Of Things That Shouldn’t Exist

why waste your time trying to convince somebody of something there not willing to believe or ready to believe?

Seriously i see so much of it on ATS. in all seriousness yes carbon dating is a hit and miss affair but you only need one of these things to be real not all of them for it to throw conventional thinking out the door.

I mean the dinosaur one is obvious as hell. i LOL'ed hard at the guy that said something about a chameleon. if you think that stone carving looks like a chameleon then either you need to look up what a chameleon looks like or you need to change your definition of what you THINK a chameleon looks like. cos to me it looks like a dinosaur. Now how in the hell did they know what a dinosaur looked like??????

Sorry pal im not buying it.

reply to post by TiM3LoRd


The bible says
"And there were worlds upon worlds upon worlds before this one"

This refers to atlantis in my opinion.
And we did have similar techonlogy to todays time.

Just look at the Dendera Heiroglyphs (from egypt) - you can see it on my avatar.
Or here:






Is this a hoax?

How about these ancient light bulbs?

Possibly explains how the lit the pyramids, something unknown till this day.
(cant light fire inside the pyramids.)



[edit on 1-2-2010 by freebourn]

reply to post by freebourn


Or they are patterns that mean something else, and our modern brains recognise them as things we know about, which is a great strength of the human brain.

There is no evidence for Atlantis, or that those hieroglyphs mean anything strange or weird.

Oh, and you should read this to learn that those hieroglyphs are not, actually, supposed to look like that.

Critical thinking is your friend!

reply to post by davesidious


I'll look into it, but I dont buy it...
No evidence of Atlantis??? What about Plato??? Who spoke of this often!
There are tons of evidence - of course, not clear cut evidence. but alot of things that guide us to believe it did exist.

About the link you gave - total nonsence in my opinion, but again, I'll look into it.
LOL do you expect me to believe that erosion caused this?
its like those people that blame all UFO phenomena as weather stuff, or marsh gas..
Critical thinking? you actualy believe erosion over time caused the glyphs to become a perfect helicopter, tank and zeplin-thingy?

I dont buy it, sorry.


Edit: Wrote Archemedes insted of Plato - lol

[edit on 1-2-2010 by freebourn]

Originally posted by freebourn
reply to post by davesidious

 

No evidence of Atlantis??? What about Archimedes ??? Who spoke of this often!

Ummm...forgive my impudence, but are you sure you don't mean Plato?

The hieroglyphs are the result of the Egyptians carving over existing glyphs, and then us reinterpreting them based on what we perceive them as today, remember that hieroglyphs were the Egyptian's writing system, and that on stone, you don't really have the option for an eraser.
www.catchpenny.org...

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck


Right!!
damm, my bad... lol I allways get those greek philosophers&thinkers mixed up.

lol thanks for correcting me

reply to post by RuneSpider


Iv'e read that page already when the other fellow linked it.
I understand what it says also about the re-carving, but I dont buy it, because it seems to simple of an explanation.
And that my friends -IS- critical thinking.
Untill this is prooven to be fact, this is my theory, and until what I believe is prooven right - it remains as it is, just a theory.

Originally posted by sparrowstail

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by serbsta

The "stegasoarus" is actually just a chameleon!

How do you know that? Looks more like the Stegasoarus to me.

[edit on 1-2-2010 by sparrowstail]

It just makes more sense that it's a chameleon rather than a creature that been extinct long before the place was built. It's Occam's razor.

reply to post by freebourn

the link provides a translation of the different lines of text, as well as highlighting the different hieroglyphs to distinguish if you want, I'd recommend contacting a Egyptologist, one who reads hieroglyphs.
Byrd, one of the forum moderators, has some knowledge of hieroglyphs and may be able to read it.

I understand what it says also about the re-carving, but I dont buy it, because it seems to simple of an explanation.
And that my friends -IS- critical thinking.

No... rejecting a theory because it seems to simple is not critical thinking. That's simply rejecting a theory you don't like.
The evidence, including the point that this is the Egyptians own writing system, would indicate it's rewritten glyphs, which is known to occur.



Also, unrelated to Abydos, the Prohm "stegosaurus" has been covered here several times. Good case for the "spikes" being decorational patterns, I remember seeing comparison with other carvings at the site, but couldn't find the exact thread.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
No
The site itself is about 800 years old, and was heavily populated prior to the collapse of the empire.

reply to post by RuneSpider


I do not deny the theory, I simply think it is to simple to be true.
And as I said these are all theories. you may be right and i may be wrong and it may be vise versa. - it does not really matter.

And excuse me, but egyptologists are just there to repeat the mantra.
Our true history has been altered and limited. and this is what I truly believe.

Call it fiction... call it whatever, this is what I believe not because some theory, but just because I can feel it in my bones.

