Nazca Lines, Piri Reis Map RELATED

Okay so this is the first thread I've started, hope it isn't stupid or has been done before

Well: A while ago, a local radio station did a show called 'Alien Jesus' (investigating aliens in history etc.) and one interesting artifact that was talked about was a map, called the Piri Reis map (Wikipedia). Basically, it is a very, very accurate map from the early 14th century.

As soon as I heard about the Piri Reis map, for some weird reason, I just had the idea that it must be in some way related to the Nazca Lines. So I got pictures of them both (a full map of the Nazca Lines, and 2 Piri Reis maps; a picture showing most of the map but zoomed out, and one showing a smaller section in detail.) I got to work comparing the images, and it was amazing what I found:

There are some lines and angles on the Piri Reis map - I don't know what they are for, they aren't longitude/lattitude - that match PERFECTLY some the lines and angles of the Nazca Lines - some of the angles are inverted, but other than that, the lines / spacing between them match. I did have the pictures from the comparison saved with all of the matching lines etc. pointed out but I think I deleted them a while ago. When I have some time free I'll do the comparison again and post the pictures.

So, what do people think of this? As far as I know, Piri Reis never even knew the Nazca Lines existed, let alone could created a perfectly accurate map from some of the lines.

reply to post by Techy


Very cool.

I hope you can find those pics!

Sorry but I'm rather skeptical of such claims. The Piri-Reis map is a poor depiction of the South American Atlantic coastline.

en.wikipedia.org...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/fbc3a6a11061.jpg[/atsimg]

Photo: "Comparison between a modern projection of South America and Piri Reis's version." - Credit: WikiPedia.

Obviously the cartographer was struggling with accurately projecting a sphere onto a too-small sheet of parchment. Remember the conventions we use today for map projection were completely unknown then or were in the process of being invented.

reply to post by Blackmarketeer


True, but land moves a lot, not to mention that the Piri Reis map doesn't cover the whole earth. But the fact that the ice under the Antarctic is shown on the map shows that even though the map itself is 14th century, it was based on something much, much older - which can be explained by the relation to the Nazca Lines.

I've done a search of my hard drive and haven't found the pictures, so I'm going to try to do them again over the next week.

Originally posted by Techy
reply to post by Blackmarketeer

 

True, but land moves a lot, not to mention that the Piri Reis map doesn't cover the whole earth. But the fact that the ice under the Antarctic is shown on the map shows that even though the map itself is 14th century, it was based on something much, much older - which can be explained by the relation to the Nazca Lines.

I've done a search of my hard drive and haven't found the pictures, so I'm going to try to do them again over the next week.

Hey there Techy,

This is one of my particular fields of interest ... but I've never come across a Nazca link before ... good for you for thinking outside the box ... whether it proves to be a correct assumption or not it is always worth exploring these possibilities.

Piri Re'is was an admiral in the Ottaman Navy ... and during his time cartographers made new maps by overlaying older maps ... the fact that the Piri Re'is map shows Antarctica without snow and ice does seem to indicate that, that particular piece of the map was originally drawn during such a time when the Antarctic was not covered in snow and ice ... and ice-core samples that were taken during the Byrd Expedition show that the last time this was so was prior to the last Great Ice-Age (over 10,500 yrs ago)

If these kind of subjects interest you then you might find my website of interest ... it's a project I've been working on for well over a decade now ... here's the link;

>>>The Atlantean Analysis

But the fact that the ice under the Antarctic is shown on the map shows that even though the map itself is 14th century, it was based on something much, much older - which can be explained by the relation to the Nazca Lines.

It doesn't show the Antartic.
Or uh... the "ice under the Antartic."

It shows the coast of South American, as Black Marketeer pointed out.

reply to post by RuneSpider


Ah, sorry, I got confused. It shows Antarctica before it was covered in ice.

Hi Woody,
Thanks for all the info, it really helped! So there couldn't possibly be a map of Antarctica that early and even if there was, Piri Reis would have no access to it... Well, I've been doing the comparison (I'll post it, although I haven't finished it yet because I have to go out, I'll finish it later) again and I've noticed that its the bottom of the map that is related to the Nazca lines - Antarctica. So that really looks like the Nazca lines were used in some way by Piri Reis to draw the map.
And nice site! I've had a look and it looks really interesting. I'll take a better look when I get back later

Imageshack - Piri Reis / Nazca Comparison

(Edit) By the way, ignore the writing / circles in green, they are referring to the gold triangle.

reply to post by Techy


I am not finding the correlatin between these tringles you are finding on the map with triangles that are at Nazca. The triangles on the map are in the Atlantic Ocean and Peru, where the Nazca lines are, is on the Pacific Coast of South America. It also looks with all those lines on the map that you could find quite a few triangles if you wanted to.

reply to post by I B Dazzlin


No, what I'm saying is, look at the map of the Nazca lines, the map lines on the Piri Reis map are in the same shapes, angles and relative positions as the Nazca lines.

reply to post by Techy


Very interesting. I'd love to see the maps and correlations you discovered. Perhaps it is possible for you to take a photo of the maps, then outline where the correlations you discovered were. I know many of us would be interested.

