Neanderthals were more advanced than us. THEY were one of the megalithic cultures of the remote past

reply to post by zedVSzardoz


continued

What is the firmament?
Let’s look at what the bible tells us about the earth when it was first made and what changed when the earth was flooded.

Look at Genesis chapter 1 again.

First of all, let's list out a few facts about the layers God talks about;

Verse 20 tells us that there's a layer above the waters on the earth that the birds fly in.

Verses 9 and 10 mention the waters on the earth that are gathered together to make Seas.

Verses 14-17 tells us about another layer above where the sun, moon and stars are placed and set in motion for the division of days, nights, seasons and years.

Verses 6-8 show us that there are layers in between the waters to divide the waters from the waters.

Notice that verse 6 says this firmament divides the waters (plural) from the waters (plural). There are many layers that are divided.

Verse 7 says there's waters “under” and waters “above”.

The word “firmament” means an expanse, and by implication; to overlay.

OT:7549 u^yq!r*; raqiya` (raw-kee'-ah); from OT:7554; properly, an expanse

OT:7554 uq^r*; raqa` (raw-kah'); a primitive root; by implication, to overlay

The layers of water and expanses are divided and overlayed in many layers.

Notice the “firmament” (layer) that God made in verse 6? It was made “in the midst of the waters” to divide the layers of waters, and He called it “heaven”. In verse 9 He gathers one layer of waters together to make dry land. In verse 20 it says that the birds fly above the earth in another layer. In verse 17 God set the sun, moon and stars in even another layer.

There is a layer “below”, on the earth, that makes up the seas, the then another layer was for the birds (our atmosphere), and then there was another layer of water “above”, and then another layer was for the sun, moon and stars (outer space). The layer “above” was between the atmosphere of the earth and the cold of space to divide them or separate them from each other.

Take the time to really study this and get your arms around the implications of the layers and the expanses and understand that there was and is many layers, and was more than one layer of “water”.

www.prophecyandtruth.com...

and this

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by BIHOTZ
reply to post by Arbitrageur

 

Here is a little about high and low level pressure and oxygenation on the body. While these traits, like that of having a smaller lung for low altitude/ higher pressures or being short and stout are adaptations to environment I say they are indicative of how our body responds FROM its original setting. High pressure systems usually associate with clear skies and nice weather.

The need to favor short and stout like the body does with preserving heat would not be indicative of the result of air pressure or even oxygenation but rather cold weather for low pressure systems that are known for lousy, cloudy weather. Darker skin pigment from higher exposure to the suns radiation from clear skies are not indicative of high pressure either since they are simply dealing with the lack of clouds in a high pressure system. Being tall and lanky is better for hot weather, not for getting more air.

That is why I do not see the particular traits of a species to be indicative of the maxim of environment, instead I see it as dealing with the particulars. What I see with a fundamental change in oxygen content and pressure I associate with it is that the earth may have produced larger species as a result of high pressure systems all over the globe.

Those high pressure systems going hand in hand with really warm weather as they are known to produce. If the whole planet was allot warmer like we have come to accept, then it is only logical that the worlds habitats were mostly high pressure systems. This with our knowledge of the earth having a richer oxygen content would explain why all life from plants to fish were bigger. This combination might be the natural state our original species worked from to produce our current populations.

It is not worthy that people at different altitudes in different places like Tibet or the Andes all have made different adaptations to keep their blood oxygenated. This shows that they were working from a common starting point since the standard their new physiology favors falls under the same standards of cellular oxygenation.

Also note worthy is that in just 3000 years the Tibetan people have made their adaptations showing possibly the fastest case of evolution ever known. Now take that model and stretch it over millions of years and you have a possible root cause for evolutionary adaptation. A direct trigger over food supply or predatory threats.

If the earth does warm again and develop high pressure systems again, I ASSUME oxygen content will increase as plant size increases, causing a cycle of increasing growth in mass for all species. Adaptations will favor warmer weather and so we will see fast changes in evolution....some we might have ourselves.

Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy (HBOT) has been used for over a century to treat almost all types of injuries, such as stroke, Cerebral Palsy, gangrene, and non-healing wounds. Now, even more recent clinical and university studies have shown HBOT supports the body’s production and mobilization of mesenchymal stem cells. Oxygen works on our stem cells on several different levels. HBOT mobilizes MSC’s from our bone marrow by a nitric oxide (NO) dependent mechanism we call NO synthesis. Nitric oxide is a chemical our body produces that is used as a signaling molecule.

Once the MSC’s get to where they are directed to go, they differentiate into more specialized cells and begin to heal damaged cells. HBOT supports this process and also delivers oxygen needed to facilitate and sustain cell repair.

www.stemcellmd.org...

Hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) is medicine's most efficient method of transporting oxygen to cells throughout the body. When you breathe oxygen at normal atmospheric pressure, it is transported on the hemoglobin in your red blood cells. Under pressure, however, oxygen dissolves in the plasma, cerebrospinal fluid in the brain and spinal cord, lymph, and other body fluids. It is therefore easily delivered to all tissues, and even areas with limited blood flow are afforded the tremendous healing benefits of oxygen.

HBOT also curbs infection, by providing a hostile environment to anaerobic bacteria, which thrive in the absence of oxygen. It promotes the growth of new capillaries and blood vessels to areas with poor circulation for cardiovascular support and boosts collagen formation for faster wound healing. It also mobilizes rejuvenating stem cells

www.whitakerwellness.com...

Air pressure is not uniform across the Earth however. The normal range of the Earth's air pressure is from 980 millibars (mb) to 1050 mb. These differences are the result of low and high air pressure systems which are caused by unequal heating across the Earth's surface and the pressure gradient force.

edit on 23-1-2013 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)

....and finally, my crappy thread I made in 2007. I am/ was newyorkee. I corrected the spelling errors but looking back on it I made some really dumb mistakes and dumb assumptions. I figure that since I wont be redoing it anymore as that would be pointless now being that there are excellent alternatives with far better research than anything I could do, I will just continue and try to explain how I think this relates to my neanderthal theory.

