Alien helped build Puma Punku

I dont understand the basis of stating the age of Tiwanaku or Puma Panku as 15,000 years...

The basis for stating the age of Tiajuanaco as somewhere around 12,000 BCE is 'precession dating'. The age of the Giza pyramids and other ancient structures has also been questioned due to the seeming discrepancies that exist between carbon dating and precession dating.

...It is now widely accepted that most if not all of these ancient structures were built on astronomical alignments which existed at the time. Knowledge of these alignments, coupled with our understanding of how they have since moved due to the ‘precession of the equinoxes’, provides us with a valuable tool in dating the ancient past.

Certainly it appears Tiajuanaco was built on celestial alignments which occurred up to 5000 years before archaeologists say it was founded, dating this ‘Incan’ city to around 15,000 BCE—way too early to fit the model propounded in your standard college history lesson!

Source

And then there's Gobekli Tepe. Even though this ancient temple in southeastern Turkey has been carbon-dated to around 10,000 BCE, there is still some debate as to its true age due to 'precession dating'. Some researchers say it might be even older!

Is everyone aware of Gobekli Tepe by the way? What an amazing find!

What is particularly mouth-watering about this site so far as archaeologists are concerned is that it has been carbon-dated to an incredible 10,000 BCE, predating the generally accepted construction dates of the Pyramids and Stonehenge by a staggering 7000+ years.

Source

My question is: if these structures were built on alignments to celestial bodies according to where those bodies were located in the heavens 15,000 or even 17,000 years ago, how can the structures be less than that in age?

reply to post by winston_boy

Certainly it appears Tiajuanaco was built on celestial alignments which occurred up to 5000 years before archaeologists say it was founded, dating this ‘Incan’ city to around 15,000 BCE—way too early to fit the model propounded in your standard college history lesson!

The so-called archaeoastronomical dating of Tihuanaco conducted by Posnanski, or whatever his name was, was based on alignments he made up.

Some of the things he "aligned" weren't even there when he did this "alignment" work.

The entire site was ruined and robbed of stones and entire structures long before any scientist ever laid eyes on it.

IOW, you can make up any alignment you want and odds are you can find it there.

At any rate, the ruins have been dated to 550 AD, conclusively.
Believe whatever you want.

The link to a discussion elsewhere about the site given by a previous poster includes all this information and more. As well as some "familiar" usernames.

Harte

[edit on 3/13/2009 by Harte]

At any rate, the ruins have been dated to 550 AD, conclusively. Believe whatever you want.

It's not really about what I believe, in fact I don't really believe anything one way or the other. I certainly don't necessarily 'believe' the scientific viewpoint we're all spoon-fed that says archaeological and carbon-dating results are unquestionably "conclusive". Carbon dating is based on some very dubious assumptions and mainstream science comes with its own agenda.

And neither do I necessarily 'believe' the conspiracy theory that these ancient structures are older than science tells us they are. I'm simply open to scrutinizing the evidence.

It's not just Tiwanaku. It's not just Gobekli Tepe (although for good measure even carbon dating agrees that this ancient temple is at least 12,000 years old).

It's also the Giza pyramids (whose archaeoastronomical alignments were not made up) and other ancient structures that point to a period of around 15,000 BCE in terms of construction and also suggest the possibility that a third-party civilization might have been involved in that construction.

OK, that's probably enough for now...

Accept to say that...

The link to a discussion elsewhere about the site given by a previous poster includes all this information and more. As well as some "familiar" usernames.

I couldn't find the link to which you refer and I do not understand your reference to 'some "familiar" usernames'.

In any event, you obviously know your stuff. Many thanks you for your post. It actually has made me think about my own perspective.

