Who Were the Ancient Megalithic Builders?

Had to skim, because going to work, but that is BEAUTIFUL!!
But a quick word: 3 books for a MUST read (if you haven't already:
Emerald Tablets of Toth

Giza Power Plant

The Lost Book of Enki

(I'm still learning, myself!)

Great Post

Coincidentally i'm just in Malta on vacation and whe visited the megalithic buildings in Gozo. The Ggantija temple is the most well known and some parts were made at around 3600 BC. It's really unbelievable that people back then were able to build such temples. Really impressive

Originally posted by wildum
Nice mixture of academia, detective work and good, old-fashioned common sense (at least to me). I still get hung up when I think of the most basic reason a structure or dwelling is built: protection from the elements or predators. If so, what could have been so formidable weather-wise and/or a threat to safety or well-being to require such massive Megalithic structures? If the bulk of these structures were purely burial or worship sites, again, why so damn big?

Maybe the stories people tell are true. Here in Malta they say those buildings were created by Giants. Maybe people back then were a lot larger then we are today? I

Anyone realise that not all races have the same skulls shapes that evolutionists produce as a 'homo sapien'

reply to post by W3RLIED2


There are most certainly a lot of "whys." This cannot be denied. However, the biggest one seems to be completely ignored by every supportive post of the OP. WHY do we have fossils and bone records of everything BUT giant versions of us? We have absolutely no problem recording millions of species that date back millions of years. Somehow, when it comes to these so-called "giants," we don't have a shred of evidence even suggesting the possibility of their existence.

And there lies the real *Why?*

If we can find millions of tiny samples relating and/or identifying every other *known* species of the homo genus, why can't we find the ones that are supposedly two or three times larger than the ones we're finding every day? ( Please refrain from bringing up the few known hoaxes related to this topic. If they existed, the evidence would be everywhere, not a bone being conjured up every 30 years. )

Either our incredibly intelligent archaeologists are being deceived by one enormous all-encompassing mudslide, or there were only about 4 of them. Seriously, though. Just look at what we find on a daily basis, and do the math.

Cheers,
Strype

Wow, Slayer, Another awesome thread. I wish I didn't have to go to work. I'm difinately going to be busy with this one when I get home.Wish I could take the day off.S&F

Excellent post Slayer.

S+F for you.

Hello slayer69

I read the whole thing from top to bottom, what an entertaining and thought provoking read.

I was thinking that maybe the reason that the missing link has not been found, is that it’s not a question of a missing species but more a multi generational genetic cross over/intermediate period you spoke of.

Nice thread great topic/theories.


Spike Spiegel

reply to post by SLAYER69


Absolutely fantastic thread. Nicely done. It's all very interesting to ponder and much more believeable than the ancient alien stuff. Kudos to you for the effort and presentation. Great work.
And thank you for striking a nice, delicate balance between the science and the religious. It's rare to see someone not try to plant their flag firmly in the ground of one or the other.
I'm going to check out some of your other stuff.
Thanks for the great read!

reply to post by SLAYER69


Wow Slayer I like it so much of what ive read so So I Made a PDF out of this Thread ! S&F

Speaking of a Unique Genetic Races

There is 3 that have caught my Interest besides the one you posted the Ainu

1) Australians Aborigines

3) New Zealand Maori

3) Uper European Region the Sami ( Laplander s to some )

There is TWO Reasons !

1) Unique Genetics that is Different From any Other European Race !!

2) The Culture is So Much like North American Native Americans From Eskimos to Plain Indians
But ... Their Style of Traditional Dress Clothing Is SO Much Like South American Peruvian
as There is also Similarity's of Traditional Mongolian Dress too.. is much the Same

Sami Tent Familiar ?





Cree Native American Teepee





I wont Spoil it All For you ! Check the Site Below and Check out The Sami People After

Let See if you can Spot The Similarity's of Culture Sami People and Native American Indians

From this Site Alone !

The Sami People
www.thevasaorder.com...

You Might say There is a Link ! But Genetically They are Not Practically Same Culture ,Different Race !!
and Oceans Apart!! Tho Some Sami's Look like theirs American Indian in them to me anyways
Dam I look Like a Sami with my mix Celtic and Native American Heritage

Ok

Heres Something Now Just Close your Eyes ! and you Swear your Hearing Native American Music !

Sami throat-singing ( Note Drums Look Familiar ? )


Mallorca-joik


Now this Really sound like native American Music ! Below!

Mari Boine - Idjagiedas (In the hand of the Night) (live, 2006)
www.youtube.com...

Well I should Know ive Been around all my life of Mohawk & Cree Music Right ?
An Ive Notice the Similarity of the way of Singing !


Even the Dialect Pronunciation is almost similar not the Language but the way its pronounce
to see what i mean look below Now that to me is Ficken Scary !! See Below to see for your self !

Oceans Apart _javascript:icon

Pathfinder (1987) Bear Dance (Important to go to the 1:25 mark to see the Pronounce Dialect )


My Area Below !

Kahnawake Mohawk Language Segment on MohawkTV


Slayer Iwould have to think there was Once some Connection at One time Of Similar Culture



Transcendentalism, Native American Theology, and Sámi Worldview: An Interpretive Analysis of the Similarities Between Three Independent Worldviews

By Andrew Slaton
www.utexas.edu...

Parallelism in Sioux and Sami Spiritual Traditions

By Ben Baird
www.utexas.edu...

Native American Nations Around The World - The Genetic Sub-Polar Route
pattyinglishms.hubpages.com...

Speaking of a Stone Henge ! In New Hampshire USA

( Crystallinks )
Mystery Hill - America's Stonehenge
www.crystalinks.com...

