Underground Knowledge — A discussion group discussion
FRINGE SCIENCE
>
Evidence for scientifically advanced Ancient civilizations?
message 151:
by
James, Group Founder
(new)
Jan 18, 2016 07:47AM
The Dawning Moon of the Mind: Unlocking the Pyramid Texts
reply
|
flag
Erma wrote: "They said (I don't recall which, but both agreed) that we are such a transient society. Thousands of years in the future, or even hundreds of thousands of years, what is going to be left behind of us? Everything is going digital these days - our whole lives. What will be left for future archaeologists and anthropologists?And then, the kicker... the fact that we are not likely the first culture to have lived so. Anasazi, anyone? We have some of their buildings, but everything else? There are countless cultures around the world that we know little enough about their homes (cities, day-to-days, markets and trade...) and most of that from cultures who did leave stuff behind. The ones that 'disappeared'?
Yeah. Someday, that'll be us... ..."
That could be true...
Would be amazing if the level we are at now scientifically, many ancient/forgotten/unknown have been at before us...
Howdy James. I agree it would be, but,.........The mainstream has certainly missed some important facts; see this for example; http://www.mysterypile.com/gobekli-te...
As for a civilization being as technical advanced as this, I would need a really BIG and SMOKING Gun before I buy that.
My new nickname should OGM. (Old grumpy man) :-)
You make a good argument as always David (so I'll nickname you Mr Mainstream Thinker instead...always playing the Devil's Advocate to perfection!).However...
I think perhaps the mistake modern people make is searching for similar technologies to ours and defining the remnants of an ancient civilization by whether they have computers or motors or watches or digital-types of technology...But when you think about it, there could be other ways than these that a civilization could be very advanced scientifically...For example, they may have had more exotic and subtle technologies like organic computers or else things that utilized nature...or Tesla-style frequencies and invisible rays (again, like Tesla's death ray gun) and various other things we probably couldn't understand. Who knows, maybe they didn't need as much physical hardware, a bit like how we now have more technology in a smart phone than we had in gigantic super computers only a few decades ago...
Also, from what I have read, we still couldn't build a pyramid as mathematically precise as the ones in Egypt...
James, I do actually feel that we were visited in the past by "somebody or something". However, historical events do not necessarily mean "They are out there" now. As for point two, I feel it is certainly possible. Mental energy is certainly not understood. Did we trade magic for technology some where in the past? The way the world is going, we do need some magic now.
All good points, mate.From Sumerian tablets to the pyramids in Egypt and Mexico lining up with distant star systems etc, it certainly seems like there was more of a galactic community occurring sometime long ago.
But now it just appears to be a big fat unsolvable mystery that is more suited for an X-Files episode...
And yes, I do think it's possible as mental energy and the belief in magic dissipated, humans suddenly needed more physical technology to do all those things that probably came effortlessly before then.
David wrote: "As for point two, I feel it is certainly possible. Mental energy is certainly not understood. Did we trade magic for technology some where in the past? The way the world is going, we do need some magic now."May I gently point out here that at one time Science *was* considered Magic. The names change, but many of the processes stay the same.
Erma, you don't need to be gentle. I agree 100%. In WW2, natives in the South Pacific were convinced that US Forces were from the heavens and performed magic.
I also wonder, if there was an advanced civilization, was their technology different from ours? Many megalithic structures are built along telluric currents and their nodal points. I wonder if they had some way of using that energy. I don't really have a hypothesis yet but it's something I like to ponder.
Goes back to the question, did the ancients have a connection to powers we have lost or forgotten? Jim, good to hear from you and hope 2016 is a great year. For all us BTW
Some food for thought; http://www.world-mysteries.com/awr_6.htm
David wrote: "Erma, you don't need to be gentle."Good to know! ;) Sometimes I get told I'm too abrasive, but this group seems to be less tender-skinned than most. It really is refreshing!
David wrote: "Some very good people in this group."I second that!
Graham Hancock talks to Joe Rogan about advanced ancient civilizations https://www.goodreads.com/videos/9921...
