A small piece of Egypt in Australia. Carving of an Egyptian god found in New South Wales

Originally posted by Xcathdra

As an example of main stream science ignoring information that doesn't support their neat little world all we need to do is look at Christopher Columbus. He was not the first person to discover America, yet here we are, still teaching that while science ignores the evidence.

edit on 5-6-2013 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

Hi, you posted a lot in there, more than I can personally respond to at this point, but that isn't an argument about 'science' it's about the fact that Columbus is widely acknowledged as being the first European to document seeing America (I think the actual native Americans had discovered it first) although evidence suggests otherwise. This is the same as saying science says everyone thought the Earth was flat until relatively recently - a myth that grew in the 20th century. You are doing what you call science a disservice as this is nothing to do with science - it's education that is the issue here.

reply to post by uncommitted


Uhm no... You and the other blank accounts are missing the point, and im not sure its a language barrier issue or if its intentional to derail the conversation / debate.

Science is not biased, the people using it are.
Science does not push an agenda, the people pushing the agenda do.

With that being said, I am going to say this one more time. I am not going to assist in derailing this thread any more than we have simply because people seem to be lost when it comes to the English language.

If you want to discuss something on topic, I will be more than happy to engage in that discussion.

reply to post by qmantoo


It's Anubis, and it could be legit since egyptians were seafarers, but it's a long way from Egypt to Australia, so i doubt it is legit since you can't sail all the way to Australia from the Nile.

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
since you can't sail all the way to Australia from the Nile.

Nope not from the Nile, but you can from the red sea.

Please, Did you even look at the image. Not even close to anything like an Egyptian image.

Originally posted by gnostician

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
since you can't sail all the way to Australia from the Nile.

Nope not from the Nile, but you can from the red sea.

Assuming ofcourse that there were egyptian ports on the Red Sea, and nothing has been discovered that i have heard of indicating that there were, i'm not real sure.

I found some extra information on this in another ATS thread. The info starts around page 20 It seems there may be a portal between Australia and the US (Area 51) which is discussed there too.

There is another thread which already covers exactly the same topic as this one.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
Its one thing to look up in amazement and awe... Its something else entirely for 2 cultures who had no contact to use the same constellations in the same manner. We are, again, moving beyond the realm of coincidence into something more.

These constellations didn't reach Egypt until long after the pyramids were built.

Originally posted by Nevertheless
The Pyramids at Giza and the Pyramids at Teothicaun are laid out the same.

No they aren't. Similar, but not the same. They aren't even facing the same direction.
I'm well aware of the pictures.
Also, the angle between the Egyptian pyramids and Orion belt aren't even close to being right.

No, really, we have Islam to thank for advanced mathematics. Or are you trying to demonstrate how a person will ignore a fact they don't agree with, even when the evidence says otherwise?

Please tell me how Islam is to thank for advanced mathematics except that the Quran allowed muslims to do science in the name of Allah and wasn't arbitrarily banned like Alcohol or exposing female hair?

Originally posted by Nevertheless
Curiosity?

Doubtful... So they were curious and decided to build pyramids?

I was talking of science.
Pyramids were built for two reasons. Religion and/or megalomania.

Necessity? Based on what need?
Original concept or borrowed from half a world away?

As said above.

You questioning and being skeptical on "Islam and mathematics" does unfortunately show some ignorance in how science and mathematics work.

Excuse me? Religion still has nothing to do with science in general or mathematics in particular.
Please explain.

Since you have been consistently missing the point, let me try this. Main stream science will ignore discoveries that will fundamentally alter the view of our human history.

Why?
Ego?
Notoriety?
Fame?
or knowing that money may very well dry up in research areas where those fundamental questions have been answered.

This is so wrong. There has been many revolutions in science. That's the point of science.
It is not the fault of science that you find these random claims exciting (which I admit, they are). Unfortunately, the world is often not as colorful as fiction.

Originally posted by Nevertheless

No it doesn't. I hope I explained above how science embraces anything that helps it.

A gun does not kill people, the person pulling the trigger does. Science, just like a gun or car or drugs, can be abused by the person using it.

I don't think you understood what I said.
I said that science learns fr
As is the case when main stream scientists use science as the hammer in one big game of whak-a-mole. Every time a discovery is made that goes against the established school of thought, it gets whacked back down out of public view.

Originally posted by Nevertheless
Speculating is not science. You are welcome to show it when it's actually science.

O.o ...... errrm ok..
[...]
When Main stream science does not know yet pretends it does its a problem.

You're not listening.
You cannot base science on speculation. If you did, you'd have religion.

Im not saying its wrong to explore.. I am saying main stream science thinks its wrong to explore. Why? Because it would undermine the established history.

"undermining" established history would be great. We'd have yet another great revolution.
However, the difficulties in doing so shows that we're doing something right.

Originally posted by MadMax7
This is an old story long ago debunked as someone carving these symbols in recent times (last 80 years).

Man, check the internet thoroughly before putting up such easily debunked rubbish.

Yep, was found to be all FAKE !!! Jeees people do your homework.

Originally posted by douggie60

Originally posted by MadMax7
This is an old story long ago debunked as someone carving these symbols in recent times (last 80 years).

Man, check the internet thoroughly before putting up such easily debunked rubbish.

Yep, was found to be all FAKE !!! Jeees people do your homework.