Anyways here it is. These are my posts form that thread with the spelling corrected at least.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I know there are already threads on ancient life spans, but I feel a new perspective on the issue might shed light in areas not touched upon by them. Without going into a philosophical debate on the interpretation of the bible..the only real source of documentation for this phenomena, I would like to speculate on the possibility of meteorological , and geomagnetic activity being the reason for this possible reality. With our modest advancements in medicine today we are seeing dramatic increases in life spans for humans from even a couple of generations ago. Image this reality being possible due to natural factors and not artificial means or Godly intervention.

I was looking at alternative medicine a while back and happened to come across what is known as hyperbolic oxygen treatment. It consists of highly pressurized, concentrated oxygen totally saturating the bodies tissues. It is nothing different than what a diver would be treated with if he rises too quickly from great depths. It is effective to the extent that the bodies natural regenerative properties are enhanced, circulation improved, cellular life span increased, as well as a whole host of interesting qualities.

It has been demonstrated that subjects that undergo prolonged treatments over an extended period of time enjoy greater health, increased stamina, faster reflexes as well as little to no sickness. This in addition to reduced recover time for a very varied and long list of afflictions. Here are some it is used to treat-www.drcranton.com... -

I was then wondering, if the human body functions so much better under these highly oxygenated, highly pressurized conditions, one could argue that that is indeed the most natural environment for it. Also if the research is true then all the tissues in the body would benefit from greater life spans due to less cellular decay.

This leads me to believe that the life spans of ancient peoples as described in the bible are a result of a higher concentration of oxygen in a more pressurized atmosphere. it is possible that as the earths climate changed, and its atmosphere leaked into space, the life spans of people slowly decreased. If our planet at one time had an atmosphere like that of a huge hyperbolic oxygen chamber we might expect this to evident in other species on our planet.

While we know the life spans of species around when the atmosphere was similar to ours, we do not know of species that existed before them, of which we have no record. It is safe to say that life begot life and that the species we do know of came from something living and not a rock. What we do not know is if the planet that sustained their life was similar to the one we know now. It is known that our planet went through very drastic environmental changes and that is evident even today.

What if when we were introduced to this planet, or sprung up from its genetic soup, we came into a world that actually enhanced our biology? That to me would explain why life spans were so long and why (as the atmosphere leaked)got progressively shorter.

What if different planets produce different biological enhancements? I wonder, anyone hear about our magnetic field changing, what if it is cycling through changes until it restores it self to a prior state. I saw on a discovery special that it will, in a couple hundred years, produce an aurora borealis over the whole planet. I wonder what metrological effects we could expect to see, better or worse weather? I bet all those positively charged particles being attracted to the earth from the sun, producing said effect, have a enhancing quality to them on the human physiology.-

www.springerlink.com...

this link provides no concrete research but does show interest by researchers "that conditions on the Sun and in the Earth’s magnetosphere can affect human health at the Earth’s surface" There are links to research being conducted on the subject..but I'll leave that reading to you.

If we imagine a planet rich in oxygen, pressurized enough to allow greater absorption of oxygen into the body.This coupled with a highly charged atmosphere, with positively charged particles being fed into it in vast quantities from the sun, we could imagine greater life spans over generations with prolonged exposure, as well as a steady decline when said variables change over time. This would explain why we are not living as long as certain biblical characters while being the same species as them(presumably), just in a slightly modified habitat. A habitat that if altered to better fit our biology would produce longer life spans.

Well look at the dinosaurs for example, they did grow to astounding sizes, like the vegetation around them, all in unison with each other..then they die out and the vegetation "shrunk" in comparable size to what was the norm for thousands of years. I remember reading that reptiles have nothing regulating their growth, and without any hindrance to their development can grow as long as they live. This might be evidence of a more supportive environment. It could just be like the accepted theory says that in fact global climate change reduced the available food supply. I wonder though...why did the vegetation suddenly change in size and growth, like many other species?

I have found a site that argues the fact that our concept of early earth may be slightly off.

www.biblicalcreation.org.uk...

It states that the levels of oxygen may have been higher than previously anticipated and that in fact may have been enough to sustain plant life, as such that oxygen that was presumed to almost be extinct (two thousand five hundred million years ago) shows viable evidence of its presence. It also states that the theory of a reducing or neutral atmosphere in early earth history in some instances lacks viable supporting evidence. by taking rock sediment and measuring the amount of iron in trace water one can extrapolate the amount of oxygen present at its formation. The concept is that

"the lower the level of oxygen ions in water (and the greater the level of hydrogen ions), the more iron can go into solution. However, the rates of dissolution have to be assessed experimentally. It is found that the reactions for Fe3+ compounds proceed very slowly. The prediction is that Fe2+ will be lost more readily than Fe3+. Using Titanium as a `standard' immobile element, the prediction is that a "reduced"-type (R- type) paleosol will have significant reductions in the ratio Fe2+/Ti but little or no decrease in Fe3+/Ti. According to Ohmoto(researcher in mentioned page), none of the paleosol sections examined yielded this characteristic. Thus, there are no paleosols that support the idea that the earth's early atmosphere was reducing (or neutral, for the same reasons). "

If our measurements' available result in an erroneous interpretation of available oxygen for the entirety of prehistoric history, then a re-examination of our understanding of prehistoric life is called for. In fact the available oxygen for those life forms during their existence is greater than anticipated. showing a dramatic reduction up into our own times.

"minimum pressure of atmospheric oxygen consistent with the data is greater than 1.5% of Present Atmospheric Levels. for the entire period of 3.0 - 1.8 Ga. " (300,000 million years-100,000million years),contrary to the accepted notion of they're being that or far less.

If life forms that grew so large and vegetation that grew so dense and large as well, had greater oxygen levels than we thought present as they developed, it would be an obvious reason as to why their size changed as these levels toped off to present day conditions. Imagine now the changes humans have undergone as a result of this reducing atmosphere.

