found over the century's that does not fit into the official mainstream narrative of a bunch of apes that suddenly learned to invent keyboard's and comment on there own history.

Stuff like this.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Of course there is another explanation, the dating is all wrong and the great flood really happened.
www.youtube.com...
www.noahsarksearch.com...
You may notice that there are TWO conflicting - or seemingly so - Ark's, but they could have come from different flood's, our's was the last one not the first.

And there is other evidence that the bible is true.


Of course this truth does not dismiss or deny the possibility of previous civilizations predating the biblical Adam indeed it can even reinforce the commitment to them as a very real possibilty.
www.gaia.com...

And indeed it would explain certain thing's that have been found that even the great flood would have difficulty explaining.

a reply to: Snarl

I highly recomend you read the book Timeless Earth.

...on topic, this is an incredible discovery. I would love to go see some of these myself one day.
S&F.

-Driver

a reply to: LABTECH767

And indeed it would explain certain thing's that have been found that even the great flood would have difficulty explaining.

The great flood destroyed much of the ancient world, and because of the ocean rise at nearly the same time covered much of it in water. But not all great works were destroyed by the flood, and needed to be "Removed" in another more direct fashion.

originally posted by: LABTECH767
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Thanks LabTech. ATS is a treasure house.

personal to iasenko: I didn't mean to derail your thread from it's subject. Some of the ancient sites found in the Americas are as fascinating as anywhere else in the world ... just less accessible. Thanks so much for sharing your find. S&F

a reply to: iasenko

man i like me some intact temples above ground that the jungle overgrowed, not ones you have to dig up.
was also wantin to see more picture with captions, hate reading full of themselves mainstreamers writing trying to show how smart they are.

Love it! LIDAR is amazing

www.asor.org...

Beneath the Euphrates Sediments: Magnetic Traces of the Mesopotamian Megacity Uruk-Warka



www.asor.org...

It's OK guys, don't worry about derailing the thread, any good discussions are welcome.
I'm so tired of all those bad news on the home page of the forum, so at least I'm happy i can share something positive.

Stay safe guys, both from viruses and vandalism

Contrary to what Hancock says, the Maya as a culture arose a thousand years before this platform was erected.
Nothing's getting older in this story.

Harte

originally posted by: Harte
Contrary to what Hancock says, the Maya as a culture arose a thousand years before this platform was erected.
Nothing's getting older in this story.

Harte

Ok here we go then close the thread down Hancock is wrong (again) so says Harte so end of !

originally posted by: fotsyfots

originally posted by: Harte
Contrary to what Hancock says, the Maya as a culture arose a thousand years before this platform was erected.
Nothing's getting older in this story.

Harte

Ok here we go then close the thread down Hancock is wrong (again) so says Harte so end of !

Hancock is so often wrong that it would be difficult to point to an instance where he was actually right.

Harte

originally posted by: fotsyfots

originally posted by: Harte
Contrary to what Hancock says, the Maya as a culture arose a thousand years before this platform was erected.
Nothing's getting older in this story.

Harte

Ok here we go then close the thread down Hancock is wrong (again) so says Harte so end of !

Hancock says so to (that he is wrong). Have you not read his books? Does he not come up with different 'ideas' in each one?

He firstly placed his beloved 'Lost and invisible Civilization' in the Antarctic and lately in North America? Which is right?

Oh and he also stated he wouldn't provide evidence to support his contentions...why do you think that is?

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: fotsyfots

originally posted by: Harte
Contrary to what Hancock says, the Maya as a culture arose a thousand years before this platform was erected.
Nothing's getting older in this story.

Harte

Ok here we go then close the thread down Hancock is wrong (again) so says Harte so end of !

Hancock is so often wrong that it would be difficult to point to an instance where he was actually right.

Harte

Hey Harte

Here is one example of him being right about somthing:

He also claims that the Mayan calendar portended world cataclysms in 2012. In Magicians, Hancock now says he got it all wrong--there was no crustal shift; instead he thinks this advanced civilization was destroyed by a comet.

You see he was correct in nothing he was wrong (I give him kudos for noting he had been wrong - many pseudos will not do so under any circumstances).

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: fotsyfots

originally posted by: Harte
Contrary to what Hancock says, the Maya as a culture arose a thousand years before this platform was erected.
Nothing's getting older in this story.

Harte

Ok here we go then close the thread down Hancock is wrong (again) so says Harte so end of !

Hancock is so often wrong that it would be difficult to point to an instance where he was actually right.

Harte

Hey Harte

Here is one example of him being right about somthing:

He also claims that the Mayan calendar portended world cataclysms in 2012. In Magicians, Hancock now says he got it all wrong--there was no crustal shift; instead he thinks this advanced civilization was destroyed by a comet.

You see he was correct in nothing he was wrong (I give him kudos for noting he had been wrong - many pseudos will not do so under any circumstances).

He also admitted being wrong about the Great Pyramid predating the Egyptians.

Harte

originally posted by: Harte

...

He (Hancock) also admitted being wrong about the Great Pyramid predating the Egyptians.

Yes - but, on some occasions, he has shown a tendency to edge back to his previous position.