HC's Ancient Aliens last episode "The Mystery of Puma Punku" DEVASTATED the show haters.

reply to post by 1AnunnakiBastard
Pure genius,thanks for posting this video I don't always have a chance to keep up with television.
This was one of the better Acient Aliens,I would give my left arm to travel to these acient sites to see these blocks and ruins up close.
Hopefully in the near future we will find the answers to all of the acient places and what connection they are to each other.

Con't from above

you see the pics there.....To me if you look at the marks....they are similar from the past...yet we are led to believe they in the past did not have this technology.......I have worked with diamond saw blades and hole cutters and sure enough very similar.....Yup simple machines there....could those holes be done by hand.....guess what.....nope.

funny how the striations appear very similar between modern equipment and the old methods....since of course these were simple tools used back then....so to me something does not add up when we are taught ancient history.....was it aliens.....who knows....but was it simple tools doing this work.....sorry not a chance.....was it ancient man with power tools.....Cool huh! i guess that would be so much more reasonable.....you see.....there are more questions than answer....so i do give our ancestors credit....the credit is....how did they get hold of them power tools.

I would say that these guys say some dumb things sometimes, like the part of not having acces to trees for rollers, because the spot was above the tree line....massive face palm.

But in my mind here is enough evidence to suggest that the ancients had acces to advanced tools.

I just don´t believe the mainstream theory about how the pyramids were built and how old they are.

It seems that there was a much older culture, in several parts of the world, connected, with a high level of sophistication that got wiped out somehow.

I also find it interesting that a lot of cultures on Earth have the story of the gods coming from the sky and interfering with, or creating the human race.

No proof or anything but I definately have an open mind about this all.

reply to post by gortex

I also enjoy(ed) the series, but I have to agree with you that they are apparently running out of fresh material...as well as ideas (Next week, I believe, they are exploring the UFO-BIGFOOT connection). What is next, The Loch Ness Monster-Ancient Alien connection?

reply to post by plube


I'm more than open to consider aliens or unicorns.

...

wait

....

maybe

...

hmmm

...

Okay, I've considered it.
Nope.

Current evidence has a stronger argument in favor of monolithic architecture for humans, of humans, and by humans.
Notice, I said 'stronger' argument.
Does that sound like a total and complete absolute? Nope.

Go back and READ my posts again. Read my posts with your reading comprehension volume turned up to eleven since you keep bringing forward these ridiculous assumptions that I'm talking in absolutes.

Go back and read, and you will see terms like 'probability', 'indication', and other such.
There's always margin for error, correction, and outright fail.

Yes, there's a probability for Aliens, or Unicorns, with capital letters or no, but, given proper consideration in light of current evidence and experience in examining evidence on this topic and others, the case tests more in favor by higher probability for humans, of humans, by humans.

Further, your photos are completely out of and without context or commentary, so, whatever point you were trying to make with those photos is entirely without legitimacy, merit, or credibility.
Please either repost those photos with proper documentation and commentary per each photo, or go back and edit the post you've already made.

Additionally, only ONE period is required at the end of a sentence.
Paragraph breaks are greatly encouraged.

Paragraph break separations are also encouraged.

Write like someone that is a professional; someone with credibility and legitimacy, and what you say might be taken into consideration with at least some credibility, or even professional respect.
Write like someone that doesn't know the first rule of presentation, rational thought, or logical analysis, someone who can't take their own writing seriously enough to make a serious effort for following the rules of writing, and, well, if you can't take your own writing and presentation seriously, then, who should?

Just say'n. No hostility. Just friendly advice.

Originally posted by The Shrike
I agree with you, of course, but if you haven't seen it there's a video showing South American ruins and the host is pointing out the superb joining of stones and he shows a stone that has a length of it with a deep but narrow (maybe an inch wide), unfinished cut and you immediately visualize that only a saw made the cut. I visualize a timber saw, the type operated by two men. We know they didn't have power tools but what do you think created the cut?

The simple answer is to find a compound that is harder than 7 on the hardness scale. This doesn't mean that all rock is a 7, but 7 represents about the hardest you would find in these rocks. Diamond is 10, but there are lots of materials that is 7 to 9 and so you do not need diamond to cut.