It might be argued then that since there is a definite pattern to the reduction in size of reptiles, progressively, as we look at history chronologically, we could correlate it then to the progressively reducing oxygen in the atmosphere that eventually brings us to our present atmospheric conditions. Bearing in mind that there was greater oxygen present at the start of this "count down", we may attribute the great size of things to a oxygen rich environment. I think the problem is that previously we measured the earths atmosphere relative to our own atmospheric conditions as being "optimal" for sustaining life.

We lack any fossil record from that time of anything beyond single celled organisms.(3.0 - 1.8 Ga) It might be noted that that does not mean there was no complex life. Just that we have no record of it. This means we do not know the average life spans of living creatures of that time..since we think there were none.

I argue now that if compared to life spans of living creatures are enjoying now, we might find a progressive change. Using reptiles' almost unrestricted growth as an anchor and their presence on earth now in vastly reduced sizes, I see a direct link between environmental conditions being more favorable to life in times past than now. If not there would be some form of large reptile in existence, comparable to prehistoric sizes.

I dont think I adequately explained why there is oxygen present, contrary to accepted belief. Here is another excerpt from the site

"The arguments are based on the occurrence of compounds of iron in certain sedimentary rocks. Iron in the ferrous state (Fe2+) can dissolve relatively easily in oxygen-free water, but is converted to the insoluble ferric state (Fe3+) in an oxidising environment. Previous studies of certain Precambrian rocks identified as weathered horizons (paleosols) have suggested a general loss of iron, which has been interpreted as evidence for either a neutral or a reducing atmosphere.

Ohmoto's research was stimulated by some apparent anomalies in the conventional analysis. He found that not all paleosol sections of >2.2 Ga showed iron loss. Even in sections that did show Fe loss, only a minority of samples were depleted in iron. Furthermore, many of the post 2.2 Ga paleosols had lost iron (and in such cases, an atmosphere with some free oxygen is accepted). "

I guess it is possible for a planet to absorb another planets atmosphere if its orbit was close enough and its mass was greater. I could see even a planets destruction(as is accepted to have happened in our solar system)causing a disruption to neighboring planets orbits. It would be interesting to see how planets conserve or lose their atmosphere when on exaggerated or unstable orbits. I imagine it follows rules similar to those of fluid dynamics. But look at the other planets in our solar system...it almost seems like their own atmospheres dissipated or changed dramatically. The later is not so well proven, but the fact that planets like mars and Jupiter once had different atmospheres is generally accepted.

while that IS the accepted theory, that humans did not in fact share co-existence with early earth life, there is a theory that the relative amount of time needed to "evolve" for humanity would far exceed the allotted time we humans give our development. This theory does rely heavily on the assumption that evolution does indeed occur and is the main factor in our development. While I would steer away from this issue all together, I am a proponent of the notion that civilization did begin abruptly from a historical point of view. I would think that it is simply that it had a greater head start in its inception than we attribute to it. This in mind, we could argue that the start date for humanity arriving on the planetary scene would be that much farther back in relative history.

I also notice a varied and diverse group of specimens that represent our chronological "evolution". It is in MHO that these specimens of human development are not a chain linked progression of the same species, but rather different selections from outcroppings of the genetic base for humanity. If they are the same species , given the allotted time given for their development, we would have seen another "step" in our biological progression. I do see a varied primate population though ,now, in our own time, co-existing with us. This proves in my mind that humanity has lived side by side with primates since our beginnings.

If in a thousand years some one were to uncover humanoid skeletons of primates and humans of the same relative time period, he might then make the connection that chimpanzees made apes, and apes made humans, within our relative time in co-existence. If the evidence supports chronological progression, it is a dangerous error to fall in, that it is all connected to each other. You may have hearted about the tour that "Lucy" will be doing from her native Ethiopia. Lucy is supposedly a genetic link to our evolutionary process. In her I see a distinct species of primate that has similar traits as humans, but I would not weigh that heavily on that sole fact. I say this because all primates are similar to us, they share almost the EXACT DNA as us.

Again if a future observer were to see a primates remains from a thousand years ago, and juxtapose them to my own he might then say that I am the "Lucy" of my time, being that I show a distinct progression in evolution. We know better but we have the benefit of this hypothetical situation's proximity to our own time. Give the same scenario a few more thousand years for all other representative specimens to disappear leaving only the primate a thousand years older than my self , and my own remains, and a fallacy of interpretation could occur. I do believe this is the case since the only remains we "can" find are of obscure species that in my mind did not represent the entirety of humanoid life on this planet from its inception to its current state. Again I say this because of the varied primate population representative of our own time.

This as well as the fact that we know that "primitive" man lived side by side with "modern" man as we know our selves. Who is to say that said "primitive" man didn't live side by side with yet another form of "human". We lack any supporting evidence, but as the case for anything that far back in time, we cant say that from our relative new interest in our origin, that we found every determining fact. In our relatively short time seeking our origin, We seem to have conveniently placed everything in its "place". That doesn't sit well with me since usually the facts out last those that seek them out. We might never know, but I esteem humanity to far older than we speculate it to be.

ok, phew....

so how does this tie into my theory of neanderthals being an advanced race of man that slowly but surely loss its supremacy on earth and eventually had to interbreed with us in order to survive a massive reduction in population?

Well, to be honest it MAY have been neanderthal or an earlier ancestor that were responsible for the megalithic constructions. IMO, the time frame fits neanderthal and that is why I chose them as well as the fact that they were highly intelligent and had the right physical and mental attributes to pull it off.

They tend to be short though, so how do we explain their supposed larger than life stature in mythology if they are the Gods and giants of old? How did they fall from technological grace?....I think I over did it explaining how I think they enjoyed longer life spans, but anyways,

their life spans:
Would have dropped off quickly from their point of view. If an adult lived 900 years, (bear with me) he would watch his son live half of those years, and his grand children live a quarter of that time. By the time passed away he would have seen several generation come and go when he would have grown up with everyone still around in his family.

The rate of education time and time for transition they were used to would suddenly be reduced faster than those in the know of things could keep up with. Like if a teacher who is used to teaching a years worth of material in a year is suddenly given 6 months to do so, then 3 months, then a week.

Along the way she would just lose some things she had no time to teach before the year was done, and try to instead convey a "general" idea of everything.

