It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Byrd
#4 - ...a real giggle. I work in a museum paleontology lab, and can say beyond a shadow of a doubt that the statement " (all of varied but known dinosaur species) " is hysterically funny and just plain wrong. They DO look like cartoon drawings of dinosaurs, but no dino ever looked like those!
Hoax.
If authentic, the figurines imply even more archeological anomalies:
If the figurines really were based on actual dinosaurs, why have no dinosaur fossils been found in the Acambaro region?
Why did no other Mexican cultures record any dinosaurs?
What caused the dinosaurs to disappear in the last 1,100 years?
Originally posted by Hanslune
In regards to the Acambaro figurines. This talk origins site covers the controversy very well
The figurines
If authentic, the figurines imply even more archeological anomalies:
If the figurines really were based on actual dinosaurs, why have no dinosaur fossils been found in the Acambaro region?
Why did no other Mexican cultures record any dinosaurs?
What caused the dinosaurs to disappear in the last 1,100 years?
Circumstances of the Figures' “Excavation”
The very circumstances from which the figures first appeared are cited as dubious. Julsrud claims that he paid the farmers for every figure they brought him, which would have given the farmers motive to create their own figures and disguise them as ancient artifacts.
Condition of the Figures and the excavation
According to DiPeso, the surface of the figures was practically brand new and they showed no characteristic evidence of having been in the ground for at least 1500 years. If they were authentic artifacts, they should be scratched and marred from the rocky soil, which is characteristic of artifacts found in that area of Mexico. Also, while people were digging up the artifacts, DiPeso observed them crush through authentic artifacts to reach the figures, yet none of the figures themselves displayed any marks of damage. Other evidence includes fresh manure and fingerprints found under the ground, and black fill from other strata which was discovered in sterile red earth, all of which is evidence of tampering with the site.
The Number of Figures and their Condition
The sheer number of perfect figures found is cited as evidence for a hoax. Over 32,000 figures were found, and all of them in perfect condition except for a few that were cleanly broken, perhaps to create the illusion of antiquity. If these were authentic antiquities, they would not be preserved with such perfection in such an inhospitable environment. Pottery is almost always uncovered as fragments called sherds; nowhere have 32,000 unblemished ceramics been uncovered with none of them in fragments and all of them in perfect condition (cleanly broken in two does not count as fragments).
Evidence?
Don Patton has provided what he claims to be accurate radiocarbon dates for the figures ranging from 6500 years to 1500 years.The laboratories that produced these dates have stated that they were inconclusive, but Dennis Swift claims that once the laboratories discovered what they were dating, they retracted their original dates. The claim is strange because radiocarbon dating can only be performed on items which possess carbon: living or formerly living things, of which pottery or ceramic is neither (see radiocarbon dating).
Originally posted by truthseekerpeacemaker
what about the Antikythera Mechanism
strange aritfact
Where is the missing link that would support evolution? Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence
Why did no other Mexican cultures record any dinosaurs? OK, so maybe it is further south to some degree...but the Ica Stones are another recording of said dinosaurs
A population in decline 3000 years ago may have gone extinct 1100 years ago. Or perhaps it hasn't, yet. There ARE legends of prehistoric creatures...
So, i would be interested to hear what you think they were representing.
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
You are correct that there isn't much that we have found that looks like those "dino's". But one does look surprisingly similar to a stegasaurus.
And it would not discount unfound species of dinosaur.
As well, with you being a fellow Texan you are likely familiar with the boot found near Ozona with a petrified foot found in it.
Originally posted by C.C.Benjamin
reply to post by Byrd
I have to say I agree with you on all but point 1. I thought these artifacts were ancient? Or at least, pre-airplane, anyway, how could we have spoken to the makers if so?
Also, if those are "birds" they are either terrible artists or very, very abstract.
I agree that many of our OOPARTS are related to either poorly described or poorly understood processes.
Originally posted by Byrd
Originally posted by C.C.Benjamin
reply to post by Byrd
I have to say I agree with you on all but point 1. I thought these artifacts were ancient? Or at least, pre-airplane, anyway, how could we have spoken to the makers if so?
Also, if those are "birds" they are either terrible artists or very, very abstract.
"ancient" is "past 800 years or so (pre-Columbian). This is a traditional art form and wasn't just made for 50 years and then abandoned. These designs continue in other forms ... not just jewelry.
And yes, they have cultural abstractions. You might not recognize some of the forms for what they are.