Once again, another brilliantly structured and insiteful thread. S&F.

And...

Depending on the true age of some sites they were us and for the still to be recognized much older sites? A much older yet to be recognized version of us. Notice how I've avoided the term "Primitive"? I honestly don't believe that after the mixture of the two hominin lines occurred that they were primitive at all. Maybe some isolated pockets were but not all of them.

... I think you know where *I* stand on this one.

I will be honest when I read that this original post said "this will be a reinterpretation of known facts" I sighed and decided not to do anything more than skim through and try to hit on the more important bits. But you do realize the reason facts are facts is because they are most logical, most likely, most evidence backed ideology?

I would also have to be a downer, but in ancient times, ALL people did was hunt/gather and move rocks. They didn't have anything else to do. Many ancient stone structures, probably the majority, were constructed with slave labor, or slaves to religion. People spent generations making these. It took modern man 10 years to build the twin towers in new york that folks here love so much to talk about. It took ancient man (or his predecessors if we're going back so far) many times that and thousands more people to construct their stone behemoths. When an ancient civilization began construction of a huge stone building or wall, the ancient civilization (not just bits and pieces of it) began construction.

Originally posted by Dystopiaphiliac
I will be honest when I read that this original post said "this will be a reinterpretation of known facts" I sighed and decided not to do anything more than skim through and try to hit on the more important bits. But you do realize the reason facts are facts is because they are most logical, most likely, most evidence backed ideology?

I'm glad you were honest about just simply "Skimming through" the OP. Because it is reflected in your second paragraph.

I would also have to be a downer, but in ancient times, ALL people did was hunt/gather and move rocks. They didn't have anything else to do. Many ancient stone structures, probably the majority, were constructed with slave labor, or slaves to religion. People spent generations making these. It took modern man 10 years to build the twin towers in new york that folks here love so much to talk about. It took ancient man (or his predecessors if we're going back so far) many times that and thousands more people to construct their stone behemoths. When an ancient civilization began construction of a huge stone building or wall, the ancient civilization (not just bits and pieces of it) began construction.

All of the above was either acknowledged, further explored and or explained. Those who have read through the thread in it's entirety understand this.

Originally posted by steveknows
reply to post by SLAYER69

 

A lot of effort has been put in to this post and I applaud the effort. Problem is the simplest thing is wrong so I gave to question everything else.

Neanderthal " is" homo sapien. Homo sapiens neanderthalensis. You didn't get neandrethal followed by homo sapien because neanderthal is homo sapien.

"We are" homo sapien sapien. We followed neanderthal and we are called homo sapien sapien.

If this simple thing has been overlooked I wonder what other evidence which rebukes all that's been stated has also been over looked?

Homo sapien sapien being "us" came about around 40,000- 50,000 years ago long before the oldest megalith. So they were made by us.

Also it has been believed by alot in the field for a long time that neanderthal evloved into us.

/thread

We didn't evolve from the neanderthal. Neanderthals and homo sapien sapien were both derived from the same species I believe to be the cromagnons.

reply to post by SLAYER69


I can't bring it to myself to ignore hundreds of year of archaeology and all of the scientists who have ever worked in that field.

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by KeepYourAnonymity

 

There were Giants in those days...

I haven't read your entire thread but I will. Harmonics. There is something to harmonics and it seems like more than one of our ancient earthlings used it to "lift and cut" to build, the pyramids, machu picchu, tiahuanaco among many other structures out there. What is in common is the size of the stone, the perfect cuts, the lack of mortar or screws. Giants might have made those structures but then so did a little 100 lb man named Ed Leedskalnin. This secret to the pyramids and stone hedge and the rest of those places, Ed had it...and I think the masons have it, perhaps 30 degrees and up... but I have no idea what they are using it for. All I can guess is they have figured out a way to move "human will" the way they move rocks from the earth. Wildly speculating I know but it could be true.

Originally posted by Dystopiaphiliac
reply to post by SLAYER69

 

I can't bring it to myself to ignore hundreds of year of archaeology and all of the scientists who have ever worked in that field.

When there is new evidence of an alternate history then the old must be discarded or you will be foolish. When you discover the earth is not flat would you say you cannot ignore thousands of years of geology?

Originally posted by Strype
If we can find millions of tiny samples relating and/or identifying every other *known* species of the homo genus, why can't we find the ones that are supposedly two or three times larger than the ones we're finding every day? ( Please refrain from bringing up the few known hoaxes related to this topic. If they existed, the evidence would be everywhere, not a bone being conjured up every 30 years.

)

The Giant angle is all a matter of perspective. I feel the whole idea of Giants has been over the centuries been blown way out of proportion and exaggerated beyond reality.

If the average height of a certain earlier Homo-Sapien group was about 5' 5" for argument sake and they came into contact with a group of say "Cro Magnons" who were on average 6' to 6' 6" they could have been considered "Giants" by the shorter group.

Over time as the "stories" were passed down through the generations and elaborated upon "As Myths often are" the "Giants got taller" Meanwhile the story tellers themselves were slowly growing in height through the centuries [Due to better nutrition and environmental factors] reaching 6' on average in the real world.

So in reality they weren't Giants at all.
Not in the real sense.

Crossbreeding ok, it was scientifically proven to be possible. But neanderthal/cro-magnon living few thousand years BC? There's no evidence only loose speculation.

Originally posted by piotrburz
Crossbreeding ok, it was scientifically proven to be possible. But neanderthal/cro-magnon living few thousand years BC? There's no evidence only loose speculation.

Speculation you say?

That's what the thrust of the this thread was based on.

Speculation.

reply to post by Wolfenz


As always awesome contribution to the discussion and I very much appreciate the links and photos.
Great info.