Their physical size and strength would also drop off slowly so their ability to reproduce the cities and structures they were used to would disappear faster than their ability to build smaller and with different materials. Also climate change may have contributed to their becoming short and stout to preserve heat in the suddenly colder and harsher climate, but I digress. Their skill set would change as their needs changed. Their ability to adapt may have made them lose touch with their technological instinct.

If you are a stone mason it might be hard to learn how to become a master carpenter in a short period of time for example.

So that would also explain the sudden drop into technological expertise and over all knowledge. This with the before mentioned reasons IMO would explain allot of their need to join us in the "savage and mortal realm".

and the size?
Well I think if the theory of enhanced life spans because of the atmospheric conditions expressed in previous posts is true, then the size drop off of other species would correspond to the reduced oxygen and pressure of the atmosphere, and so neanderthals not being an exception (all hominids) would have reduced in size as well.

I have to laugh at the radical change in how people view the neanderthal. They used to be primitive beasts, with no language and hair all over. Now that its proven that all people a outside of Africa are homo sapien hybrids and the Africans are the only genetically pure homo sapiens, all of a sudden neanderthals are advanced megalithic builders.

I'm not doubting they were advanced and imo the blue eyed blond hair genes of Europeans probably came from neanderthals.


And as for the biblical talk about the nephilim. you have to remember that God wiped out the human race because the human race gene pool had become polluted with the genes of animals. Well the only pure homo sapiens are Africans. Does this mean that the rest of the population is due to be eliminated for genetic impurity. I find this to be almost humiliating for those that used the Bible as a tool for racism where those that are most pure are the most advanced.

and BTW, I do believe in this stuff and I think that the global elite consider them selves to be children of molloch, and descendants of fallen angels breeding with human women. That is why they view us as lesser forms of life to be used by them. And its why royalty inbreeds. Whether its true or not, I think they believe it and its why they attend ritualized child sacrifice at places like bohemian grove.

Before the end, the truth will become known.

reply to post by dieseldyk


well I can agree with almost everything you say there. In all fairness, we have to push the dates for some of these constructions back. That much is certain for me. Taking that into account, you have to look and see who was around to build them at those times? What does that mean as far as THEIR history and traditions they passed on to their successors?

I think there have always been people who after enough thought couldnt buy the accepted history being pushed as absolute fact. I never thought prehistoric man was as dumb as they said they were and I have met many people, even in academia that argue a higher level of intelligence and sophistication than they were given credit for.

Racial purity and even the concept of "races" has undergone drastic changes and is doing so even now.

also, the bible is not just a religious text, It is a historical text as well. I say this because it has included documented history and has been influenced by historians and cultures that incorporated their own history into their mythology.

reply to post by Kandinsky


It has been proven that solar flare energy distorts carbon dating making it nothing more than a shoot from the hip and guess system of dating items.

Almost all dates provided to us by mainstream are lies meant to keep us from no knowing true earth history.

I have just as much faith in Scientists as I do in the Pope.

They are lying about EVERYTHING...

Scientists will have you believe it takes millions of years to fossilize something.

Things fossilize much quicker than scientists will tell you.

A fossilized foot has been found inside a cowboy boot in Texas.

The religion of scientific fundamentalism is just as dangerous as any on earth.

Science is nothing but a HUGE LIE!

There're al ot of things wrong about this thread but I won't delve into it.

But the major point is that there's no evidence that we're hybrids of cro-magnon/neanderthal or homo sapien/neanderthal. In fact, this study shows it's likely we share common genes from a common ancestor and in fact there was no sex between neanderthal and our ancestors:
www.adelaidenow.com.au -
Experts say ancient homo sapiens didn't breed with Neanderthals...

............
But a new study by scientists at Britain's University of Cambridge says the shared DNA came from a shared ancestor, not from "hybridisation" or reproduction between the two hominid species.
..........
In a separate study published in PNAS, scientists led by Svante Paabo at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, found that Neanderthals and Homo sapiens split between 400,000 and 800,000 years ago, an earlier date than thought.
.........

Neanderthals had a slightly smaller brain-to-body-mass ratio:
www.nature.com - Body mass and encephalization in Pleistocene Homo...

..........
Relative to body mass, brain mass in late archaic H. sapiens (Neanderthals) was slightly smaller than in early 'anatomically modern' humans,...

There's so much I could say. There's even been reserarch into the genome of the neanderthal and homos sapien and it suggestis several positive gene changes that increased our survival.

Here's a list of some of hte differences:
1) Neanderthals likely matured more rapidly in childhood; 9 y/o w/ development like a modern 12 y/o.
2) Brain development is markedly different early on; in modern humans changes in this are significant
3) Olfactory and temporal lobes (including orbitofrontal cortex) are larger in modern humans
4) Neanderthal had much higher amounts of steroids and much stronger arms/hands. This includes a different spread in their fingers which gave them better grip. They had larger lungs. The average weight for a neanderthal 5'6 would be about 170 pounds. A lot of that is muscle and dense bone.
5) Neanderthal ate an essentially all meat diet; did this change their genes?
6) Shorter necks likely meant a higher-pitched voice (like primates but not that high-pitched). This indicates they might sound more like modern females. They would have full range of speech.
7) Their foot favored walking; homo sapien feet favor endurance and running. However, Neanderthal might have been a better jumper and their superior strength would benefit in many ways.

In a seperate thread I went into a lot of this and gave links. My summary at the end of it was that the southern climate and the social selection pressure made homo sapien the dominant Hominidae. It resulted in a circumstance where homo sapien fathered civilization not because he was necessarily smarter, but because the southern climate spurred him to become especially diverse and social.

I don't know if it has been mentioned or not, but Neanderthal was not superior to Homo Sapien. One of the big problems was during the catastrophic event that limited our numbers, also made hunting more scares. Neanderthal with their large muscle mass, didn't have the endurance (all that muscle makes it harder on cardio) to range as far from home to hunt. Where the leaner Homo Sapien was better adapted for that very thing.

