Photos of Energy emanating from the Bosnian Pyramid

reply to post by Pinkorchid


Listen, if you believe this you've been hoodwinked, like the OP. The reason all your sources date back to 2008 is because the charade is over. There used to be a litany of debunking information out there, I can't even find it. And when I first heard about the pyramids, I was all excited too, just like a bunch of archaeologists who are furious they ever went to one conference on the matter.

Osmanagic is convinced a large hill overlooking the town of Visoko near the Bosnian capital Sarajevo is a pyramid from an lost civilization dating to about 12,000 years ago, when the region was experiencing the Ice Age. The hill is indeed roughly pyramid-shaped, at least the half that faces the town. The other half is a bit lumpy. In fact, if you look at it with Google Earth, it doesn't look like a pyramid at all. Geologists say it's a natural formation and that there are several like it in the region; Osmanagic says many of those hills are pyramids too.

To prove his point Osmanagic set up the "Archaeological Park: Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun" and since 2005 has been fighting for permission to excavate. The permit was granted, but then it was revoked for fear the excavations could damage an existing archaeological site on the top of the hill. This is a medieval fort with Roman foundations built atop a Neolithic settlement. Now permission has been granted again and the work will continue.

A victory for independent science against the narrow vision of academia? Not necessarily.

Looking at the photos on Osmanagic's website on the pyramids in Bosnia, I don't see anything indicating there's a pyramid there. Most of the supposedly worked stone looks like other natural formations I've seen, the so-called "secret tunnels" could be from any era, and the few examples of obviously worked stone could just as easily be medieval. In fact, Byzantine records say there was a town here in the Middle Ages and it has not been found. The Bosnian pyramid team may be destroying a real archaeological site in order to create a fake one.

Any names Semir uses to try and justify his little con, never consented to it. He sent letters to legitimate people and would post their headers and names claiming they supported him. Hell, the supposed "Scientific conventions" or "papers" on the thing, were nothing more than pamphlets given out at conference or speaker spots that he paid for, to host. The names on the lists are people who attended a convention, for legitimate scientific discussion on other matters, but ended up attending Semirs paid spot, and nothing was ever peer reviewed. *Actually it was but that's how the con was discovered. There are a couple archaeologists who absolutely hate Semir and don't want to have his name come up anywhere in fear of ruining their reputations.

He actually did get attention at first, and people were excited, then severely let down by his tactics, "OH we found this so it supports my conclusion!" …"Uh those rocks were made by rain… " … "No they aren't, because I say so!"

If you don't believe me try to find an actual legitimate study.

Serbia endorsed this because it was that long after the war and it brought a ___ton of tourists to the area. I actually found a document where it looked like a teacher wrote something into a textbook, basically asking "do you believe this is true or false" or perhaps it's a logic quiz I'm not sure.

In any case, try to present real evidence, you can't!

reply to post by hellobruce


This is the ONE of the guys that studied the concrete, there were 5 different independents that studied the concept.


this is his website

Some of the information is written in French.

From Bad Archaeology:

we should ask ourselves why he would choose to involve a metalworking contractor of Bosnian origin but living in Houston (Texas, USA) to investigate a potential archaeological puzzle.

Semir never had a background in archaeology…

In brief, Osmanagić claims to have identified six ancient pyramids in the landscape around Visoko, of which the best known is the one he calls Bosanska Piramida Sunca

The first anyone heard about supposed pyramids in Bosnia was in 2005, following a series of high profile public announcements based on a story carried by the popular Bosnian newspaper Dnevni Avaz. This ought instantly to set alarm bells ringing, as this is a typical tactic employed by pseudoscientists: rather than try out your new ideas on your peers (or, in the case of a discovery made by someone who is an amateur in a particular field, on acknowledged experts), you go straight to the mass media to instil your ideas in popular imagination. In that way, when the real experts begin to raise awkward questions, you can claim that they are trying to suppress your revolutionary ideas.

Unlike a lot of Bad Archaeologists, he has actually gone out into the field and excavated sites to retrieve evidence in support of his hypothesis. This is unusual and he deserves respect for actually being prepared to put his ideas to the test. He claims to have detected evidence for artificiality in the pyramids. This consists of the identification of stone paving, terraces, tunnels, blocks and cement. This is the sort of evidence that would convince sceptical archaeologists of human activity in at least modifying natural geological formations to create pyramid forms. Why, then has the archaeological community failed to endorse his hypothesis?

