Ancient Stone Shaping and Setting

reply to post by TheIrishJihad


I get the feeling we'll be finding out a lot more about the truth not too far down the track. I think the time is nearly right for this to take place, although how soon, I'm not sure. But we'll get to view it in our lifetimes

I'd love to check out the Cayce museum, I've got a lot of respect for that man. For a simple guy, not very well educated, he gave some spectacular readings for people in regards to medical conditions and a bunch of other things. Things, by all rights, he couldn't have known!

reply to post by Stonesplitter


I totally agree. Eventually we will find the truth.

As for Cayce. I was always kinda skeptical about psychic phenomena until I visited Cayces museum. That made me research it much more. I must say he was a very gifted man. He was simply correct with his readings far too often to be a fake.

Also threads like this are why I still frequent ATS. Open minded people who know what they are talking about seem to be less vocal on this site than the serial debunkers.

Thanks again.

Great thread, I noticed this in Egypt in on the Sphinx, there are stones that look similar to the pics you have shared in the thread. I worked with limestone as a landscaper in a former life and you never loose the eye for good masonry.

reply to post by cartenz


Thanks very much mate That's actually pretty cool to hear of a past life experience involving masonry. Do you mind if I ask was this through dreams or meditation? The Egyptian stone work was definitely very similar, especially the working of massive blocks. It's all related somehow.

Originally posted by TheIrishJihad
Also threads like this are why I still frequent ATS. Open minded people who know what they are talking about seem to be less vocal on this site than the serial debunkers.

I think the debunkers feel all they have left is flailing their arms in the air screaming. Rational people can figure out we've been lied to on so many fronts and maybe that's the thing about the changing times- you can only keep a lie going for so long and eventually the truth comes out



p.s. love Cayce

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
I think the debunkers feel all they have left is flailing their arms in the air screaming.

You mean like this......

reply to post by Stonesplitter


Umm I think I may have given you the wrong impression, Past life I meant in a former profession. I have a desk job now with a great view and only wear safety boots to the office when I anticipate something seriously going wrong. Sorry for the confusion.

Originally posted by cartenz
Past life I meant in a former profession. I have a desk job now with a great view and only wear safety boots to the office when I anticipate something seriously going wrong. Sorry for the confusion.

Ahhhh.......The mysteries of Egypt!

Even when I moved up the ranks and was put in charge of a half dozen other splitters, I get to do all the fine tuned masonry, deal with every customer that walks in the yard AND do all the office/paper work......if anything, my job got harder. (I always thought it was supposed to be the other way around!) It's actually very difficult to find anyone that lasts longer than six months, for every 3 blokes we put on, 2 are gone within a fortnight! Same with the other masons I know, they cannot keep any apprentices on. The youth of today want top dollar for holding on to an iPhone and texting their mates all day it seems!

I deal with a ton of landscapers too and a lot of these guys are actually very good with attention to detail. You've either got it.....or you don't....and as you say, It's having the eye for it that counts. Good to hear from someone who's worked with stone. Cheers mate

Looking at some of the pics I cant help but feel that they were built from the top down and not the bottom up like conventional walls. In a lot of instances there would be no reason to cut the stone in such a way unless you were working backwards

davidpratt.info...

reply to post by Stonesplitter


I laughed so hard coffee was coming out my nose. Haha. Thanks for that

General comments

A lot of personal incredulity as noted before. The only way to 'prove' levitation and stone softening is to reinvent them.

Using the Inca as a source is good as, as has been mentioned before, the Inca or more properly their occupied neighbors provided the skills to do the stone work. They were doing such work before, during and after the Spanish showed up.

Levitating big rocks would have been of great value to the Inca (either side in the civil war) in defeating the Spaniards but that 'technology' was a no show. What writing we have from both the Spanish, the later educated Inca and other sources don't mention any levitation or stone softening, they do mention craftsmanship and hard, dangerous work.

And that is where we are left, we don't fully understand how the Inca and the earlier empires did their work, unlike the AE who left some writing and inscription and art showing how they did their craftsmanship, The Andean civliization are relatively quiet.