It is quite possible their muscle mass lead to their eventual downfall, however they were not totally lost, as there was interbreeding with Homo Sapien.

reply to post by jonnywhite


Thanks for the addition. I don't disagree with the differences mentioned. I am not arguing that they or us are hybrids though. I included an article that made that argument because it had an excellent breakdown or Neanderthals as well as other conclusions I did agree with.

I guess now would be a good time for a recap

I am saying that neanderthals were forced to breed with homo-sapiens out of necessity. That they are the or one of the megalithic cultures that have eluded us in our attempts to find who exactly were the "incarnate" Gods primitive man spoke of that taught man everything there is to know of civilization.

I say that they were originally from an advanced civilization, the one described in countless cultures across the globe that due to a catastrophe lost their technological superiority and spiraled down into barbarism.

I am saying that they are the or one of the races of man described in folklore and myth accredited to have had once great life spans and large stature...(immortal giants of myth)

I argue that climatic change and inadaptability due to coming from a far advanced civilization changed their educational dynamic by reduced life spans and so commenced down a path of diminishing returns where each generation knew less and was less trained than the last and in turn could impart less knowledge to the following generation.

They KNOWING that their populations had shrunk to numbers too low in terms of genetic diversity and so survivability, decided that their only avenue for survival was interbreeding with the slightly different homo-sapiens with abundant survival techniques adapted for harsh and wild environments that they lacked.

I argue a fusion of a lesser in numbers population of neanderthals into a larger population of homo-sapiens. A smaller but richer culture in terms of fore-knowledge about civilization into a primitive culture of nomads.

I also say that our early traditions, myths and folklore came in part from them, and that early civilizations knew this. That the Gods and giants of old were advanced forms of man, previously thought primitive and dumb but that early cultures revered.

That a cultural record of "races" of men existing before ours is recorded in common themes like those in origin stories. There are other similarities for example that a once global civilization existed as well as a flood that ended it. These among others like the belief that Gods MAKE man of this time out of the remains of the last epoch...many shared components indeed implying a common story and so a common starting point for all global cultures.

that is the gist of it....

reply to post by zedVSzardoz


Legend has it: all these eras that came to an end, were the result of alien intervention-- specifically the Annunaki. Their master geneticists; Anu, Enki (later morphed into Adam [atom] and Eve) Enlil and Marduk were believed to be the engineers who seeded this planet over and over again with intelligent Beings. No evolutionary process per se rather...instantly, there were new species.

The legend continues by saying; they kept wiping out these INTELLIGENT races (including giants) until they got the species right (Humans) --- for whatever reason.

We really don't have a fluid explanation for these periods. Inclimate weather (Ice age) or meteors impact are only theories and they don't make sense. For instance, if we evolved from primate then theoretically there should be no primates left! And clearly, that's not the case.

Neanderthals were believed to have been a very intelligent race (Big Foot?) So, who knows?...... The theory of alien intervention makes the most sense if you stop and think about it.

reply to post by SoulVisions


Thank you for sharing that article. It really was informative and I really can see now why neanderthal may be Nephilim. Also in looking at carbon dating you can see all it's flaws. Earth's climate has changed so many times since coming into existence there is no way to truly calculate using a carbon footprint. Earth's future denizens will probably date us wrong, too, if they decide to use a similar dating technique.

In fact, what will we have to show for us being here 50,000 years from now? The Georgia Guidestones, Mount Rushmore? Surely all our other wonders will fall to pieces by then...or be totally unrecognizable for what they are. it would be nice to have out species survive that long to find us making wonders and not having others study our past but to be truly honest I wonder if we'll make it another 50 years.

Really great article!

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
reply to post by Harte

 

ok,

so first the evidence of water erosion of the sphinx first proposed by Robert M. Schoch.

I know all about Schoch's claim, and I know also that his sphinx date is not based on water erosion at all. His claimed date happens to coincide with a period that was wet. At the time, we didn't know anything about several subsequent wet periods. His date is based on subsurface weathering which is caused by contact with air, not water. If you actually read his paper, you would be aware of this.

So, please point out the part that indicates that Giza was a tropical rainforest at the time of the sphinx's construction, as you claimed.

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
reply to post by Harte

 

now the claim I made about South American people´s INHERITING the structures and cities WE claim they built even though THEY say the "gods" built them.

Please point out the part where WE claim that they built them, when they claim they didn't, as you stated.

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
reply to post by Harte

 

as far as subduction and the under water structures....SO WHAT? are you serious?
subduction is what PRESERVED the Mediterranean and kept it from drying up.

The real impact of them having been above ground when constructed, obviously right, is the period in time when they were supposed to have been above ground....

Again, so what? Subduction put Port Royal Jamaica under the sea inside of two minutes,.

Are you saying that Port Royal should be dated to the time of formation of the Gulf of Mexico?

Are you unaware that much of ancient Alexandria is under the Med. today? Do you think a city founded in the name of Alexander the Great was built a million years before he was born?

There is no "city," not even a structure, off the shore of Yonaguni, and none in the Gulf of Khambat.
As for the poster that claimed that "these sites" haven't been investigated, that should read "I am ignorant of any investigation of these sites."

Prof. Masaaki Kimura, the only mainstream geologist that thinks Yonaguni might have been "altered" by humans, has dated the sinking of that natural formation to around the first century A.D. based on info he finally got from caves that sank with it.

Harte

reply to post by Harte


I am not even going into it with you. Do or think what ever you want.

Trying to gather up all the information necessary for this thread, read it all, make notes and post it is hard enough.

You are welcome to it or not. I honestly dont care nor have I the energy to even bother with your "issues" with my theory, as it is, they are not constructive criticism, but rather just criticisms.

what evs......

I guess you wont be contributing to this thread anymore? if you change your mind, then the floor is yours.

take care guy.

EDIT:
in case you were wondering what the response by Schoch was to James A. Harrell, they guy you are parroting,

the correspondence between both of them is available here....www.davidpbillington.net...

Schoch defended his assessment and yet again debunked the "wet sand" theory. I have no problem reading. That is not the issue. Its just that the available explanations for it other than water erosion are just asinine, desperate, and flawed considering all the facts. Did I mention disingenuous?.......

also

Doesn’t carbon-14 dating disprove the Bible?