The scale is not uniformed so a hardness of 6 has a absolute hardness of 72, 7 is 100, 8 is 200 and 9 is 400.


As example Corundum and many other materials would be extremely abrasive to rock.

9. Corundum
Corundum is the crystalline form of aluminium oxide and one of the basic rock-forming minerals. Corundum is naturally clear or colored by impurities. Due to its hardness, Corundum is used as an abrasive in sandpaper. Emery is an impure and less abrasive variety of Corundum.
Absolute Hardness: 400

Also don't forget that they could of had a softening natural chemical, and also maybe liquid state rock (like cement) poured into molds. I'm not an expert but then if a group of people spent 100s of years working on it I bet they would be experts in doing it without alien help.

Add in 500 years of trial and error and I'm sure they could get it right... ;P

Originally posted by JizzyMcButter
It's all up for debate here, I like to look at both sides but will lean towards AA theory rather than MSA on these.

Could you explain why?

I think most people that take the MSA theory as gospel and refute any evidence are religious and choose to ignore opposing theories due to the fact that they do not want their belief system challenged, lest the be proved wrong.

That's what you think, although I think that may be true in some cases, I don't really see any reason to favour the "Aliens did it" theory over the "Humans did it", after all, we know that humans exist and we haven't real proof of the existence of Aliens.

Proponents of AA theory are capable of thinking about things in a different perspective and are looking for their proof.

From what I can see here, it looks like the AA proponents just chose a different box, as they (mostly) appear to be as against any other possibility as the die hard MSA proponents

Proponents of MSA theory stay 'inside the box' on just preach what they have been taught without looking further.

I see the AA proponents doing exactly the same thing, only they follow different people.

None of the supposed theories should necessarily be construed as 'fact' until we find proof.

True, too bad so many people think that the louder they shout the stronger their position becomes.

Originally posted by jimnuggits
Get a good look at the sharp cornered and stepped insets on some of those diorite stones... Can't be done.

The claim that Pumapunku was built of granite and diorite is an outright lie. There is absolutely no source for this but has been repeated ad nauseum. Pumapunku was built from red sandstone and clay, with some andesite. (various sources, but try Pumapunku and Archaeology's Interactive Dig are good starting points.

Andesite is a form of diorite (though it cools more slowly than diorite) but the sole material used to construct Pumapunku. Studies in Ande an Archaeology I and Journal of Archaeological Research show that crushed andesite has been found at Tiwanaku, demonstrating the people of Tiwanaku were working the andesite with conventional means, not using lasers or space-age technologies.

Even if diorite were as abundant in Pumapunku as the ancient astronaut proponents claim, that does not preclude it's use in masonry. The claim that diorite can only be cut by diamonds with patently false. The ancients often worked with diorite. The Code of Hammurabi is carved into a diorite stele. This book Experiments in Egyptian Archaeology gives just some of the methods used by the ancients to work diorite.

Originally posted by nineix
Touched on briefly in the episode under discussion, the bowl mentioned does indeed have Sumerian style cuneform writing, as well as proto-semetic script; two different forms of writing totally out of place and seemingly out of context with the area and cultures associated with it.

As I said before, if it's a know writing, what does it say?

Originally posted by merkaYou dont need a degree in engineering to understand that they didnt need to understand it either. Nothing about the artifacts indicate that they have knowledge of artifical aerodynamics, ie powered flight. They could just as well be modelled after nature - and nature has pretty much perfected aerodynamics. Even with our modern machinery we are not even close to the gracefull flight of a bird - our airplanes is a primitive and brute-force approach to flight.

Unless of course ancients astronaut theorists believe that flying fish and birds didnt exist in our past.

edit on 18-3-2012 by merka because: (no reason given)

As I said, I have not investigated the artifacts myself, nor have I seen detailed sketches and/or measurements. I also don't have a degree in engineering to make claims as to what perfect aerodynamica is. I do, however, have a pretty solid base knowledge of physics and math. Going by from what I've seen on the show I can only conclude that the people who build that artifact did, in fact, have knowledge of "powered flight", altough artificial flight would be more fitting.