I think they were cut using water. Good old fashioned H2O. The water flows through a tube that contains 2 reed like devices which starts them vibrating/resonating/cavitating what ever you would like to call it. The frequentcy can be easily changed by the length of the reeds. Just like a claronete is played. The water serves a couple of purposes as well. Washing away the debris as well as cooling the cutting blade/blades most likely diamond. I think they were cut like butter to tell you guys the truth. As far as how they were moved, that little 100 pound man that built Coral Castle knew how it was done. Just my 2 cents..

The speed of sound varies with the hardness of the medium through which it passes: contrary to what you might imagine, it travels faster through liquids than through gasses such as air, and faster through solids than through liquids. By definition, molecules are closer together in harder material, and thus more quickly responsive to signals from neighboring particles. In granite, for instance, sound travels at 19,680 ft per second (6,000 mps), whereas in air, the speed of sound is only 1,086 ft per second (331 mps). It follows that sound travels faster in water—5,023 ft per second (1,531 mps), to be exact—than in air. It should be clear, then, that there is a correlation between density and the ease with which a sound travels. Thus, sound cannot travel in a vacuum, giving credence to the famous tagline from the 1979 science fiction thriller Alien: "In space, no one can hear you scream."

Originally posted by winston_boy
Carbon dating is based on some very dubious assumptions and mainstream science comes with its own agenda.

The former is certainly not true, but the latter, illustrative of any human endeavor, is an obvious statement of fact.

Originally posted by winston_boyIt's also the Giza pyramids (whose archaeoastronomical alignments were not made up) and other ancient structures that point to a period of around 15,000 BCE in terms of construction and also suggest the possibility that a third-party civilization might have been involved in that construction.

Unfortunately, the dating your talking about was most certainly made up. While there may have been some superficial attempt to construct the three main pyramids in an offset line similar to that of a portion of the Orion constellation, no correlation exists, or ever existed, between the two that would allow for any archaeoastronomical dating to occur.

You should look into what archaeoastronomical dating actually is. It does not involve any superficial similarity between positions on the ground and stars in a constellation. It deals with alignments between structures on the ground and specific stars. For example, if you are behind one structure and line it up with the tip of one across the way, this line from your eye through the first structure and across the tip of the second should continue on to point directly at, say, the position of a particular star at a momentous time in the solar year, such as an equinox or solstice.

The link to a discussion elsewhere about the site given by a previous poster includes all this information and more. As well as some "familiar" usernames.

I couldn't find the link to which you refer and I do not understand your reference to 'some "familiar" usernames'.

In any event, you obviously know your stuff. Many thanks you for your post. It actually has made me think about my own perspective.

You're welcome.

The link is This one from (I believe) page 2
The "familiar names" include myself and others that post here at ATS (or used to, anyway!)

Harte

Basically you have two opposing forces…”science” and for lack of a better term…”free-thinkers”.

These days, any new ideas which go against conventional wisdom will almost certainly be discredited and the person ridiculed.

I find this odd as not too long ago you could be a man (or woman) of both. These were the real pioneers that made science what it is today. Unfortunately, the scientific community’s “death-grip” on what they belief is fact has turned science into a dogma thus becoming somewhat close minded.

As for Puma Punku, I don’t believe ETs built it, but I believe they may have provided a little “grease” to get the wheels in our brain spinning.

Modern man has been around for about 100,000 years…..then…what can be considered an explosion of creativity occurred 40,000 years ago….yet writing wasn’t invented until about 6000 years ago. Where’s this ingenuity in man everyone is saying we shouldn’t discredit?

You always have to nudge a child a little here…and a little there… to bring out their ingenuity.





[edit on 18-3-2009 by j619pinoy]

[edit on 18-3-2009 by j619pinoy]

Originally posted by j619pinoy
Basically you have two opposing forces…”science” and for lack of a better term…”free-thinkers”.

These days, any new ideas which go against conventional wisdom will almost certainly be discredited and the person ridiculed.

I find this odd as not too long ago you could be a man (or woman) of both. These were the real pioneers that made science what it is today.

You may have underestimated the pioneers of science.