So dudes if you want to prove the Andeans couldn't do it, re-invent levitation and stone softening

reply to post by Hanslune

Using the Inca as a source is good as, as has been mentioned before, the Inca or more properly their occupied neighbors provided the skills to do the stone work. They were doing such work before, during and after the Spanish showed up.

There's no doubt the Inca were doing stone work before, during, and after.....but looking at what I've pointed out earlier in the thread, I don't believe they did this particular work with the limited technology they had, only added to it later on.

Levitating big rocks would have been of great value to the Inca (either side in the civil war) in defeating the Spaniards but that 'technology' was a no show. What writing we have from both the Spanish, the later educated Inca and other sources don't mention any levitation or stone softening, they do mention craftsmanship and hard, dangerous work.

Hence why I believe this to be a lost or forgotten technique in stone manipulation.

And that is where we are left, we don't fully understand how the Inca and the earlier empires did their work, unlike the AE who left some writing and inscription and art showing how they did their craftsmanship, The Andean civliization are relatively quiet.

I agree with this, which is why I posted this thread as being my opinion on how ancient people from this part of the world (and other parts) did stone work. With the few examples of science fact that we have been given, I think it is worth considering as a potential candidate, albeit from a long lost group of people that have been relegated to myth by mainstream modern science. Again, this is why in the OP I refuse to name any specific civilizations or dates as it would flow into even lesser accepted ways of thinking.

Originally posted by Stonesplitter
reply to post by Hanslune

 

There's no doubt the Inca were doing stone work before, during, and after.....but looking at what I've pointed out earlier in the thread, I don't believe they did this particular work with the limited technology they had, only added to it later on.

As noted before the Inca were Johnny-come-lately to the empires of the Andeans but they did tend to build their own stuff. Yet there technology was sufficient as it was for the earlier groups to build some amazing things

I agree with this, which is why I posted this thread as being my opinion on how ancient people from this part of the world (and other parts) did stone work.

There has been experimental archaeology done but no one has spent the time and money to recreate the art. Example it took a generation to regain the ability to recreate the flint knapping ability of early man. It was quite difficult I myself was able - after about year to make passable Clovis style points. Others have recreated the most elaborate Meso-American flints using obsidian.

That is why I suggested a prize to inspire someone to spend the effort to try this.

With the few examples of science fact that we have been given, I think it is worth considering as a potential candidate, albeit from a long lost group of people that have been relegated to myth by mainstream modern science. Again, this is why in the OP I refuse to name any specific civilizations or dates as it would flow into even lesser accepted ways of thinking.

Good idea BUT for the Inca it brings up the immediate problem that they weren't aware that these folks were there building stuff for them nor did the Spanish note them. Now if the the claim is that, no they did the EARLIER work then you run into the difficulty of no evidence for their existence except claiming that the people we do have evidence for being there couldn't have done the stone work.


So as with many things it falls back on evidence, to claim a unknown civilization doing the stone work requires that you find said civilization. Which at this point we haven't.

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by Stonesplitter
reply to post by Hanslune

 

So as with many things it falls back on evidence, to claim a unknown civilization doing the stone work requires that you find said civilization. Which at this point we haven't.

edit on 9/7/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)

I agree with this. However its not just stonework(though that is the main point of the OP) that points to a much older source civilization. It's in everything from Stonework, architecture, mythology, etc. I agree we have not found said civilization YET. There is definitely evidence, maybe not the smoking gun, but plenty enough for common sense to start telling me there is much more to our history than modern scholars know about/aren't telling us.

edit on 9-7-2012 by TheIrishJihad because: error

reply to post by TheIrishJihad

I agree with this. However its not just stonework(though that is the main point of the OP) that points to a much older source civilization. It's in everything from Stonework, architecture, mythology, etc. I agree we have not found said civilization YET. There is definitely evidence, maybe not the smoking gun, but plenty enough for common sense to

Architecture? Myths are always a contention, were they made up, based on facts or a combination? We do know that people are marvelously imaginative and some do seem to have epiphanies, which is why we have thousands of religions and tens of thousands of myths. The problem is which to believe and which not to?