The artifact is aerodynamically designed. It's lacking many features a bird would have and it has all necessary features an airplane would need. (Including the broken-off tail part) Why did they chose this approach? It's clear that whoever build this had an understanding of aviation. I'm not saying that they did, in fact, have full-size airplanes. I'm saying that whoever build this had the knowledge necessary to build one. (Which then obviously leads to: "Why wouldn't they have atleast tried it, if they had the knowledge?")

As for birds vs airplanes: I agree with the fact that nature/evolution is very efficient. I disagree with stating that our current airplanes are not. Leave aside the possibility of alternative technologies (This is ATS after all), you simply can't say that our current model is inefficient. Birds weigh anywhere from 50 grams to several kilograms, a Boeiing 747 can weigh up to 440,000 kilograms (including passengers and fuel), so you simply can't compare the 2. For that matter, glider aircrafts come pretty damn close to the "gracefull flight of a bird" when looking at aerodynamica.

Lastly, I would like to note that I don't believe in the ancient astronaut theory myself, however credit where credit is due. The egyption airplane artifact does not fit in our current understanding of history (And neither do alot of things they discuss on AA). Wether or not Aliens are involved, I'll leave in the middle, but there's no reason shootin them down on valid arguements...

Originally posted by bastardo
I would say that these guys say some dumb things sometimes, like the part of not having acces to trees for rollers, because the spot was above the tree line....massive face palm.

Aliens coming to Earth to build megaliths or to teach our ancestors how to do it? Completely plausible.

Our ancestors walking down from a mountain-top to cut down timber for construction purposes? COMPLETELY IMPOSSIBLE!!!!!!!1111

reply to post by 1AnunnakiBastard


Seriously...this episode brought back my respect for AA. Nice find!

Originally posted by Unknown Soldier
Columbus, Giovanni Cassini even Galileo Galilei were deemed and discarded as lunatics my modern academia at the time.

Columbus was really wrong.

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by nineix
Touched on briefly in the episode under discussion, the bowl mentioned does indeed have Sumerian style cuneform writing, as well as proto-semetic script; two different forms of writing totally out of place and seemingly out of context with the area and cultures associated with it.

As I said before, if it's a know writing, what does it say?

The translation is in the link I provided.
I will, however, source back to the link in an edit to this post with ex-text of the translation ...

Okay, the following, listed under Chapter 3 of source document Investigations of Bolivia's Fuente Magna ... details this translation:

Decipherment of the Cuneiform Writing on the Fuente Magna Bowl by Dr. C. A. Winters

This translation of the 3 panels of the cuneiform writing reads as follows:

"Approach in the future (one) endowed with great protection the Great Nia". "[The Divine One Nia(sh) to] Establish Purity, Establish Gladness, Establish Character". ("This favorable oracle of the people to establish purity and to establish character [for all who seek it]".) "[Use this talisman (the Fuente bowl)] To sprout [oh] diviner the unique advise [at] the temple". "The righteous shrine, anoint (this) shrine, anoint (this) shrine; The leader takes an oath [to] Establish purity, a favorable oracle (and to) Establish character. [Oh leader of the cult] Open up a unique light [for all], [who] wish for a noble life".

There are further translations listed also under Chapter 3 of the sourced document.

reply to post by nineix


sorry NIN you lose all cred when you resort to talking down to people....because that is all your doing...i was interested in your thoughts and ideas...but your closed.....so take your thoughts and learn how to address your peers in a decent fashion....I have acknowledged your thoughts on what you have been saying and even say it is some valid...but do not discount what others say when they disagree....

As i now have decided that your full of BS....

you have latched onto one aspect.....one thought pattern...and will not let other permeate to the surface....I have not said what it was...THAT built these structures and i have not discounted it being humans....what i has been discounting is our historical retelling of it......so please when you get off that high horse of yours and can come back with some logical conclusions to the questions that get asked of you.....You might be able to justify your presentation.....Fact is you cannot answer the questions as they are conjecture....simple as.

now it was valid to ask about the manufacture of the chemicals require...the manpower needed...the molding process involved...the time it takes...the resources available.....but you deflect...and try to make out that others don't know what they are talking about when it diverts from your egotistical way of thinking ... am i an expert in archeological digs....no....but as an structural engineer i do have an idea of logistics involved in large scale building projects....and these sites are EXTREMELY large scale.....