They were well educated in formal logic and theory, so many of these tests wouldn't have met their standards of proof, either. They were far better educated in world history than most are today, and spoke at least two other languages.

The "scientific method" is simply a variant of the Aristotelian logic they were formally taught. I don't know how much you've read of the papers of Newton and Copernicus and the like, but many constructions tossed around on the Internet as "proof" wouldn't have met their lowest standards.

There is a modern contempt for these things in many people -- for learning what makes a good foundation and what makes good proof. I always like to recommend Lewis Carroll's "Game of Logic" as a starter point for folks. It's available for free on the Internet.

They say the only thing capable of making cuts in that type of stone is diamond and nothing else.

I just recently found out about this place sometime within the last 6 months and it's been the topic of several of my conversations as it is one more way to make people think a little.

Didn't these guys not have a spoken language also or something?
I remember seeing the Ancient Aliens special on history and someone brought up the point that something like this would most likely require blueprints and strict direction but what struck them odd is that the people who built them had no spoken language or something like that.

The former is certainly not true...

The former certainly IS true, my friend. Which is not to say that Tiwinaku is necessarily as old as, say, Gobekli Tepe, nor indeed that the Pyramids or the Sphinx are of a similar age.

However, in my opinion you are wrong to assert that the archaeoastronomical alignments relating to the Giza Pyramids were 'made up'. They were not 'made up'....

Unfortunately, the dating your talking about was most certainly made up.

...And contrary to your confident assertion (above), neither was the date of 15,000 BCE as the postulated time of their construction.

You should look into what archaeoastronomical dating actually is.

Thank you for the advice, but I am fully aware of 'what archaeoastronomical dating actually is'.

More later...

It's apparent from your claim that the pyramids at Giza have been dated using archeoastronomical methods that you have no real grasp of the method.

Also, the alignments at Tiahuanaco were certainly manufactured by Posnanski, he admitted as much himself.

Perhaps you should read his published work on the site rather than fringe websites.

Harte

As I stated, I am not disputing that Tiahuanaco might be less ancient than some claim. Nor am I claiming the pyramids are necessarily older than conventional dating methods suggest.

What I am saying is that conventional scientific methods of dating are not necessarily water-tight either.

Like it or not, assumptions are made with regard to carbon-dating -- in particular with regard to carbon-12/carbon-14 ratios etc. Other methods are possibly more accurate, but even these could not in any way be considered conclusive beyond question.

To say different is not only in my opinion ill-founded. It is surely an assertion of misguided arrogance.

Thanks for the debate. I'm out of here...

Hmmm, yes, Puma Punku... a very hot, tasty and delicious subject with a hint of cheese. This has been such an amazing thread because the debate here is a very well informative one (...and dare I say educated because of backing proof and the expression of wisdom/knowledge/education online is unreliable at best) and this will continue to go back and forth, back and forth. No one can say for sure who built Puma Punku, when, how they did it, and why they did it.

IMO, I would like to believe that this site was built with assistance of otherworldly beings. I am sure the real answer is pretty mundane and simple, staring us in the face. Why does it seem like that how it goes sometimes? Besides, did anyone ever ponder the notion that these might be natural geological shapes? Huh? No? Well, I thought I'd throw that out there.

My ex, who's an anthropologist, finds this site a very intriguing one and she leans towards the aliens theory. BUT... she said with the absence of writings or technical plans, the only evidence that may give insight to Puma Punku is to find the tools; drills, saws, horses, cranes, reeds, boats, logs, chisels, jackhammers, what have you. This got her so wound up she went and bought Myst/Riven/Exile for her computer. What a nerd.

In someone's signature, they had written 'We're all missing the point' (...or something to that degree). I don't think the peeps here are simply missing the point but mucking up the waters in a stick and jab fashion and dancing in a haze of references and opinions.