‘I’ve used carbon-14 dating’, David chuckled. ‘Frankly, among archaeologists, carbon dating is a big joke. They send samples to the laboratories to be dated. If it comes back and agrees with the dates they’ve already decided from the style of pottery, they will say, “Carbon-14 dating of this sample confirms our conclusions.”

But if it doesn’t agree, they just think the laboratory has got it wrong, and that’s the end of it. It’s only a showcase. Archaeologists never (let me emphasize this) never date their finds by carbon-14. They only quote it if it agrees with their conclusions.’1

David tried to explain, ‘The Sothic cycle is a weird and wonderful thing. Some statements in Egyptian history speak of the rising of Sothis but from there on, it’s all conjecture. What is Sothis? Is it Sirius? Venus? There’s no agreement on that. What does “rising” mean? When it comes above the horizon? It’s all speculation, but because it apparently supports their dates, most archaeologists just accept it.’

David raised his eyebrows, ‘In fact, most archaeologists couldn’t explain the Sothic cycle. But they won’t question the Egyptian dates because they think they’re “astronomically fixed”.’3

‘The reason for shortening the Egyptian chronology’, David explained, ‘is overlapping dynasties.’

‘No archaeologist will deny that some dynasties are contemporary. In fact, there’s one place in the Third Intermediate Period where even Kenneth Kitchen, the biggest authority on the period, recognizes that there were four dynasties ruling at the same time.

‘So it’s not a question of “Were any dynasties contemporary?” The question is “How many and for how long?” There were many more dynasties contemporary than previously recognized.’

David explained that the archaeology in Israel is related to Egypt, and has no chronology of its own. ‘So if you find a piece of pottery in Israel that has an inscription related to a pharaoh, then you give it the same date as the pharaoh. But if the date of the pharaoh is wrong, then the date of the pottery in Israel will be wrong, too. There’s the problem.’

creation.com...

and

My academic critics frequently accuse me of dishonestly ignoring carbon-dating results when it suits me to argue that a site may be older than the scholars say it is. For example Garrett Fagan, Assistant Professor of Classics and History at Penn State University in the USA, has attacked me many times both privately and publicly over exactly this issue. He is particularly incensed because my treatment of Tiahuanaco in Fingerprints of the Gods and Heaven's Mirror fails to mention the 29 carbon dates which show the ruined Andean city to have been uninhabited virgin soil before about 3500 years ago and undeveloped on a monumental scale until about 2000 years ago or later.

He believes that this series of carbon dates rules out and renders ludicrous any possibility that Tiahuanaco could be as much as 17,000 years old as I speculate in Fingerprints of the Gods.

www.grahamhancock.com...

The pottery was left there as tribute since the locals say the Gods built it and there are customs all over South America of leaving gifts at sacred sites......carbon dating on those pbjects is not conclusive, yet academics refuses to consider the astronomical alignment factor which all these sites always had and sets the date of construction and use into the remote past (17000 years).

and
www.thestoneage.org...

and
www.atlantisquest.com...

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
reply to post by Harte

 

I am not even going into it with you. Do or think what ever you want.

Trying to gather up all the information necessary for this thread, read it all, make notes and post it is hard enough.

You are welcome to it or not. I honestly dont care nor have I the energy to even bother with your "issues" with my theory, as it is, they are not constructive criticism, but rather just criticisms.

My "issues" involve the blatant lies you post to prop up your vapid claims. As such, they are extremely constructive, but not to you. Only to people that care about the facts.

"Wet sand theory?" Who said anything about that?

Air caused the subsurface weathering. Neither sand nor water has any affect on that sort of weathering.

Again, there's not any bit of Shoch's sphinx claims that I don't know about. Not one single whit. I wrote the old Tinwiki article on the subject. I've been following it for decades, and I know exactly why they aren't true.

For example, are you aware that, using Schoch's method, his own data show that the sides of the sphinx enclosure are the oldest parts? Older than the rear? Older than the front? Yet, according to Schoch, the oldest part of the enclosure is the front, by thousands of years in fact.

Funny how he cherry-picks his own data. I guess the sides being the oldest won't fit into anyone's fringey theories that sell books to the ignorant.

Do you need more examples, or should I wait for you to post more lies as if they were true? You don't like what I say? Don't lie anymore and you won't have to worry about it, will you.

Harte

reply to post by Harte

His claimed date happens to coincide with a period that was wet. At the time, we didn't know anything about several subsequent wet periods.

you referred to wet periods and the theory relying on what "happened to be" wet periods in your last post.....that is who mentioned it. Do you not even understand what you parrot? That is what it is referring to.

You keep calling me a liar....imagine why I would not appreciate that..?

Air erosion does not do that.

His issue with the walls being "different" ages as you say is that he debunks the counter arguments by saying the erosion would then have to be uniform, it is not. So the exposed areas were eroded by RAIN WATER....nice try though.Talk about cherry pickers.

again, you are welcome to my theory and others out there or not. Neither they nor I am forcing anything on you.

please be civil and stop attacking people by calling us liars, and in so doing proving us right on the issue of stubbornness in academia due to close mindedness. The facts speak for themselves.

