Chester
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- May 22, 2021
- Messages
- 754
- Likes
- 1,841
Have you seen any of those folks?
Beautiful people, in that part of the UK…..unlikely.
-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
All About UFO's
- Thread starter Ron Texas
- Start date
Beautiful people, in that part of the UK…..unlikely.
there you go, it seems "prehistoric people" also knew how to have a good time.
Don’t forget to mention that some of the stones came from as far away as Scotland:
Stonehenge Altar Stone came from Scotland, not Wales
The largest “bluestone” at the heart of Stonehenge came from northern Scotland, not Wales, according to new research.
It's not my contention that they were mainly concerned with food and shelter - clearly they were not but that is the conventional narrative.
Building the great pyramid would require a lot more than having lots of people to drag stones about, I suggest reading up on the details of its architecture, then come back and tell me you still think the people who built it were stone age farmers. I look forward to your arguments.
That they have found quarries and accommodation tells you nothing because of course they would have needed those things. You seem to be jumping to the conclusion that I think it was built by aliens even though I specifically said I don't think that. Lazy counter argument.
If they needed Stonehenge to know when to plant crops, how did they manage to survive prior to that? 'Probably had a religious connotation' should be 'Possibly had a religious connotation' since we have no idea whatsoever, its purpose was already completely lost to history by the time the Romans arrived.
It seems it was an astronomical calendar, that's the only supposition where the evidence is strong. But if that was its only purpose it was clearly a 'luxury purchase.' As noted above, they were 'dragging' (almost certainly not) some of the stones all the way from Scotland and Wales when for a simple alignment marker, any local stone would suffice. Or a wooden post.
Archaeologists and historians tend to be very circumspect about making definitive statements, it's only on the TV shows that such conjecture is presented as fact.
Last edited:
somebodyelse
Master Contributor
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2018
- Messages
- 6,816
- Likes
- 6,744
For a start they were well beyond the stone age. The bronze age started in Egypt around 3150BC, half a millennium before they started building pyramids. And clearly they weren't all farmers - to have a bronze age at all you need multiple specialisations like mining and smelting. Those didn't just spring from nowhere - mining for good tool stone like flint goes back a long way into the stone age, as does trade in that stone over long distances. They didn't start with the Great Pyramid - there's a progression in building techniques and complexity over the century between the first pyramid and the great pyramid, including mistakes along the way like starting out too steep. That's longer than it took to go from the Wright brothers to Concorde. People weren't any less clever or ingenious back then, and they had different skills and technologies to start from. We know how knowledge, skills and technologies can be lost even in a short time, like NASA and contractors having to reinvent ways to do things from the Apollo era because some skill or supply chain element no longer exists, or aboriginal peoples having to re-learn traditional fire making skills from bushcraft enthusiasts because everyone had got used to using a lighter and the last person who knew how to do it had died. Even then the technique learned may not be the same as their traditional one. For much older technologies it shouldn't be much surprise we have difficulty working out how they did some things - it's only recently we're finding out how to make concrete as well as the Romans managed, or finding out what Viking sunstones might have been. You should stop underestimating our ancestors.
That might not be the case at all. Here is a detailed analysis that sheds a different light on things:
I am sceptical of the order the pyramids were built. I think it far more likely that the far cruder 'early' pyramids were built much later in an attempt to copy the Giza pyramids long after the skill and knowledge required had been mostly lost.
We know from geological dating (water erosion) that the Sphinx and its enclosure must predate the Bronze Age by several thousand years. Therefore it is possible that this is also true of the Giza pyramids. In addition, it seems unlikely that a civilisation with advanced knowledge of architecture, mathematics and geometry demonstrated in the construction of the Great Pyramid would not have grasped the simple concept of the wheel, or appreciated its applications. The story does not really hang together for me.
I take your point about Wright Brothers to Concorde but we did have two world wars that pushed that advancement along much more quickly, there does not appear to be any corresponding impetus in ancient Egypt.
Added to which there were definitive motives (warfare, profit) to the advancement of aircraft technology, what is the motivation to rapidly advance the technology - going from shoddy mud-brick step pyramid to what is still the most accurately constructed building on the planet in less than a century - for what are supposedly just tombs or memorials?
I don't underestimate our ancestors at all, simply suggesting there's a big question mark over which ancestors were responsible.
