China: Ancient Pyramids + Explosions: "Underground Forests in Mystery Holes of Guangxi"

originally posted by: ArMaP
a reply to: JamesChessman

You don't need to repeat what's on that page, I already read it.

And it's still someone's opinion.

Well the larger point was that it’s often referred to and quoted, by many different people, that the Vedas describe weapons of mass destruction. And the linked webpage is doing that, afaik, he’s quoting specific terms from the Vedas.

I think you’re misrepresenting it to say he’s just making things up, I think he’s clearly referring to the content of the Vedas.

Given that we don’t read Sanskrit, and that it seems a very messy topic, it’s probably the best we can do to find such sources referring to the content of the Vedas… and there’s just infinite different sources that do refer to the Vedas’ weapons of mass destruction…

originally posted by: JamesChessman
Well the larger point was that it’s often referred to and quoted, by many different people, that the Vedas describe weapons of mass destruction. And the linked webpage is doing that, afaik, he’s quoting specific terms from the Vedas.

There's a difference between quoting and paraphrasing, that page appears to be paraphrasing the original texts, not quoting them, and adds a personal interpretation, although I think that should also be a question.

Goodness gracious, is this Brahmasthra then what we call nuclear missile in today’s scientific language.!!!…..

I think you’re misrepresenting it to say he’s just making things up, I think he’s clearly referring to the content of the Vedas.

But it's not quoting.

Given that we don’t read Sanskrit, and that it seems a very messy topic, it’s probably the best we can do to find such sources referring to the content of the Vedas… and there’s just infinite different sources that do refer to the Vedas’ weapons of mass destruction…

Or you can read a translation of the Vedas, available on the Hindu section of the Internet Sacred Text Archive.

a reply to: JamesChessman

Another thing, according to Wikipedia, the weapon (Brahmastra) was discharged on what is today's Rajasthan, so if it was a nuclear weapon that area should have signs of the use of one.

a reply to: ArMaP

But it's not quoting.

Well I think he was quoting at least the names, phrases, and details, from the Vedas, like the "Brahmasthra" seems a legit phrasing from the Vedas, afaik. But also, beyond the specific details like that, yes you're right that the rando webpage was mostly paraphrasing and adding his personal interpretation (which also happens to be a common personal interpretation among many people).

Or you can read a translation of the Vedas, available on the Hindu section of the Internet Sacred Text Archive.

Ok that sounds awesome, I didn't know about that.

originally posted by: ArMaP
a reply to: JamesChessman

Another thing, according to Wikipedia, the weapon (Brahmastra) was discharged on what is today's Rajasthan, so if it was a nuclear weapon that area should have signs of the use of one.

I didn't know that either, and it's interesting, but the nuclear remnants would obviously be subject to the length of time, since it happened. And so far, it doesn't seem that we are finding any real clarity of the timeline of ancient history in the Vedas.

Are you finding a clear idea of when exactly the weapon supposedly hit? i.e. how many thousands of years ago? Or does this seem an open question, of when it supposedly happened?

a reply to: ArMaP

Or you can read a translation of the Vedas, available on the Hindu section of the Internet Sacred Text Archive.

Also, I'm not exactly sure why, but at some point I got the impression that the Vedas were basically impossible to read.

I think this might be from pre-internet days, I might have just gotten the impression that it was TOO MUCH for anyone to read and make sense of. And I figured I'd never deal with it, plus I was never extremely interested in Hinduism anyway.

Also I didn't know if accurate translations were even possible from the ancient Sanskrit. (Buddhism is considered clearly translated and preserved, but I didn't know if ancient Hindu texts were or not.)

But if the Vedas are legit online and accurate, then that's awesome to realize that.

Was there some portion of ancient Vedas that were lost, or unable to translate, or anything like that?

a reply to: ArMaP

Also I'm just realizing that this might have been a misunderstanding when you said that the Vedas were only 3500 yrs old.

Because I was really mainly interested in the timeline of Hinduism and its reported Puranic timeline... and maybe that stretches back before it was written, and it was only spoken word, for a few thousand years before that?





I stay with my perspective that Hinduism MUST have been several thousand years old, at the time of the Buddha, which was 2600yrs ago.

His whole context was being born into Hinduism already being ancient, I believe: several thousand years already before the Buddha's birth.

So that's why I was saying that the Vedas / Hinduism had to be older than only 3500 yrs ago, because that doesn't line up with the Buddha's timeline. But like I said, maybe it's a matter of the Vedas being spoken word for an epoch BEFORE they started to get actually recorded 3500yrs ago. That would make much more sense, because it would be acknowledging Hinduism's ancient epoch of thousands of years before the Buddha.













Plus the content of each religion is self-evident / obvious that these religions are from completely different eras. Ancient Vedas are describing aliens, warfare, insanity like that.