One thing might prove the carvings are real.
What if the Egyptian carvers are still there in Australia.
Due to one cause or another the prospect is real.
Barry Fell and says the Fall of Rome and the loss of shipping left many in
the Americas to see Columbus and his crew 1000 years later.
Crews from the Spanish ships sunk by England landed and stayed in Ireland.
So find the original Australians and perhaps we will find DNA origins from
the origins near Egypt or along the way.

Ed: Egypt in Australia
A Google but placed on www.crystalinks.com

reply to post by TeslaandLyne


Egyptians were not deep sea faring people. The ships they built were a little 'barge-like' , not deep enough to make long open deep ocean voyages.
Under Hatchsepsut (the female pharaoh) they describe a expedition to the Land of Punt and we are unsure to this day where that was, but scholars are very comfortable it was located at what is today northern Somalia, Djibouti, Eritrea and the Red Sea coast of Sudan. This is Ancient Egypts most famous trading expedition by sea, the were not sea adventurers. If you look at the remains if their boats you would see why they would not have been able to make long voyages.

It is almost inconceivable that the gods they called gods were made-up figures not based on something they had seen. Now, whether the gods were actually there or no,t no-one will really know but if they were ETs, then it is likely that some moving around of personnel was done and one point on the Earth is very much like another when you have ET ships. It seems there is no place for physical gods in the explanation given by science.

reply to post by qmantoo


Their Gods ARE what they saw.... You are kinda debunking yourself

Eagles, Dogs, Lions, Humans, Cows, Ibis, Hawkes, the Sun....Natural surrounds they saw. Where are you getting they based them on extraterrestrials? I see nothing other than humans, the sun, animals etc.

see the pantheon here for images and the animals that represent them.

www.ancientegypt.co.uk...

Their gods are what they saw - yes, and what I was saying is that they saw the aliens and then drew them in pictures. Just as you are saying they drew animals on the walls too.

Many of these gods do have 2x arms and 2x legs similar to humans, but it all depends of whether you think these bipedal beings have masks on, or whether they naturally have heads of a different shape. It IS possible that humans have been bred from bipedal beings and there are many reports of different alien-kinds of human-shaped beings from the past to the present. Once it is established that there are aliens, then it becomes highly unlikely that we evolved on our own to become this shape, dont you think?

reply to post by qmantoo


There is no alien pictures/images in Hieroglyphs. Would be exciting if there were, but there are not.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
The sciences have developed an attitude of "if it does not fit into the accepted version and cant be explained away, then it must be something else".

If so, how do you explain Homo floresiensis? Wouldn't that be something that "didn't fit?" What about Denisova hominins ? Did they "fit in?" Is that why they're not "something else?"

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by Nevertheless
Most famous pyramids from different civilizations have been created during different periods of time. Why do you claim the opposite?
There wouldn't be anything strange about two civilizations doing it at the same time either, though.

What are the odds that 2+ civilizations, whom never had any contact with each other according to the currently accepted theory, developed the same?
* - Mathematics

The odds of this are 100%. Anyone that knows anything at all about mathematics must realize that this is the case.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
* - Design, size and layout.

You can't come up with any examples of this from widely different cultures, esopecially ones that existed far separated in time.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
* - Celestial Observation

The silliest claim you make. Do you believe that the sky is not the same all over the world?

Originally posted by Xcathdra* - Orion's belt layout

Corollary to the above. Orion is practically the most obvious and visible arrangement of stars into a pattern that exists in our entire sky. This would only be "mysterious" if people didn't acknowledge it in antiquity.

Originally posted by XcathdraThe layout of the Giza pyramid complex in Egypt can also be seen in the Teotihuacán pyramid complex. The layout was not a technological discovery. What are the odds that 2 different civilizations will use the almost exact same layout design?

Show us why you believe the layouts are the same. They aren't really the same at all, and the construction differs wildly between these two sites.

Originally posted by XcathdraThey both mimic Orion's belt.. Again not a technological advancement.

Teotihuacan has two pyramids. It mimics a straight line (LOL.)

Originally posted by XcathdraWe have Islam to thank for advanced mathematics... Who do the Mayans / new world cultures have for their advancement?

Do you have any evidence for "advanced" Mayan mathematics?

Harte

Originally posted by Xcathdra

The Pyramids at Giza and the Pyramids at Teothicaun are laid out the same.

Comparison of both

Orion's belt

Clearly they are not... unless we are to ignore such trivial things as distances and angles.

reply to post by draknoir2


The interesting thing is that I'm pretty sure if you lay out any 3 points, 2 of them will line up perfectly and the third wont unless its perfectly in line. So I'm pretty sure that there are many more things out there that match up pretty well...like any three houses on my street.

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian
reply to post by draknoir2

 

The interesting thing is that I'm pretty sure if you lay out any 3 points, 2 of them will line up perfectly and the third wont unless its perfectly in line. So I'm pretty sure that there are many more things out there that match up pretty well...like any three houses on my street.

And be sure to select three landmarks that roughly conform to that arrangement while ignoring the rest that do not. Then claim an exact match.


And even if they were an "exact match" to each other and did represent the primary stars in Orion, while interesting, it would not be an indication of Alien contact. Pretty sure Egyptian technology included the ability to look up at the night sky and emulate what they saw.

reply to post by zazzafrazz


If you look at Fells work on ancient travel an Egyptian could easily use
those boats that did travel the seas. Yes the Egyptian culture did not
have the large boats but some one else did.