It’s the nature of the data unearthed by Semir Osmanagić that has not impressed archaeologists around the world. During late 2005 and early 2006, Osmanagić mkade statements to the media about the involvement of other archaeologists from around the world, who would bring scientific credibility to his excavations. Unfortunately, several of those named by him denied any involvement in the project (one, Royce Richards, even describes his alleged involvement as “a big load of bollocks”), others (such as prehistorian Anthony Harding) who visited the site failed to see any evidence for artificiality, while yet others (such as Egyptologist Nabil Swelim) failed to present convincing evidence or left the project after discovering it to be a sham.

Interesting geology at Visočica
Interesting geology at Visočica that no archaeologist would mistake for human construction

One of those who might have been expected to uphold Osmanagić’s hypotheses was Robert Schoch of Sphinx-more-ancient-than-Egyptologists-claim notoriety. However, after visiting the excavations in 2006, he declared that all he saw was interesting geology. That is certainly the impression given by photographs published in documents available from Osmanagić’s website, which is public front of his Fondacija Bosanska Piramida Sunca (“Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun Foundation”). The foundation has raised hundreds of thousands of (American) dollars to carry out its research, at a time when Bosnian archaeology is poorly funded and many monuments in the country are at risk following the devastation of the 1990s war.

Link

Standard scam practice, drop a well publicized press release, get some half wit media organizations to cover it, get some momentum, take in cash until people see it's dog bones.

iamea
reply to post by hellobruce

 

This is the ONE of the guys that studied the concrete, there were 5 different independents that studied the concept.


this is his website

Some of the information is written in French.

Oh you mean this "study" ?

Analysis
But the existence of this "concrete" and "cement" had to be based on something more than Mr. Osmanagic’s intuition alone. An announcement was made to the effect that five different laboratories had analysed (en) the Visocica blocks, and confirmed that they were artificial. Four of the laboratories are listed here (bs) :

- the Institute of Civil Engineering of Tuzla (bs) in 2006 headed by Ahmet Imamovic;
- the Institute "Kemal Kapetanovic" of Zenica (bs) in 2007 and 2008 headed by Muhamed Pasic;
- the Institute for Construction and Materials, University of Sarajevo (bs) in 2008 (Azra Kurtovic)
- and finally the Polytechnic Institute of Turin (it) in 2009.

There are also some pages (en) that cite an analysis carried out by a private company, Geoprojekt of Tuzla (Geoprojekt is the company that, in 2008, conducted the geological survey on the Vratnica mound). Other pages cite the latest survey carried out by Professor Davidovits (en), proponent of a controversial theory according to which the pyramids of Egypt were built of geopolymer (en), reconstituted stone.

However, anyone searching the sites of these various institutions for the results of these tests will not find any pertinent information. Nor is there much beyond a few details to be found on the Foundation website, despite the fact that this page (bs) states that "all reports are available on www.icbp.ba [1] and www.piramidasunca.ba [2]”. As far as these reports are concerned, none has ever been published by the Geoprojekt company, or by the University of Sarajevo. The Foundation website contains four references to "reports", none of which, as will be seen below, meets the criteria required of a reasonably serious scientific work …

Analysis (?) by Professor Davidovits
Mr. Osmanagic and Mr. Davidovits met in Edinburgh (en) in November 2008 at the "Histories & Mysteries" (en) conference (where other familiar faces such as Harry Oldfield were also to be seen). It was on this occasion that Mr. Osmanagic gave Mr Davidovits a sample from the Vratnica "mound". Once again, it has proved impossible to obtain a proper analytical report on this sample. It seems that all Mr Davidovits did was to send the Foundation an electron microscope photograph (bs and en), accompanied by a rather terse email in which he mentions "geopolymer cement" without any scientific discussion; and in which he requests some further information about the geology of the region. The article on the Foundation website citing this email indicates that "more information can be found" on the official Professor Davidovits website; unfortunately, the official page in question (fr) provides little more - indeed, if anything, somewhat less - information. In December 2008, Mr. Davidovits placed a statement on the page to the effect that what he was dealing with was: "antique concrete (not modern) worth of being analyzed". So, before even beginning any analytical tests, he had already announced that the material was concrete ... An update in February 2009 repeats this "first impression" ... but still treads very warily: "pockets of what seemed to be calcined clay”. After that, nothing further. Professor Davidovits merely confines himself to commenting on the analysis by Professor Pasic mentioned above, an analysis of which he clearly knows no more than the shortened version (en), translated into English on the Foundation website, which at no point explains how Mr. Pasic reached his conclusions, although Professor Davidovits endorses them without any reservations: ("I am enthousiatic in reading that it could have been used by those who built the Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun, Visoko”).

irna.lautre.net...


Here is a tip, that is not what a study looks like. A scientific paper looks like this, journals.tubitak.gov.tr...