Harte, your just plain wrong about the weathering on the Sphinx because water erosion was the only force that could have caused it.
The Giza plateu has been virtually bone dry for thousands of years now and last period where sufficient water would have been available to account for the weathering was 12,000 years ago, at the end of the last ice-age...Thats a scientific fact, not lies.
The rest of you need to get your head out of the bible! But since you want to go there I'll make a rare exception but only so I can address the rediculous ages given for these early races.
Given the extra-terrestrial connection I'm supprised you didn't factor in the effect that time dilation would have had on "perceived lifespan", rather than actual lifespan.
First I think we should assume that these early races lived just as long as we did, as lifespan is determined by how many times our telomeres can divide, so the multi-century ages given in the bible are obviously pure fantasy (as is pretty much everything else in the bible!).
Time dilation can be difined as the percieved difference in the passage of time that is experienced by a fixed observer relative to one moving away at speed.
If you believe some of the tales from the old testement, Aliens often took early man on pleasure trips in their flying saucers. Lets assume that their flying saucers had the ability to warp time and space so that they could travel at very high speeds for great distances.
Now lets assume they took one of the sons of Noah, lets call him Bob, on a long trip back to their home planet at the equivalent of the speed of light. I say "equivalent" because it is not possible to actually travel at the speed of light...Warping space is a way around this though.
Noah was left behind on Earth waiting for his sons return. Many years passed and Noah eventually died. On his deathbed he instructed his sons to carry on awaiting Bobs return and in turn they instructed their sons to await his return and so on. Eventually some 400 years, and several generations, later one of Noahs descendents is supprised to see Bob has just been returned to Earth by his Alien mates, and that he appears to have hardly aged a single day!...Such is the effect of time dilation. This could easily account for the great ages stated in the bible.
About the level of Oxygen in Earths early atmospere...There was virtually no free Oxygen in the very early atmosphere, it being composed mostly of CO2 and Nitrogen.
It was only the countless multitude of single celled plants that thrived in the early oceans that gradually filled the early atmosphere with Oxygen...They took in CO2 and expelled Oxygen gas as a waste product.
Ironically, it was this waste product that eventually allowed multi-celled creatures to develop and over time the development of more and more complex organisms.
The amount of Oxygen in the atmospere has varied greatly over time. Some of the highest levels of atmospheric Oxygen occured during the age of the dinosaurs...And this is largely what allowed them to grow so large.
In fact if you brought a dinosaur back to our time it would quickly suffocate in our relatively Oxygen depleted Atmosphere!

reply to post by ProfessorAlfB


I am not going to argue against the alien theory since I am not close minded like that, could be....it would explain allot. BUT

to address 1 thing you said that I do take issue on is this,

There was virtually no free Oxygen in the very early atmosphere, it being composed mostly of CO2 and Nitrogen

I addressed that in my 2007 thread. There was oxygen in early earths atmosphere. Possibly enough to support PLANT LIFE! We only have record of single cell organisms, but that is not absolute. it just proves there may be a limit to the time remains can last, even fossilized remains. Also, going that far back in time, we must consider the state of the earths crust relative to our own time. How much of it has been renewed or has changed since then?

I have found a site that argues the fact that our concept of early earth may be slightly off.

www.biblicalcreation.org.uk...

It states that the levels of oxygen may have been higher than previously anticipated and that in fact may have been enough to sustain plant life, as such that oxygen that was presumed to almost be nonexistent (two thousand five hundred million years ago) shows viable evidence of its presence. It also states that the theory of a reducing or neutral atmosphere in early earth history in some instances lacks viable supporting evidence. by taking rock sediment and measuring the amount of iron in trace water one can extrapolate the amount of oxygen present at its formation. The concept is that

"the lower the level of oxygen ions in water (and the greater the level of hydrogen ions), the more iron can go into solution. However, the rates of dissolution have to be assessed experimentally. It is found that the reactions for Fe3+ compounds proceed very slowly. The prediction is that Fe2+ will be lost more readily than Fe3+. Using Titanium as a `standard' immobile element, the prediction is that a "reduced"-type (R- type) paleosol will have significant reductions in the ratio Fe2+/Ti but little or no decrease in Fe3+/Ti. According to Ohmoto(researcher in mentioned page), none of the paleosol sections examined yielded this characteristic. Thus, there are no paleosols that support the idea that the earth's early atmosphere was reducing (or neutral, for the same reasons). "

If our measurements' available result in an erroneous interpretation of available oxygen for the entirety of prehistoric history, then a re-examination of our understanding of prehistoric life is called for. In fact the available oxygen for those life forms during their existence is greater than anticipated. showing a dramatic reduction up into our own times.

"minimum pressure of atmospheric oxygen consistent with the data is greater than 1.5% of Present Atmospheric Levels. for the entire period of 3.0 - 1.8 Ga. " (300,000 million years-100,000million years),contrary to the accepted notion of they're being that or far less.

I dont think I adequately explained why there is oxygen present, contrary to accepted belief. Here is another excerpt from the site

"The arguments are based on the occurrence of compounds of iron in certain sedimentary rocks. Iron in the ferrous state (Fe2+) can dissolve relatively easily in oxygen-free water, but is converted to the insoluble ferric state (Fe3+) in an oxidising environment. Previous studies of certain Precambrian rocks identified as weathered horizons (paleosols) have suggested a general loss of iron, which has been interpreted as evidence for either a neutral or a reducing atmosphere.

Ohmoto's research was stimulated by some apparent anomalies in the conventional analysis. He found that not all paleosol sections of >2.2 Ga showed iron loss. Even in sections that did show Fe loss, only a minority of samples were depleted in iron. Furthermore, many of the post 2.2 Ga paleosols had lost iron (and in such cases, an atmosphere with some free oxygen is accepted). "

EDIT:
Also, dont bother with that heart guy. He doesn't even understand what he parrots when trying to debunk what is clear evidence. HE is convinced that we are wrong. The facts are just a technicality to him. The guy is arguing the "wet period" theory and doesn't even know it is about the sand supposedly being wet enough to cause the erosion. In other words another form of water erosion, yet he thinks its wind erosion....He doesn't even know what "wet period" means to Egyptology, It has nothing to do with rain making things wet and everything to do with the Nile....lol.... yet he claims to know all bout the theories.....

Just a rabid debunker who cant be bothered to read and understand that which he sells as truth to even verify if it is in fact true.

I wanted to add something else I came across about Teotihuacan.

There is an anomaly found surrounding Teotihuacan. The Pyramid of Sun has underneath it mica in layers up to 30 cm (12 in) thick. Mica is = en.wikipedia.org...

It is thought that the Mica was mined locally but there are no large deposits of it in anywhere in Mexico.

The Large amounts exist in Brazil. The type of mica found at Teotihuacán is only found in Brazil in deposits that are more than 2000 miles away. It is a mystery how it was transported to Teotihuacan and what its function is in the inside layer of the Pyramid of Sun.