Good old GH-I think my favorite book of his was Fingerprint of the Gods.
From the design of the human body and the construction of megalithic structures by people who should have been more concerned with not dying of starvation, it is obvious that we had some help. I do not think that the 'magic' of the ancient was separate from the science that we enjoy, just a different perspective. With 3.9 billion years of some form of life on earth, we probably had many higher civilizations on the planet, both human and other.
I just found an interesting piece on this very subject in The Epoch Times."Is This a Huge Million-Year-Old, Man-Made Underground Complex?"
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/19762...
Interesting article, Martin. I could not tell how well validated the 'conclusions' reached in the article was, but it certainly brings some interesting possibilities to light.Putting our 'Archeologically Correct' blinders to the side, I can totally accept the conclusion of an much earlier high civilization being responsible for the site.
I have always been entertained by the Egyptocentric conclusions that are dominate in our world, when I know that the Sumerian Empire predated Egyptian by a couple thousand years, and Rama and other civilizations also preceded the Egyptian civilization. Heck, where do you think Egypt got most of their good ideas?
Right. And Egypt itself references older Civilizations in its writings.
Atlantis, anyone? It has long languished on the conspiracy pile, but there slowly mounts evidence that it really did exist, and was more advanced than the average bear.
Enki of the Anunnaki, build a ship out of Calgone, and take me away!
Yeah, but besides Atlantis which is open to debate, in Egyptian hieroglyphics they mention they are the last in a long series of civilizations or empires. Whether those included the likes of the Sumerian or Rama civilizations who knows, but it really does seem as if academia's view of Egypt is limited.
True. Academia has been politically correct on their viewpoint, decades before they coined the phrase politically correct.
What we know of Egypt, their civilization seems to have appeared out of nowhere fully formed. They had hieroglyphic writing as far back as we know about. Their religion and technology (things they would't think about separately) were at their peak in the Old Kingdom and declined as time went on. That suggests they relocated from somewhere else. The timing doesn't really work for Atlantis in the usual sense.I tend to use Atlantis as a shorthand for an advanced civilization that preceded the cometary impacts 12.5k years ago. While the Sphinx could be that old, Egypt as we know it doesn't appear to be. I think Egypt, along with many others, inherited a lot of knowledge from "Atlantis." I'm still puzzled about exactly where Egypt came from.
I have one hypothesis but it's probably wrong. I think they came from Sundaland, the area around Indonesia that used to be above water. If they fled rising sea levels from the end of the ice age, the timing is closer. If they sojourned in India along the way, it would also explain a lot of similarities in their beliefs.
That's just me spitballing. I don't have anything resembling evidence.
J.D. wrote: "True. Academia has been politically correct on their viewpoint, decades before they coined the phrase politically correct."Politically correct or too linear in their analysis?
Jim wrote: "If they sojourned in India along the way, it would also explain a lot of similarities in their beliefs. ..."Definitely a lot of similarities with India. The two civilizations in India and Egypt surely must be related somewhere along the line otherwise it all seems just too coincidental.
In that Graham Hancock video I posted earlier in this thread, he mentions that the Egyptians referred to floods that wiped out their ancestors (which they called Gods) in older empires...Hancock also stated that it's a funny reference for Gods to die! Does this mean the old Egyptian Gods were actually human or ET and not divine?
The gaping hole in my hypothesis is that the Egyptian language was clearly an Afro-Asiatic language (a.k.a. Semitic).I guess the way out is that Sundaland was part of the Atlantean civilization. It influenced both India and the ancestors of the Egyptians. Probably Sumeria as well.
Linguistically, Egyptians had to have originated in Northeastern Africa or Southwestern Asia, yet we haven't found any clear precedents for their civilization. There is an interesting stone circle with astronomical alignment in southern Sudan. There's some rock art here and there that might be consistent. None of that explains a fully formed civilization suddenly appearing in the Nile valley.
I guess I'm using this forum to think out loud tonight.