*Heck, that's an engineering paper, and they are notorious for being scientific illiterates. Yet they still manage!

No that big dirt thing that looks like a pyramid is not real , those steps you see are gardens and they get shorter at the top because the people of the town got dizzy at heights ( sarcasm )



No sorry its all been photo shopped for the poor people of Bosnia to make living.

Its all pretend , nothing to see here move along lol

Pinkorchid
reply to post by boncho

 

You have presented no evidence , no links , nothing but your word on it.

I on the other hand have , so where's the proof of your debunk?

Read the post above you. It's all there. You haven't provided dick squat. Link me to one peer reviewed paper. That is what archaeologists do, they write up a scientific paper of their findings, pass it on to their peers, then confirm their findings. You won't find that in this case.

I must correct myself earlier also, as it's been years since this hoax has been perpetuated, my memory was a little off, the conferences that he had the names of people on, indeed were pay-per-play, but they were virtual conferences:

Another unusual aspect connected with these two conferences were the reviews, for which Professor Debertolis provides links respectively here - for the article on the Ravne tunnel - and here - for the article on Visocica. I don’t think I have ever seen such poorly composed reviews: the first contains no more than a few basic comments on the form of the paper; the second is more or less blank ...

Finally, a search for the domain names (.com) of these conferences reveals that both domains are registered by the same company, Websupport , s.r.o., a host that, based in Bratislava, also functions as the administrative and technical contact. So it is impossible to connect these two "virtual conferences" to any institution in particular.

All these factors raise questions about the validity of these virtual conferences. A quick internet search has come up with at least two other conferences of a similar nature, the Global Virtual Conference, whose partners are the same Macedonian university and the same Slovakian company - Thomson, Ltd., of Žilina - the same list of topics , the same call for reviewers, etc., and the Electronic International Interdisciplinary Conference.

Despite the fact that these are virtual conferences, they are not free of charge. On the one hand, those authors wishing to attend the conference and submit a paper have to pay an entrance charge of 70 or 80 euros, depending on the conference; and, more especially, those authors whose papers are accepted (and we cannot imagine that any are not ... ) are offered publication - in return for payment in one of the seven journals offered by each conference. These journals (the same ones appear on each of the four sites of the four conferences) are all published by the same organization, Sci-pub. And guess who owns Sci-pub? A company called Thomson s.r.o., based in the city of Žilina in Slovakia ...

Recently, some critical articles have appeared - in the United States, for example – about "scams" involving "conferences" and mediocre "scientific journals" (sometimes called "predator" journals, as in this list of "Potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access journals"). Could Professor Debertolis have fallen victim to this kind of scam?

irna.lautre.net...

Links are all there for you to research if you are actually looking for two sides to the story. If you are not willing to hear anything that goes against your belief I can't help you.

Irna and her site do a good job of totally scrapping the junk science Semir uses, if you take the time to go over her information.

iamea
reply to post by hellobruce

 

This is the ONE of the guys that studied the concrete, there were 5 different independents that studied the concept.


this is his website

Some of the information is written in French.

Davidovits is the guy who proposes the pyramids in Egypt were made in situ, as a poured concrete limestone block. He is familiar with the peer review process:

Although his ideas are not accepted by mainstream Egyptologists, in December 2006 Michel Barsoum, Adrish Ganguly, and Gilles Hug published a peer-reviewed paper in the Journal of the American Ceramic Society stating that parts of the pyramid were cast with a type of limestone concrete.[4] However, Dipayan Jana, a petrographer, made a presentation to the ICMA (International Cement Microscopy Association) in 2007[5] and gave a paper[6] in which he concludes "we are far from accepting even as a remote possibility of a 'manmade' origin of pyramid stones."

As his paper was accepted for review but not endorsed. He should know better than a flimsy personal account being "evidence". In any case, if he is being 100% above board on his Egypt notions, I would like to spend more time looking into it. Because I find it interesting. The recreation he has created is interesting to say the least:

www.youtube.com...

I think it's great when science is turned up on its head. But that requires people to do it honestly, with transparency. And as far as Semir's pyramid of the sun is concerned, there is nothing honest about it. Two separate matters. I won't judge the other claim though as I haven't properly assessed any information about tit myself. The fact that it wasn't accepted in peer review does not bode well.

reply to post by boncho


At the one minute mark in that video you will hear why all those experts of yours say and do what they do.
The well oiled allowable information machine is working overtime to supress this.

In the end as the years go by all your experts will be proven to be full of male cow excrement.

Just like all the experts in history stood by and blacklisted those that believed the world was round.

If the knowledge is controlled by a world view that does not agree with new information because it would shatter their power structure , they financially control the information that is sourced from their intellectual experts.
These experts publish paper too, but the difference is that they are brandied as the penultimate source of knowledge.