When Jon Stewart was on Crossfire (...I think it was) he told the Democrat and the Republican guys that all they do is argue, argue for their side, to be right, the other is wrong and this is why, based on their own political views and opinions. It's human nature. The rep and dem don't put forth the good points and find a median or compromise that would work and neither do those in science fields. I once seen chimps fist fight during a game of Scrabble.

This is why we will always have an unstable government and terrorism: people can't agree. But speculation is only speculation. A large part of understanding, should be in application. Bruce Lee taught me that. Not personally, but you know what I mean.

We all can speculate on how things could have been drilled, moved, cut, etc. but how much understanding would that bring if we didn't apply these techniques? Cutting stone using water? Interesting, I'd like to see that done. 100-450 ton stones moved on log boats? I like to see that done too. And remember, using only those tools and materials of the time and place. But if we are so advanced now, then why won't we just do these things now with our contemporary and superior knowledge to put our theories to the test... and then to rest?

Quickly, I believe the very first tool, before the wheel, was a rock. Next comes the club. Then maybe the loin cloth. Then the internal combustion engine. Yeah, that's how it went, I sure.

Back to the topic... one thing to me is certain, the craftsmanship of Puma Punku is beautiful and how amazing would it have been to see it in all of it's glory.

My theory: Puma Punku was built by arrogant ancient alien/giants assisted by Bolivian natives with UFO/hovercraft/boats who didn't write down plans but used telepathy to communicate, using the local stones since they were artists and expending fuel to bus moon rock back in forth was very cost prohibitive plus using brick, wood, and mortar is for sissies.

You can quote me on that. Time will tell, oh, yes... time will tell.

AND...

I am a Native of North America and I can't speak for all indigenous people here (...because each tribe can and are very distinctive of one another) but yes, our belief was to care for the Earth as she has done us. But we didn't see our world as God, we just knew we were living in Heaven.

[edit on 12-4-2009 by DarkGift]

www.thelighthouseonline.com...

www.catchpenny.org...

Check out the osireion in egypt if you dont know about it. the most amazing building in egypt in my opinion. also likely to be MUCH older than dynastic egypt as the architectural style is so different, and it was buried UNDER the seti 1 temple as far as layering goes.

Im sorry but saying that people with flint knives and copper tools and horses and chariots built this stuff without any 'help' just seems ludicrous in the extreme to me.

Metal clamps on megaliths (sorry if this has already been posted)

www.anomalies-unlimited.com...


Couple of articles on advanced machining in ancient egypt and stone technology. opinions of modern day stone cutting experts. (for once).

www.gizapower.com...

www.theglobaleducationproject.org...

just for the record, my father's an engineer, and he went to egypt and just thought it was impossible and ridiculous when he saw the obelisks in the quarry and was then shown the copper hand tools archaeolgoists say were used to cut the stone. He doesn't say much but i know he doesnt believe the explanations that archaeologists have come up with about this stuff.

why are so many experts so skeptical, if archaeologists have got it right? these questions wont go away, because the experts KNOW what they're looking at and just how impossible it is that primitive people built them without assistance.

and for the record, c14 cant date stone, only artifacts found at the site. the site may have been reused over time or things buried in and around the site. this is NOT absolute proof of the real age of a stone building, particularly when it seems to conflict with a: oral histories of the indigenous peoples of the area; and b: archaeoastronomical evidence based on alignements and the obliquity of hte ecliptic. which is a pretty sure way to date something, i would say (for those that understand what its about).

i can never work out why archaeologists profess to be 'politically correct' and culturally sensitive' to the beliefs and myths of native peoples who have their own oral histories of the sites, but when they are privately thinking these myths are a load of infantile rubbish - which is what they DO think. why not just come out and be honest? they think they know better than what the oral histories passed down for generations among the indigenous people say.

e.g. if indigenous people say, yeah, we recall it clearly, gods or beings from the sky came down, and told us what to do, and made the stones fly throught hte air (which is common explanation for buidlings like nan madol etc), and this happened a LONG Long time ago... no, we didn't build them. our gods did.