What three pieces of this evidence do you find most compelling?

start telling me there is much more to our history than modern scholars know about/aren't telling us

So you think 'they' are hiding stuff? Lots of stuff isn't known but we do know that ancient civilizations leave massive archaeological footprints and at this time we don't see any sign of said civilization

reply to post by Hanslune

The Inca did not build the original temples at Machu Picchu or Cusco. Our story gets so much larger when we listen to the wisdom keepers of the ancient traditions. The histories known to the old cultures around the world tell of highly advanced ancient civilizations; and of the coming and going of ages punctuated by world cataclysms. Where ‘modern science’ has dismissed the histories as given by indigenous cultures as mere myth; there are now a few brave researchers, who are willing to face the rejection of the mainstream academics and are publishing the suppressed evidence supporting the knowledge of our ancient ancestors.

In the Americas during the European invasion, after the church sanctioned destruction of so much of the arts and records, a few of the Spanish got around to asking the native history keepers their stories. What was then told and chronicled is quite different than what is generally accepted today. During the 1600’s, in Peru, the Spanish chronicler Fernando Montesinos recorded the histories of the Quechua speaking peoples of Cusco, Peru, those now called Inca.

The Quechua historians told Montesinos and other Spanish chroniclers, that before the last empire there had been much older lineages. The prior peoples and lineages existed through epochs of thousands of years called ‘Suns’. These time periods, often ended by cataclysms, were also reported by the indigenous of both North and Mesoamerica; in fact humanity’s history, told as such, is a worldwide tradition. Both the South and the Mesoamerican historians count five of these Suns. The Andeans began their count of the ages with the time of the "gods", called the Wiracochas. The second age was of the giants. Third was a time of primitive uncivilized man; perhaps they were people struggling to reemerge from one of the times of world cataclysms. Fourth was the age of the semi-divine hero kings. In the fifth age were the human kings, of whom the Inca of Cusco were the last of the line. This is all so wonderfully parallel to the histories given by the Sumerian, Egyptian, Judaic, Greek and other old cultures.

Source
As for Egypt...

Now rain, in the quantities required for this degree of weathering, had not fallen in Egypt since the end of the last Ice Age , around 11000-10000 BC. He was backed up by a huge phalanx of geologists who found West’s evidence overwhelming. When West presented his findings to the 1992 Convention of the Geological Society of America no less than three hundred of his peers endorsed his work.

A related piece of circumstantial evidence is the situation of the Sphinx itself. It has been sculpted out of the solid rock and so is surrounded by a deep trench which, until relatively recently, was always full of sand so burying most of the monument. It has always been agreed by Egyptologists that the Pyramids and the Sphinx are contemporary and related structures but at the time the Sphinx was carved there could not have been a desert. No one would have carved out a monument which was going to be constantly buried in sand.

Khufu was the son of Sneferu and it is assumed by academia that he suddenly realised how to do what all his predecessors had failed in – construct a pyramid of 52 degree angle. Thus, according to the accepted time scale, chronologically he built the most magnificent pyramid of them all at Giza. A pyramid so far in advance of any of the previous ones that there is no comparison between them. The two companion pyramids are attributed to Khufu’s successor Chefra (or Chefren) and to his successor Menka-ra (or Mycerinus). As pointed out previously these three edifices were built over centres that lay almost on a straight line – but not quite. This is the version of events that has been accepted and continues to be promulgated across the world.

Source
And as a side.....

The results of recent research suggests that ancient, or prehistoric, builders of the monumental structures found in such diverse places as Ireland, Malta, southern Turkey and Peru all have a peculiarly common characteristic -- they may have been specially designed to conduct and manipulate sound to produce certain sensory effects.

So what does all of this mean? What explains these similar, yet geographically and culturally disparate finds? "How curious that such varied ancient structures, separated by so much time and distance, should have common features which imply sophisticated knowledge", observes Eneix. "Did the architects of the day each make and develop their own discoveries or did they inherit a concept from some older school of learning? Adding the time element to other fields of comparison suggests human trail-blazing of monumental proportion."