Well where was that knowledge when they believed the world was flat or that you needed to open the skull to let the essences out to cure people of mental illness , bet they had the correct paperwork as well.

Below we have relatively new technology that uses the 30 Kz range of electromagnetic radio waves.



www.kln.de...(GB)/Ultrasonicstandards.html

No? Oh, well. The giveaway here is "ultrasonic". Your example cites an ultrasound machine. Sound isn't EM waves. It's sound. Sound is not radio.

You can't just google for keyword hits, you ought to read for understanding as well.

reply to post by Bedlam

Did you know that electromagnetic waves can not only be described by their wavelength, but also by their energy and frequency? All three of these things are related to each other mathematically. This means that it is correct to talk about the energy of an X-ray or the wavelength of a microwave or the frequency of a radio wave.

www.nasa.gov...

Pinkorchid
reply to post by Bedlam

 

Did you know that electromagnetic waves can not only be described by their wavelength, but also by their energy and frequency? All three of these things are related to each other mathematically. This means that it is correct to talk about the energy of an X-ray or the wavelength of a microwave or the frequency of a radio wave.

www.nasa.gov...

This is true, but not germane to your statement. Unless you were trying for a "bees smell fear" post.

Ultrasound is not radio, because it's a totally different phenomenon from EM. You can't compare them. Sound doesn't fall on the EM spectrum, because it's not EM at all.

reply to post by Pinkorchid

Just like all the experts in history stood by and blacklisted those that believed the world was round.

People knew the world was round since the days of ancient Greece, it was actually the olden day version of Semir who ran with the flat earth theory. People with no scientific background making money (followers) on wild assertions and doing none of the work to back it up. Even when there was clear evidence to indicate otherwise.

The site has actual archaeological value:

Apparently Visočica happens to also be a real archaeological site. A Medieval fort called Visoki has been excavated on the summit of the hill and declared a National Monument. It's built on top of Roman ruins, which were in turn built on top of ruins from an even older tribe called the Illyirians.

skeptoid.com...

Pinkorchid

edit on 4-11-2013 by Pinkorchid because: removed

No that big dirt thing that looks like a pyramid is not real , those steps you see are gardens and they get shorter at the top because the people of the town got dizzy at heights ( sarcasm )


No sorry its all been photo shopped for the poor people of Bosnia to make living.

Its all pretend , nothing to see here move along lol

edit on 4-11-2013 by Pinkorchid because: (no reason given)

You realize that is not real right?

Can you give me another example of a hill that has straight lines, and exact angles.....anywhere in the world....

NOPE! you cannot because nature does not work that way...

It is a pyramid!!

iamea
Can you give me another example of a hill that has straight lines, and exact angles.....anywhere in the world....

NOPE! you cannot because nature does not work that way...

It is a pyramid!!

If you say so…

DECLARATION
We, the undersigned professional archaeologists from all parts of Europe, wish to protest strongly at the continuing support by the Bosnian authorities for the so-called “pyramid” project being conducted on hills at and near Visoko. This scheme is a cruel hoax on an unsuspecting public and has no place in the world of genuine science. It is a waste of scarce resources that would be much better used in protecting the genuine archaeological heritage and is diverting attention from the pressing problems that are affecting professional archaeologists in Bosnia-Herzegovina on a daily basis.
Professor Hermann Parzinger, President, German Archaeological Institute, Berlin
Professor Willem Willems, Inspector General, Rijksinspectie Archeologie (RIA), The Hague
Dr Jean-Paul Demoule, President, Institut nationale de recherches archéologiques préventives (INRAP), Paris
Professor Romuald Schild, Director, Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw
Professor Vassil Nikolov, Director, Institute of Archaeology, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia
Professor Anthony Harding, President, European Association of Archaeologists, c/o Institute of Archaeology, Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague
Dr Mike Heyworth, Director, Council for British Archaeology, York

www.e-a-a.org...

Now if you are interested in knowing what an actual pyramid covered in dirt look like:



Oddly enough, Semir tries to justify his claim using this picture, little does he realize that all sort of people have found pyramids in Maya in the past. The burden of proof isn't that heavy, if it were true, it would already be known and accepted.

reply to post by boncho


none of these examples are exact right angels, except perhaps the top one, and it is probably a pyramid too lol.

iamea
reply to post by boncho

 

none of these examples are exact right angels, except perhaps the top one, and it is probably a pyramid too lol.

Where are the right angles on the Bosnian one exactly?

reply to post by Bedlam
[more
Well put friend, i like to be corrected when im wrong, thats how i learn.