I always found them fascinating as well. Welcome to ATS, hope you enjoy it here.

reply to post by agent violet


The link is 2 posts above yours, it takes a while to load (needed high quality or it would be too hard to see some of the lines clearly). It is a Nazca lines map next to a Piri Reis map, there related angles / shapes / lines are marked the same colour on each map. I'll post the original unedited version when I get a chance

reply to post by Techy


Interesting work Techy. I should point out that Piri Reis was a Naval Admiral who said he used references from even earlier sources to draw the map. I think this piece of information comes from two authors: Zecharia Sitchin and Eric Von Daniken. Logically speaking, in 1513, the year in which Mr. Reis drew the map, Antarctica was snow-covered according to accepted scientific observations.

reply to post by arfin24


Thanks for the info Arfin. But how old were those sources? And even still, how would anyone have a map of Antarctica? It wasn't even first explored until recently.

I look around today and see a guy who claims to be an artist and wraps a bunch of islands in pink fabric and calls it art. Another wraps a whole building in paper and calls it art. Then I think of the Nazca lines.

I've no doubt that several centuries ago there was a lunatic with a gleam in his eye and a dream, yelling to all who would listen, "I AM AN ARTEEEEST!!!!!!!" and soon had them making giant spiders in the desert. When the spider was done he made a fish, then a bird etc, etc....

Human beings are just weird like that.

Okay I've seen the picture comparison. They don't seem to have anything in common in terms of the triangles and rectangles but the comparison has helped to strengthen one important argument, that the Nazca lines probably are not lines drawn by primitive people to commemorate their forefathers but a giant and sophisticated astronomical calender. Both of the "maps" have triangles and etc. because that's how an "expert" would draw a land map or aerial map.

To draw a map like Nazca one would need a big team of laborers, pre-drawn mini-sized figures with proportionate co-ordinates, a whole map of all the lines, and aerial reconnaissance to constantly check whether your output is matching with your source drawing, special measurement tools to convert the mini-figures into giant figures and maintain the proper distance between them.

It looks like the lines have been drawn either by giant humans or by beings who could manipulate land surfaces while being airborne.

About a reliable observation on Antarctica, you could skim through "The Arctic Home in the Vedas" by someone called "Tilak".

reply to post by Techy


You don't think this could just be coincidence? Like I said before there are alot of lines on that map & I can make out a bunch of triangles. However if this is not just coincidence then why are the triangles out in the ocean? I am just failing to see the relevancy of what you have found. It does not seem to correlate to much of anything other than they are similar triangles.

Okay I'll reply properly to all posts when I get home from school. But what I'm trying to show you all is, zoom very far in to the Piri Reis map, highest corner of the blue circle. Notice that a black line crosses through here to make a smaller triangle. Do the same with the other blue circle, you'll notice the same thing. Now do the same for the blue circles on the Nazca lines. Then look at the lines in grey on both the Nazca map and the Piri Reis map: They form exactly the same angle on both maps.

EDIT! Also, I just noticed, in the highest blue circle of both maps, a diagonal line comes down and crosses through the smaller triangle - on BOTH MAPS. Coincidence?

Its hard to explain... I'll try to make a video if I can.

reply to post by Techy


the grey lines do not form the same angle. In the Piri Reis map the grey line does not form a another small triangle in the yellow triangle insted it only touches the corner of the yellow triangle. I honestly don't think the angles of the blue triangles are even the same I have just not had the time to measure them.

reply to post by Techy


I just pulled out a protractor and measured some angles on the maps and here is what I found.
Nazca lines- Blue triangle has the angles of 90, 45, and 50 degrees.
Piri Reis- Blue triangle has the angles of 97, 35, and 68 degrees.
Since the angles are not the same the triangles are not the same. This differentiation in the angles of the blue triangles and the grey lines seems to be pointing in the direction of coincidence to me.