Maybe I'm wierd or naaive, but this is how I feel.

[edit on 1-2-2010 by freebourn]

Great thread! I truly enjoy reading about topics such as this. The human hand imprint found by Carl Baugh really interests me due to it's proximity to home. I've been to the fossil-park in Glen Rose and it just amazes me to see those fossils along the riverbed and realize just how old they are. More about Carl's work at www.creationevidence.org...

Thanks Serbsta. This stuff always intrigues me. i also thought that the "shoeprints" were mirror images of each other (a single piece of rock split in 2). Shale splits very much in shapes such as these and trilobites are common fossils to be found in it. It is also much too precise to be a shoe print, no sloping on the edges (all nearly 90 degree), no "toe out", scuffing or other marks that show life in a track.
As for the "human" handprint there are families of salamanders and lizards that have 5 toes on the front feet and 5 on the back. The salamander's front print bear an amazing resemblance to human hands but are much, much smaller. Given the time of the rock bed forming there were many large amphibians that might have made tracks very similar to what you show.
The stegosaurus at Angor Wat looks just like a stegosaurus. Maybe they did see one.
The aci rocks do look new as I can see no weathering so I would guess they are tourist knock-offs. Riding a dinosaur? lol, only recently would anyone have bought one of those!
Those are the only pictures I can add anything on. You have a real knack for finding the wierdest stuff. Keep em coming!

reply to post by freebourn


Egyptologists are not there to repeat the mantra.
One of my favorites is a fellow named Mark Lehner, who started his career trying to prove the predictions of Edgar Cayce.

I myself currently have a book, a beginners guide to reading hieroglyphs, and I really recommend either attempting to translate, or getting a stranslation done of the glyphs.

oh wow the was very interesting indeed
do you have any more examples?

I would have to assume that since modern day man has been able to reconstruct images of dinosaurs based of of skeletal formation that early man would be able to do the same.

All it would take would be to unearth one that is still intact.

(forward to 6:55)
17000 years old ruins
Pumapunku in Bolivia makes the pyramids seem like childs play. They are carved in the hardeds rock, and there is evidence of machining. They are carved so perfect, that even today its hard to copy them.


(forward to 4:40)
2000 years old mechanic computer called "Antikythera instrument"


[edit on 1-2-2010 by conar]

I for one am also intrigued by these and many others. I don't let my ego or pride get in the way of possibilities. There are many findings that boggle the minds of science, but it may be as simple as they don't believe things can be any older than their personal accomplishments and education will allow. My personal thoughts are that man has been here very much longer than anyone can imagine. I think this earth wipes the slate clean periodically, and man starts all over again; his science and inventions go away, and he's forced to start all over with only the natural surroundings to begin, evolve, and maybe triumph. Unless it's "carved in stone", then it gets lost. One may be able to carbon date the rock, but not so much the message.
The instinct of survival of the fittest eventually takes over, and by that time (as now) the cycle of the earth for cleansing begins and here we go again. Whenever man can live "with" the earth instead of attempting to have dominion over it, then and only then can man truly evolve. History points to the fact that man is here for a while, and the "Earth" seems to be ever enduring. It, (the Earth) no matter the poison or damage will simply rid itself of the infection (man), and begin again. We don't know squat, and man's existence seems to be to find ways to kill fellow man, and have charge and dominate. It's actually moronic in every sense. All that we find, seems to peel away more and more time, and it points to this truth. It can be denied, but it is the truth.
One can say that hand print isn't from a man; but isn't it possible that someone slightly deformed, lost balance, put out the hand to prevent a fall and continued on??? Today's so called scientists are in business for themselves. They will collaborate so they can continue to get paid and hold their status of being smarter than you (in their minds).
But of course this is my opinion, and only matters to me.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

and many other threads i have yet to re-find...

reply to post by freebourn


Plato used Atlantis as a parable to pimp his work, Republic.

Basically, he has two states - one (Athens) represents his idealized republic structure. The other, Atlantis, represents the absolute opposite of his Republic. The two powerful nations go to war, and in the end, the good and wonderful people of Athens - the republic - triumph over the greedy despotic warmongers of Atlantis.

And then the gods blow up Atlantis for daring to challenge the perfect Republican system of Athens.

I'm sure he managed to make it sound more engaging and deep than I have, but this is a cliffnotes version. In Plato's work, Atlantis only exists as a foil to his Republic. That's all. He used Athens as the Republic in question because he was in Athens at the time, and it's always good to kiss the butts of your hosts when your only productive activity is talking.

Imagine if in three thousand years, humans are arguing over where Telmar and Narnia are. That's the basic gist of our ponderings about Atlantis.

[edit on 1-2-2010 by TheWalkingFox]