No problem with that Jim. We do need to find some evidence where they came from as the Old Kingdom could not have just "popped into existence". What about Turkey area Phil Coppens did a good introductory article about Göbekli Tepe Found here; http://philipcoppens.com/gobekli.html
I have not studied the linguistics like Jim has, but the geography should work. The current correct view of the ancients is not correct!
Guys, where do you think the Aboriginal peoples here in Australia fit in to all this? They go back 50,000 years and some researchers claim to have found remains of pyramids in the deserts here tho to be verified...And what about the ancient Civilizations of the Americas (North and South)?
Here's some more stuff about the Egyptians. Their language was a member of the Afro-Asiatic family but shows significant changes. Proto-Afro-Asiatic is dated to circa 8000 bce in the rift valley area. (south of where the Nile starts)The geological dating of the Sphinx is at least that old so it likely predates the people we call Egyptians. The Egyptians most likely inherited their civilization to some extent.
A big problem is that we don't have any written language that goes back further than the civilizations we know about. Sumerian writings are the oldest thing we can translate. Some others that may be older are from the Indus Valley civilization and possibly Old Europe (Vinca, etc.)
There was a rumor in the Arabic world that the Giza pyramids also predated Egypt. I'm not ready to take a position on that yet but the Sphinx has to be older.
Anyway, I think the people who became the Egyptians must have learned a lot about astronomy, cosmology, spirituality, etc. from some other people before or around the time they settled in the Nile valley.
James, I can only opine about the Americas. Genetically, native Americans appear to be mostly of Siberian stock with some admixture from Polynesians. There are arguments about some ancient European influences, similar haplogroups plus Clovis technology resembles Solutrean and seems to have spread from East to West consistent with some European contact. I think the jury is out on that.
It's entirely possible that several other ethnic groups were in the Americas but haven't left a genetic legacy. That gets more speculative but I'd really like to know who the Olmecs were depicting on their head statues.
One complicating factor is the comet that wiped out the Clovis culture and didn't do a whole lot of favors for anyone else. I don't think we have DNA from Clovis people so they very well could have been Solutreans from Spain. Being wiped out by a comet explains the lack of DNA in current Native Americans.Again, total speculation. Since there is no evidence either way, they could have been from Siberian stock or anything else.
One of the biggest mysteries for me in the Americas is: Who were the original (pre-Aztec) inhabitants of Teotihuacan of Mexico?Have been to the site and if my memory serves me correctly, Teotihuacan is the only civilization ever found on Earth in which there is zero evidence of any class system whatsoever. No signs of an elite or royalty, no peasants, just equals. All homes in the city were built the same and the place had a population of 1,000,000 people at around the time of Christ or before I think. The human sacrifices came much later when the Aztecs discovered the city about 1,000 or so years later, but they believe there were no sacrifices conducted by the original inhabitants, whoever they were. And then the 1,000,000 strong population just vanished without a trace...
They have now begun to discover vast tunnel systems underneath the pyramids and also a mineral substance has been discovered inside the Pyramid of the Sun at Teotihuacan that is only found in Brazil...and Brazil is about a continent away to take a mineral from...
Mungo man and Mungo woman are believed to be older than the Aboriginal Australians. However this is denied by the Indigenous Australians because it would mean they were not the first Australians.
Looks like you are right Kelly - and according to this article the Lake Mungo human remains challenges or potentially contradicts the entire theory of human evolution:http://www.convictcreations.com/abori...
I just learned:The Lake Mungo human remains found in NSW, Australia are 62,000 years old and were ritually buried at their time of death. They were homo erectus not Homo sapiens, yet their features were fine like modern humans with no thick skulls or big brows. Their DNA contradicts the Out of Africa theory apparently.
Quest for the Lost civilization - Graham Hancock (FULL MOVIE) -- https://www.goodreads.com/videos/9964...
James Morcan wrote: "'Scientists Unravel Mystery of Ancient Greek Machine' -- http://www.livescience.com/1166-scien...Like something from a fantastical treasure movie, the..."