Source

reply to post by Stonesplitter


As noted before the Incan were very much later comers to Andean, many earlier civilizations had existed. The source didn’t load properly. However it seems to be a new age site. Archaeological evidence doesn’t support the many religious beliefs of the Andeans – and many other cultures.


The guy who came up with the older sphinx theory, Dr Schoch later adjusted his own suggested date to around 5,000 BC

A fair summary of the debate can be found here

Summary

My own take on it is that the Sphinx enclosure is lower down on the plateau and that when infrequent rain does fall – it is funneled thru that area

I’d go with independent invention due to the fact that all humans can hear and all would note that sound ‘bounces’ off stone and would realize they could manipulate it in that manner

reply to post by Hanslune



Well, to be doubly fair, when a scientist with any reputation puts his reputation on the line to speak what he thinks is truth, if it is upsetting to his peers it can certainly lead to professional bullying (i.e., threats of blackballing, etc)

Hans, you have to admit that there is not a lot of encouragement of creative or out of the box thinking in science. The paradigm is the dogma, and that is the gospel. I know you take exception to this, but we can go throughout the post Rennaisance history and find case after case of scientists blackballing and marginalizing peers who do not toe a specific line. At the very least, it has resulted in ignoring meaningful theories that through the ignoring delayed real progress by decades, maybe more. Especially in the field of physics.

The caution is absolutely necessary and warranted. But ego masquerading as caution is what I am taking exception to.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan



Hans, you have to admit that there is not a lot of encouragement of creative or out of the box thinking in science.

Sorry dude but that is complete and utter nonsense, where do you think all the scientific change has come from in the last 200 years? Following the Greeks?

The paradigm is the dogma, and that is the gospel.

Please explain the constant and increasing flow of new theories, findings, impassioned debate and continual research

I know you take exception to this, but we can go throughout the post Rennaisance history and find case after case of scientists blackballing and marginalizing peers who do not toe a specific line.

Because there are lots and lots of theories that DON'T work, and few that do, obviously the ones that do drive the system, if it didn't then where do all the advances come from?

At the very least, it has resulted in ignoring meaningful theories that through the ignoring delayed real progress by decades, maybe more.

This is usually due to a lack of evidence to support the theory, like with contiental drift

The caution is absolutely necessary and warranted. But ego masquerading as caution is what I am taking exception to.

Since science is full of humans you will get this, on average it use to take 10-15 years for a new idea to be fully accepted, that is changing and its now (swag) down to about half that. Some take longer some take less

Note how long it took for consensus to accept the Hobbits and Denisovians

But the evidence always wins in the end - unless you're dealing with a religious or politic issue then the science can become muddled but again in the end it will come clear in time

reply to post by Stonesplitter


Stonesplitter

Its funny all this sonic stuff, very neat and the modern sonic drills are just amazing. The problem is that the energy you need to put in is a hammer or flick of a tong. well why not just use that same force directly on the stone. Ever tried the technique with the actual tuning forks in the museums, good luck with that.

If you want to change your life and adopt an exquisite ancient technique look no further than sun dishes. These things do not even touch the stone, the dynamic beam of light NEVER wears out and its silent and quick. When I first started using these devices I could not stop inch thick granite from fracturing almost instantly. Since I was interested in the vitrification of the stone it was rather irritating.

After a while I worked out how to control the fractures, not quite to a craft level yet but it explains a lot of these neat stone cuts from antiquity without a chisel or tuning fork in sight. There are plenty of sun dishes BTW.

For the fuller explanation of the Ancient Solar Stone Cutting/Finishing Techniques see
Ancient Solar Stonecutting Techniques

At the very least I have shown the techniques work in practice rather than all this theoretical stuff. The mainstream archaeologists will retain their chisels and hammer stones if all they see is unproven theory. I will be demoing the techniques in Cairo next year if all goes to plan. Be interesting to put the tong method beside it.

Keep up the great work

Regards

Chris