The “Mica Temple” that has been discovered on the site has the following characteristics. The temple sits around a patio about 300 meters south of the west face of the Pyramid of the Sun. Under a floor paved with large rock slabs, they found two massive sheets of mica.

The sheets are 90 feet square and form two layers with one on top of the other.Since it is UNDER the floor it is not decorative, but rather has an unknown function.

www.floridafusion.com...

books.google.es... a=X&ei=OxIBUc33NISHhQf4o4HwAg&ved=0CDoQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=MICA%20used%20in%20ancient&f=false

books.google.es... en&sa=X&ei=FxMBUbjgDM2HhQeBh4HQBA&ved=0CEgQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=electrical%20uses%20for%20mica&f=false

and this

Teotihuacán – Anomalous Technical Evidence

Teotihuacán, in Mexico, is an immense, even overwhelming archaeological site, oriented along a twin axis. In the 1960s a team of archaeologists and surveyors mapped out the entire complex in great detail. The resultant map revealed an urban grid centred around two principal, almost perpendicular, alignments.

From the Pyramid of the Moon at the north end, the complex extends south along the Avenue of the Dead beyond the Ciudadela and Great Compound complexes for about 3.2 kilometres.

To this north-south axis we must add an east-west alignment that led from a point near the Pyramid of the Sun to a spot of prime astronomical significance on the western horizon.

Anthony Aveni, an astronomer-anthropologist, discovered that on the day the Sun passes directly overhead in the spring of the Northern Hemisphere (May 18), the Pleiades star cluster makes its first annual predawn appearance. It was at this point on the western horizon that the Pleiades set, and the builders aimed the east-west axis.

Additionally, the Sun also sets at this point on the horizon on August 12 – the anniversary of the beginning of the current Mesoamerican calendar cycle (5th Sun) – determined by a consensus of academic and independent scholars to have begun on August 12, 3114 BCE.

It is very clear Teotihuacán was laid out according to a set of alignments that reflected celestial, geographic, as well as geodetic relationships. Walking along the avenue from one pyramid to another, up the steps to the top, and surveying the site from a multitude of angles, one is struck by the sense of being in the middle of some vast geometric matrix.

Teotihuacán was the first true urban centre in the Americas. At its peak around 500 CE, it boasted a population of an estimated 200,000. George E. Stuart, archaeologist and the editor of National Geographic magazine sums up our ignorance:

We speak of it with awe, as we do the pyramids of Egypt, but we still know next to nothing about the origins of the Teotihuacános, what language they spoke, how their society was organised, and what caused their decline.2

As for one the most anomalous of artefacts on the planet, in the 1900s archaeologists discovered a sheet of mica in the upper tiers of the Pyramid of the Sun. This was no ho-hum pottery shard to catalogue and file away in a dusty box, yet that is about how archaeologists treated the find.

To anyone with even a smattering of technical knowledge, discovering a large sheet of mica in an ancient pyramid site comes as a shock. In fact, it is one of the great ‘smoking guns’ that turn archaeologists mum.

Mica is an inflammable and non-conductive mineral that grows in fairly weak plate-like structures. It is not at all useful as a structural building material.

NASA uses it as a radiation shield in space vehicles. Mica is also utilised in electronic components and microwave ovens, and it is a good shield for electromagnetic radiation, like radio waves.

Like the Great Pyramid, the Pyramid of the Sun has a subterranean cavity under the middle of the pyramid. A large pyramid with layers of thick mica would be an excellent EMI shield.

www.cloudriderbooks.net...

The Giza pyramids exist for the most part of limestone, wherein is often formed quartz. The stones of the corridors and chambers are made of granite, which exists of three minerals: quartz, mica and feldspar. Within the granite blocks of the King's Chamber has found a high concentration of quartz. Most of the obelisks in Egypt are also of granite stone. The x-ray research of the French scientist Joseph Davidovits concluded that also the casing stones contain highly piezo-electric crystalline material. Quartz under pressure of weight emanates a piezo-electric field, and those stones could function together like one large capacitor.

talc.site88.net...

Perhaps this is evidence of technological capabilities that we have not looked to due to our lack of understanding in manipulating raw natural materials to produce electric and magnetic effects on each other for a purpose we have yet to determine.

the qualities of these mysterious materials incorporated into the construction of megaliths serve no decorative purpose being that they are hidden from sight. It is note worthy that we employ them in a number of ways and always incorporated with high technology for their natural properties.

Interesting, but I dont think it is a capacitor. To make a capacitor you need to sandwich the Mica between two conductive plates, but no metal plates have ever been found above or below the sheet/s of Mica in the temples, so if the temple is acting as some giant capacitor then it must be using some other form of conduction.
We know that stone isn't a exactly a good conductor of electricity but stone containing lots of quartz could actually produce its own...Via the Peizo-Electric effect, if it is flexed sufficiently. This flexing only needs to be a fraction of a mm for the Quartz to produce a discharge.
A 1 cm3 cube of Quartz with 2 kN (500 lbf) of correctly applied force can produce a voltage of 12500 V.
Along with this brief HV discharge, a tiny EM pulse would also be produced and this could be detected from a great distance, if a correctly focussed directional receiving antenna was used.
Given the very large X/Y area of the "conductive" stone on either size of the Mica layer, if it contained a sizable amount of Quartz then it would produce a much higher voltage and much more powerfull EM pulse when flexed.
Given there would be millions of individual Quarts crystals in the stone, all discharging at slightly different times, a radio receiver tuned to the correct frequency would detect this as a form of "static" noise, just like the crashing noise you can hear on short wave radios whenever lightning strikes during a thunderstorm..
The question is, what could flex such huge, heavy structures...Simple, earthquakes!
Its true that Mexico is in a known earthquake zone and Teotihuacán is located in Mexico.
So was this some kind of self-powered ancient emergency distress beacon to let their ET friends know automatically that they had been struck by an earthquake and that they should come and bring help to the survivors?
If true, the purpose of the Mica slab is still a mystery as it would serve no useful purpose in the Piezo electric process.
BTW, Mica is virtually transparent to radiation so we can rule out its use as some kind of radiation shield/Farriday cage for those sheltering inside the temple.