The Antikythera device was the inspiration for an alternate universe story I have yet to write. Simply put the premise of the world would be "What if the Romans had not conquered the Greeks?" The characters find themselves on an Earth that is about 800-1000 years ahead of ours because the Greeks were on the verge of technological breakthroughs we didn't make for another thousand years thanks to their demise.
The ancient civilizations were a lot more advanced than we like to give them credit for today, and it always bugs me when people suggest the Egyptians could never have built the Pyramids without outside help. We remember only the famous pyramids at Giza and the idea goes out that they instantly came upon the knowledge and expertise. Thing is, those pyramids were the result of experimentation. There was trial and error and there was failure before those famous examples came into existence. We all know the Great Pyramid and its neighbors, but how many know of the Bent Pyramid? The builders got the angle wrong and had to alter the shape at the midway point. That wasn't the kind of mistake they would have made if they had experience whispering in their ear. There were pyramids that collapsed during construction, and if I remember correctly, they found evidence problems arose during construction of the Great Pyramid itself.
It's too easy to discount the achievements of these ancient peoples because they did something great that we didn't. It would be akin to our descendants arguing we could never have built all the skyscrapers adorning our cities, that we had to have outside help to figure out how to build so high in the sky.
Onto the main topic, I find the idea of an advanced race existing before our current incarnation absolutely fascinating. But it raises one question for me: are we talking about a previous, independent evolution of humans as some sci-fi suggests, or should we consider these ancients evolved from a totally different species? They might not even be animal...could a plant species have developed the intelligence, learning to use its tendrils as we use our fingers?
James Morcan wrote: "'Scientists Unravel Mystery of Ancient Greek Machine' -- http://www.livescience.com/1166-scien...Like something from a fantastical treasure movie, the..."
The Antikythera device was the inspiration for an alternate universe story I have yet to write. Simply put the premise of the world would be "What if the Romans had not conquered the Greeks?" The characters find themselves on an Earth that is about 800-1000 years ahead of ours because the Greeks were on the verge of technological breakthroughs we didn't make for another thousand years thanks to their demise.
The ancient civilizations were a lot more advanced than we like to give them credit for today, and it always bugs me when people suggest the Egyptians could never have built the Pyramids without outside help. We remember only the famous pyramids at Giza and the idea goes out that they instantly came upon the knowledge and expertise. Thing is, those pyramids were the result of experimentation. There was trial and error and there was failure before those famous examples came into existence. We all know the Great Pyramid and its neighbors, but how many know of the Bent Pyramid? The builders got the angle wrong and had to alter the shape at the midway point. That wasn't the kind of mistake they would have made if they had experience whispering in their ear. There were pyramids that collapsed during construction, and if I remember correctly, they found evidence problems arose during construction of the Great Pyramid itself.
It's too easy to discount the achievements of these ancient peoples because they did something great that we didn't. It would be akin to our descendants arguing we could never have built all the skyscrapers adorning our cities, that we had to have outside help to figure out how to build so high in the sky.
Onto the main topic, I find the idea of an advanced race existing before our current incarnation absolutely fascinating. But it raises one question for me: are we talking about a previous, independent evolution of humans as some sci-fi suggests, or should we consider these ancients evolved from a totally different species? They might not even be animal...could a plant species have developed the intelligence, learning to use its tendrils as we use our fingers?
Good points J.J. - I agree we shouldn't discount that the Ancients just had a pyramid fetish and that they may not have needed any help given there was lots of trial and error. And yes, the bent pyramid in Egypt is a really odd one...I always figured maybe the chief architect for that pyramid had a drinking problem :)
J
The ancients were further ahead scientifically that many give them credit for, nevertheless Aristotle made two huge clangers, and interestingly enough, they hindered progress thereafter. However, another point that most probably won't understand is that it is hideously difficult to unravel something scientific when you don't know the answer or the answer is not what everyone thinks. After it gets accepted, it becomes remarkably easy. Thus students these days take in (with varying degrees of understanding) in an hour or so what Newton, one of the greatest minds ever, took years to unravel.For those who think they are smart, little sub plot in my novel "Athene's Prophecy" has the hero, a Roman around 30 - 42 AD having to prove that the Earth went around the sun. You try it, using ONLY what was available at the time. (As an aside, the book also has a small section that outlines what the ancients thought they knew.)