Psychosis might explain a deal of UFO ' sightings '
You do know that this is highly controversial, don't you? Here is another great analysis from History for Granite:
Yes, I've been studying the subject for 40 odd years! It's only controversial because it doesn't fit with the narrative Egyptology created in the 19th century and which has been used as the basis for so much further speculation since, that it can no longer be reconsidered without damage to reputations and to the discipline itself.
There's no controversy amongst geologists regarding water erosion of the enclosure walls as the video you linked to confirms. Consequently the climate of the region must have been substantially different at the time, and for some time after its construction. From what we currently know about climate change in that region, we have a construction date for the enclosure that can be no more recent than 8000 BCE.
If enclosure construction is to remain contemporary with the pyramid, then that collapses the accepted narrative of who constructed the pyramid, and when.
Or the enclosure was constructed much earlier than the pyramid which collapses the accepted narrative that they are contemporary.
Based on the current evidence, at least part of the Egyptological narrative has to be wrong.
Therefore aliens.....
Personally I prefer the idea of an ancient civilisation that was quite advanced, at least in some areas, but disappeared around 10,000 BCE. Possibly due to asteroid or comet impact and the rapid deglaciation and sea level rise.
To that end I think it possible that some of the remaining traces such as the three main Giza Pyramids are far older than is generally considered.
Of course that is just conjecture. I don't pretend otherwise.
That is not correct. There are plenty of geologists who disagree, or simply put the water erosion at a much later date, for instance, James Harrell, Colin Reader, or Lal Gauri.
I'm all for believing that some (or possibly a lot) of what we know about ancient Egypt is simply wrong or incomplete, and I would not exclude a prior civilization either. At 8000 BCE, and a lot of activity after, it's very likely that little to no artifacts would have survived from back then.
Given that most civilizations live near the seas, and that sea levels have risen over the last 10K years, most evidence would be wiped out or hidden anyway, worldwide.
Look at it this way: if we were to die out now, 50K years later, there would be almost zero traces that we ever existed on this planet. And that is a massive, resource-eating, globe-spanning civilization. Smaller, less intense ones will be way harder to find.
As for the Sphinx and the enclosure wall, as of now, I would simply pose that we don't know for certain. "We don't know", is something that does not seem to be an acceptable answer in many circles
kemmler3D
Master Contributor
Not that I've studied this at all, but the Egyptians had writing, are there no contemporary accounts of building the pyramids at all??
terryforsythe
Major Contributor
I'm a little surprised the skeptics haven't cited last Friday's Wall Street Journal article on the UAP issue. Admittedly the investigation is a little thin and, other than Sean Kirkpatrick, the sources all are anonymous. Of course, coming from mainstream media, the article completely ignores any information contrary to the authors' narrative. Still, I think it makes some good points from a skeptical perspective that are worthy of consideration.
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2021
- Messages
- 1,488
- Likes
- 1,292
Didn't someone post about it a few pages back? Regardless, that there's been an ongoing psyop by the powers that be to muddy the waters of UFO/UAP investigations is beyond old news and a surprise to no one. For me, that article was the UFO yawn of the century. It makes perfect sense that to protect various black projects, to actually support/enhance/create UFO narratives among the followers is part of the game. One ret air force intel officer, Richard Doty, claims that was his entire job, to feed BS to reporters and UFO researchers. As usual, the Q is then, is he lying now or then? Finally, it's a smart move to then admit to the disinfo campaign to further create doubt for people. It does not change a thing really and only those new, or surface level public, will think there's anything new there.
Petrushka
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2024
- Messages
- 1,784
- Likes
- 2,075
Is it news that governments are untruthful? Is it wrong or unethical for the military to disguise its capabilities?
To imply that one’s capabilities are magical seems like a strategy.
Sigh.. again, jumping to extreme conclusion with almost no data... the unknown advanced ancient civilization myth is ludicrous, Time and nature to be able to hide an advanced ancient civilization from the science of archeology is as difficult as the Americans faking the lunar landing in front of the Russians. smh; by the way; the Egyptians were an advanced ancient civilization, think how long it would take that traces of its existence to disappear, at least to a point that their existence is doubted?
Last edited:
There is archaeological evidence, for example the two distinct building styles in Egypt. There's too much to go into on a post on here. A global catastrophe and ten thousand years would eliminate a lot of traces.
Archaeological evidence changes the paradigm quite often, not necessarily in headline ways. Was watching a documentary early where they discovered houses on man-made islands dating from the Neolithic, a practice previously thought to have begun in the iron age, a couple of thousand years later.
There's likely a lot still to be discovered. Most of Egypt is unexcavated, I've seen estimates of 95 percent.
Similar threads