Buddhism is a much newer religion, it's most focused on Enlightenment which is really basically personal well-being and helping others. Buddhism has mythology too but it really remains CENTERED on the path to Enlightenment, peace, and selflessly helping others.





That's kind of a nutshell summary of both religions as I see it. Hinduism is self-evidently ancient with its insane mythology of different species of people, advanced civilization, warfare etc. Buddhism just basically accepts it as ancient history, and moves on with clarifying the focus of our lives on personal growth and goodwill to others.




I haven't made a point of searching this out, yet, but I expect that I can find some Buddhist references to Hinduism being many thousands of years old, before the Buddha's birth. It's just something so famous and accepted that I never even looked for info about it, lol.

Alright here's a very legit article from history.com.

www.history.com...#:~:text=Hinduism%20and%20Buddhism%20have%20many,path%20to%20salvation%20and%20enlightenment.


Re: the age of Hinduism:

Origins of Hinduism
Most scholars believe Hinduism started somewhere between 2300 B.C. and 1500 B.C. in the Indus Valley, near modern-day Pakistan. But many Hindus argue that their faith is timeless and has always existed.

^So their older estimate there is 2300 BC. Which would mean: Hinduism is now 4,300 years old, today.

That makes more sense in relationship to Buddhism, because that's at least allowing for Hinduism to have its epoch of about 2,000 years, before the Buddha's birth marked this new epoch (since his birth).

So that DOES make much more sense, as a possible timeline, in relationship to Buddhism.

originally posted by: JamesChessman
I didn't know that either, and it's interesting, but the nuclear remnants would obviously be subject to the length of time, since it happened.

Sure, but, as far as I know, there isn't one clear sign of any use of mass destruction weapons.

Are you finding a clear idea of when exactly the weapon supposedly hit? i.e. how many thousands of years ago? Or does this seem an open question, of when it supposedly happened?

That appears to be the biggest problem, as, apparently, there isn't a clear way of knowing it, that's why there are different interpretations.

a reply to: ArMaP

Sure, but, as far as I know, there isn't one clear sign of any use of mass destruction weapons.

Ok, but also, I think if there's a long-enough time then the clear signs would eventually, gradually fade away. So I think if there's enough thousands of years then the signs would seem to mostly disappear, with enough time passing.

That appears to be the biggest problem, as, apparently, there isn't a clear way of knowing it, that's why there are different interpretations.

^Ah OK, that's it, my general impressions from the 1990's that ancient Hindu texts are not all clearly interpreted / understood, completely.

That's disappointing but that also just leaves it an open question what the real timeline would be, if it's real.



(By the way, it's one of the best aspects of Buddhism, that it actually has managed to be clearly, safely preserved for 2600yrs. Which is almost a miracle, in and of itself, considering how easy and common it is, for history to be lost, for any kind of history.)

originally posted by: JamesChessman
Ok, but also, I think if there's a long-enough time then the clear signs would eventually, gradually fade away. So I think if there's enough thousands of years then the signs would seem to mostly disappear, with enough time passing.

It depends on the time of weapon.

^Ah OK, that's it, my general impressions from the 1990's that ancient Hindu texts are not all clearly interpreted / understood, completely.

It's not a question of not being clearly interpreted, I think it's a question of no clear ways of dating the events being part of the text, so there is really nothing that can be directly used to date them.

(By the way, it's one of the best aspects of Buddhism, that it actually has managed to be clearly, safely preserved for 2600yrs. Which is almost a miracle, in and of itself, considering how easy and common it is, for history to be lost, for any kind of history.)

It's not that difficult when there's a written language and there isn't anybody interested in destroying that specific part of history.
Being ignored is the best way of being preserved.

a reply to: ArMaP

It's not that difficult when there's a written language and there isn't anybody interested in destroying that specific part of history.
Being ignored is the best way of being preserved.

Ok, well those are good points, Buddhism has been a small, consistent percentage of the world since it started. So it has mainly kept to itself and so it's been easily "ignored" in most contexts.

And it's also been a peaceful religion that has not had religious wars against other religions, which is claimed to be the only religion that hasn't. So that probably goes most of the way for explaining the lack of destruction of Buddhism.




(There are a few very specific exceptions, of times and places that it was not working out, but those are generally considered true aspects about Buddhism.

The big exceptions include that there has been destruction of the traditional temples and monks etc. in China, sadly enough, but that's a matter of the government going after them, while they keep to themselves. Tibet etc.





There's also another place, I have to double-check but I believe it's Burma, there are masses of people who are really the worst version of Buddhists because it's become like a tribal marker for them, not even a religion / philosophy, just a goddam tribal marker like f*cking cavemen. The masses of Buddhists are locked in neverending war with Muslims in the area, everyone is ignorant and wrong on BOTH sides of that conflict, and they're BOTH misusing their religion as a tribal war stamp.