Bad news - my answer is in the sequel, Legatus Legionis
Makes you wonder how they figured out precession. If heliocentrism is hard, precession seems mind-blowing.
Actually, there are essays and articles online suggesting the Bent Pyramid may not have been a mistake after all... http://www.invisibletemple.com/sacred...
http://grahamhancock.com/phorum/read....
James-this is a pretty large stretch; SACRED GEOMETRY SECRETS OF THE BENT PYRAMID.
Egypt's most iconic temple is a mirror of the planet as well as human DNA..
Freddy Silva bills himself as a renowned expert, but who else does? I gues I am not convinced.
This from his homepage; BIOGRAPHY
Freddy Silva is one of the world's leading experts on sacred sites, and a leading researcher into ancient knowledge and the interaction between temples and consciousness. He is a best-selling author and director of several documentaries. He lectures internationally on a variety of topics on earth mysteries, with keynote presentations at the International Science and Consciousness Conference, and the International Society For The Study Of Subtle Energies & Energy Medicine, in addition to appearances on The History Channel, Discovery Channel, BBC, numerous video documentaries, and international radio shows.
Described by the CEO of Universal Light Expo as “perhaps the best metaphysical speaker in the world right now.”
David wrote: "James-this is a pretty large stretch; SACRED GEOMETRY SECRETS OF THE BENT PYRAMID.
Egypt's most iconic temple is a mirror of the planet as well as human DNA..
Freddy Silva bills himself as a reno..."
Hey David - I love it when you play Skeptical Scully to my "I want to believe" Mulder :)
But actually, mate, that was just one site I took as a mere example (after a quick skim read - and I've never heard of Freddy Silva by the way) of those who have theorized the Bent Pyramid may not have been a mistake. So wasn't meaning to imply that site is a prime example or anything.
I think Graham Hancock is another who has suggested the Bent Pyramid may have been no mistake.
Another similar researcher to Hancock, author Joseph P. Farrell, wrote the following in his book The Giza Death Star Destroyed: The Ancient War For Future Science: "The Bent Pyramid was not a mistake at all: The Bent Pyramid is a true (Pyramid) and was purposely built the way it was for principles of energy production..."
Lots of other examples around similar to these guys.
I do like Hancock. Agreed about lot's of books written about the subject. I think the late Phil Coppens did a nice job and I like some of what Childress writes. I will have to check out Farrell.
Thanks for the tip, Fox.
The Bent Pyramid (A mistake by Egyptians or purposeful design?) -- https://www.goodreads.com/videos/9993...
Ian wrote: "The ancients were further ahead scientifically that many give them credit for, nevertheless Aristotle made two huge clangers, and interestingly enough, they hindered progress thereafter. However, a..."I always find it amazing the famous astronomers of the past spent half their lives watching the skies and documenting night after night the locations of whatever stars or planets they were watching. They devoted their lives to something we could do today in a fraction of the time, but without their groundwork, we today could not direct our telescopes to studying other galaxies or the mystery of creation because we would have to make their discoveries and observations first.
It's probably why out of everything, written language is the single greatest invention of man because it allows us to carry forward the knowledge accumulated through past generations in ways our minds could not.
Underground Knowledge — A discussion group
Books mentioned in this topic
The Sentinel Project (other topics)The Modern Antiquarian: A Pre-Millennial Odyssey Through Megalithic Britain (other topics)
Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings: Evidence of Advanced Civilization in the Ice Age (other topics)
Civilization One: The World is Not as You Thought it Was: Uncovering the Super-science of Prehistory (other topics)
Memory Code, The (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Julian Cope (other topics)Christopher Knight (other topics)
Andrew Collins (other topics)
Brien Foerster (other topics)
Robert M. Schoch (other topics)
More...