If you bothered to look at the vid i showed you would have found out...it took 12yrs to fill a quarry the size of the giza pyramid in France with landfill....now this was with out any construction involved...it was only trucking in soil to fill a hole......So when you get some idea of the scale of the task at hand you might actually start to look for other options other than just rock softening....Which just for your info....IS NOT PROVEN.

So doing a little more research on the rock at Puma Punku I found that it is Diorite (granite-like igneous rock). I also noticed that many alien reference sites list Diorite as "extremely hard material that only diamond can cut", but the real Mohs scale of it is 5.5 to 6.

This means it would be easy to find material to cut it, and the whole diamond cutter needed idea is just an example on how far people will go to convince others that stone work was impossible without alien help.


Since yesterday was Saint Patrick's day I want everyone to dub in the word leprechaun every time they use the word alien.... now you all know how ridicules the word "alien" being used sounds to me.

The duck-tails used in the H stones look like handholds used to move the stone. Just like a forklift uses the spaces in a wooden pallet to grip it, the duck-tales were used to grip the stones to move them.

One does have to wonder why they would use such big stones when it would have been simpler to use smaller stones. The only advantage i can think of for using larger stones is they stand the test of time better. And human/animal power has it's limits, so they would need some type of mechanical leverage and another type of power in addition to human strength to move large rectangular stones.

Well Folks

Something to think about

Someone said a Sumerian like middle eastern Connection

Atlantis Bolivia - page 4, conclusion
www.atlantisbolivia.org...

and this to think about through the Legends & Tales of Atlantis

See Image Below to big to put on ATS



SO Leif Ericson & Columbus were not the First from the Old World ?

Originally posted by plube
yes there was global trade...but the historians also suggest time frames.....one is that the pyramid at Giza was built in twenty years......Quite the feat.

you see the problem with dates and time frames.....now you apparently have slaves....well all those slaves need feeding.....they would need to be housed....they would need to be watched by overseerers .....now they would have to work round the clock....but that of course is all logical....all over the world....at various sites.....yup....perfect sense to me....now the cocoa plant was mentioned to bring this forward because of it being found well to be fair....we are talking a few thousand years ago....Egypt always desert...OR....Could it have been lush rain forest at one time....what makes you think that the plant was not already there......also global trade was not as great as one might think if you are to believe the historians on one point then why dismiss them on other points......you can not have it all ways can you.....so NIN is saying that there was continuous global trade....and getting this knowledge around the globe was easy peasy was it......once again cherry picking to fit the picture.....is it so very hard to say....we just don't really know....is it to hard to say...if we follow back our past....alot just does not add up.....I don't care if it was giants that roamed the earth building things...and we the humans adopted a great many of their techniques.....but as it stand.....NOT one person here knows the answers....and each and every person in this thread can only base things on historical accounts(if they are even true).

It is interesting that people suggest 1000s to 10,000s of slaves were needed. I suggest this is once again blown out of proportion (like only diamonds can cut Puma Punku rock) to try and say it was impossible without help...call it aliens or advance lost civilizations...doesn't matter.

The bottom line is it took 250 people as the cutters, transporters, builders and I suggest they were not slaves but skilled craftsmen paid for their work. You would most likely need another 1000 people to fill in all other needed support jobs that could have been slaves and others, but the end is not as much is needed as what people may think or have been told.

reply to post by plube


i'm not attacking you, or talking down to you. I sympathize for your over sensitivity.

I am, however, looking at evidence, and going to the highest probability answers, and collecting pieces in the puzzle that make sense and fit.
I'm not attempting to force a round piece into a space that will not fit the round piece in question, though it may fit a similar looking rounded but not round piece.
There are certain important distinctions.

With apologies, if I'm in error, but, it's also extremely difficult to understand what you are attempting to say, or what point you are possibly making an effort to convey due your unconventional use of formatting choice.
In other words, if you make it harder for someone to understand you people are going to have a difficult time hearing what you have to say, and after awhile, they may very well become dismissive, or even flippant.
Such can be avoided by adhering to the universal conventions of standardized writing.
That is meant as friendly advice.
Once again, I'm not attacking you, and I'm not talking down to you.