So those are the big exceptions that I know of, off the dome, when / where Buddhism has NOT worked out.





So I think really it's still pretty miraculous that Buddhism has managed to survive and remain preserved, there are such examples of its destruction in limited areas of the world, like that.




And then just consider that Christianity has lost its own record of its own founder and his life, for example, Christianity has altogether been ANTI-history preservation, in many different examples of that, around the world, in the last 2,000 yrs. Christianity has attacked / destroyed other religions / cultures, including destroying those dead-cultures' history, as well as Christianity losing / destroying Jesus' own history, which I still find amazing.

Anyway there's any number of different examples of history-destruction around the world, throughout all times, so maybe it helps to remember that context, which helps explain why Buddhism's preservation does seem very rare and unique.)

a reply to: ArMaP

It depends on the time of weapon.

Yes. Along those lines, I'm sure you know this but probably not everyone knows, that there is a small, natural amount of background radiation value... of everything on Earth, if I recall correctly.

So if there was ancient nuclear bombs, with enough thousands of years, its resulting radioactivity would seem to disappear in the constant background radiation that we are just normally living with...

a reply to: ArMaP

It's not a question of not being clearly interpreted, I think it's a question of no clear ways of dating the events being part of the text, so there is really nothing that can be directly used to date them.

Alright so this basically puts Hinduism as a religion which has lost track of its own timeline... which is a mind-blowing concept... and in Hinduism's case, it can be blamed on the religion being so ancient...

Like I said before, Buddhism's preservation seems almost miraculous when u consider the world's propensity for destruction of history and destruction of everything.

But it's also a much-newer religion so its preservation has been much easier and rather automatic, it has had the right context to be preserved.

a reply to: JamesChessman

Now it's called Myanmar.

a reply to: JamesChessman

There are different types of radiation, so it's possible to identify, to some extent, what the source of that radiation is.

Also, depending on the type of radiative material, its radioactive half-life (the time it takes for the amount of radiation being reduced to half) may have huge differences, with some materials having a half-life of milliseconds and others, like caesium-135 (with a half-life of 2.3 million years) or selenium-79 (327,000 years) that could easily be used to detect an old nuclear fission event.

originally posted by: ArMaP
a reply to: JamesChessman

Now it's called Myanmar.

Ok, I didn't double-check my reference to it, when I wrote it. Also I thought it was called both Burma and Myanmar, I usually always saw it called "Burma/Myanmar."

I'd have to double check but the tribal war conflict doubtless spills into some neighboring areas too, I expect.

To be clear, I consider them uneducated tribal war factions, I don't consider them actual Buddhists nor actual Muslims neither, in that specific area, defined by endless conflict, and uneducated / primitive thinking, for everyone involved.

It's really a situation where truth is stranger than fiction, both sides of the conflict are basically modern-day... primitive humans, and they're both misusing a religion as a tribal stamp, for the war. It's really bizarre.

Well as for the Vedas: Apparently we just have to settle on the timeline being unclear. I'm pretty sure that one channel has at least one video about the timeline in the Vedas so I'll look for that.

Then I expect there is plenty of descriptions of ancient war but it somewhat becomes a moot point if we can't pin down any sort of timeline, unfortunately.





So I still believe in the ancient advanced civilizations described in the Vedas even if we can't figure out its timeline. I think it indicates how ancient it is, that it got lost in the mists of time.




Also the discussion has emphasized to me how much I don't necessarily believe in most dating methods, with all the discussion of the YD Impact sites, I'm kind of agnostic now about the entire thing. i.e. I don't think human beings are really capable of dating back such ancient sites.



So I think there remains a lot of buried pyramids and a lot of impacts / signs of ancient war, but honestly probably nobody can accurately date any of it.

originally posted by: JamesChessman
Also the discussion has emphasized to me how much I don't necessarily believe in most dating methods, with all the discussion of the YD Impact sites, I'm kind of agnostic now about the entire thing. i.e. I don't think human beings are really capable of dating back such ancient sites.

"Most" dating methods? Which ones do you believe?

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: JamesChessman
Also the discussion has emphasized to me how much I don't necessarily believe in most dating methods, with all the discussion of the YD Impact sites, I'm kind of agnostic now about the entire thing. i.e. I don't think human beings are really capable of dating back such ancient sites.

"Most" dating methods? Which ones do you believe?

Well carbon dating is supposedly respected as accurate, for dating organic matter, but it doesn't really apply to non-organic things like stone, which basically leaves me doubtful that anyone can accurately date ancient pyramids or ancient Younger Dryas Impact sites...

Are you still reading the Vedas or did the interest run out when you established that the timeline is lost?