the archaeologists has a little private giggle. silly natives they say. what would they know. the great western scientific establishment is here to save you and tell you what really happened in your ancient past. let us dig out our scientific tools and set you silly people straight. and then they think they're NOT being racist. and that anyone who believes the indigenous people (like on easter island - where they say that a white skinned race or flying birdmen (aleins presumably) made them build the monuments, but that they killed this race except for one survivor, who intermarried - hence some of their children still have red hair today) - anyone who actually takes their stories seriously - is said to be a racist. (because the aliens happened to hav white skin.. how dumb. some probably had green skin too. they also would likely have had those very alien looking elongated heads.. clearly a different race to humans. how can believing in ALIENS be racist????)

Cool discussion. I learned about this site from television, but wanted to find out more. After reading this thread and many of the links, I'm still not sure what to believe. There's valid points on both "sides" of the argument. Here's my guess at how this and many other ancient monoliths were constructed:

years from now -- i don't know how many -- mankind learns how to time travel and decides to go back to the time of the construction of the pyramids and other ancient structures, to find out once and for all just how they were built.

In doing so and upon their arrival, the time travelers are worshipped by the primitive cutures as gods, swooping in from the sun and/or other heavenly locales.

Witnessing this phenomenon, the time travellers realize it is they who are responsible for constructing these strucutres they have come to observe the creation of; they who are the gods who, prior to their recent understanding, supposedly inspired the monoliths' inception.

In order to preserve history as they know it, and to preserve the future from whence they came by not altering the past, the time travelers assist in building the pyramids, using pseudo-modern technologies and principles which are known by them to cause much speculation in the less-distant past (i.e, "now").

As is known by the time travelers at that point in the past/future, the plans, tools and recorded methods for constructing the pyramids and whatnot remains on their futuristic, computer-like palm pilot devices and is whisked away with them, back into the future when the construction tasks are complete.

Understanding that traveling into the past has the potential to rewrite and un-create the present they are living in and content with, time travel is outlawed, forbidden, or by some other means made to never occur again.

I certainly won't pretend to know the means by which these future "us"es master the mechanics of time travel, or even the exact methods they deemed suitable for constructing the monuments that baffle us today. And of course, nobody that has previously posted to this thread will be alive when it does occur to know I was right. Perhaps, however, these words will endure...

The stone work at Puma Punku remind me of the obelisks in Axum, Ethiopia. Compare the Axum obelisk style to the Puma Punku style.

Axum obelisk, Ethiopia

www.sacredsites.com...



Puma Punku, Bolivia

www.world-mysteries.com...

Both were cut with amazing precision and they both have a similar door design.

Not too far away in Ethiopia is the rock hewn churches of Lalibela. They were also carved with great precision. The mastery of Lalibela out shines those of Puma Punku and Axum. The legend of Lalibela actually goes along with this thread's main theme. The fact that aliens helped build the monuments. There are ancient texts still remaining that state that humans built the rock hewn churches in the day and angels (aliens) worked on them in the night.
(African Kingdoms by Basil Davidson)

This is an image of the cross shaped church


en.wikipedia.org...

Maybe aliens really helped with the stone cutting at Puma Punku just like those at Lalibela.

It seems that the masons of the 3rd world or of ancient past had a natural science and method of creating things.

How did we lose this knowledge and who is hiding it?

It's been proven time and time again that there are ancient man made objects on this planet that to this day we cannot replicate or move.

This high precision rock work remind me of exotic crop circle patterns. I wonder if the aliens have a problem building new structures out of rock in our era. Now they only have the power to express themselves by cutting down fields.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crop_circle

Humans of the past and present are due credit for their masterful work but there are cases of artwork that exceed human want. Who have the time or resources to waste on structures that have no purpose? We humans need to eat, sleep, work, mate and bring up children. Therefore we have no time to smash complex patterns into crops or carve elaborate structures out of gigantic stone.