Underground Knowledge — A discussion group discussion
FRINGE SCIENCE
>
Evidence for scientifically advanced Ancient civilizations?
Here's an interesting one :
Atlantis in the Amazon: Lost Technologies and the Secrets of the Crespi Treasure
There was an article about the Crespi treasures on Ancient origins recently. http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-g...Long story short, gold plates aren't there. Remaining metal plates are disappointing. Many of the artifacts are pretty cool but nothing to support any mysteries.
J.J. wrote: "If it was the initial design, it could be interesting that they were trying new things or getting creative. ..."Yeah, maybe the bent pyramid is not a mistake but our inferior minds of this era just cannot comprehend it so we say "oh those dumb Egyptians screwed up..."
Hey guys, this is an awesome tour video (CGI-style) throughout all of the Great Pyramid of Giza: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiRZt...The narrator alludes to the interior being made utilizing very advanced technologies and that it must have been something more than simply a tomb for kings and queens. I agree!
James Morcan wrote: ""...carved marble figures in strata that suggests the characters were made by intelligent humans from the distant past,a section of gold thread found in strata between 320 and 360 million years ol..."
A closer look at these supposed anomalies reveals that they are invariably 1) artifacts of poor research technique, 2) results of what is called "reworking" of soil strata, 3) errors, and 4) hoaxes.
James Morcan wrote: "We currently have a group poll running on this subject.The poll asks: Do you believe the Pyramids of Giza were constructed solely to be burial chambers (tombs) for the pharaohs as Egyptologists t..."
This naïve notion about the ancients being advanced astronomers always annoys me because what it really shows is how modern readers misinterpret much of what they read. After the invention of agriculture (10,000 years ago in the Old World and 3,000 years ago in the New World), civilizations based on agriculture (which was all of them) became very concerned with tracking the seasons. This included "astronomy." They were "advanced astronomers." But what does this really mean? It means that they were very good empirical observers of the sky and the movements of the lights in the sky. That doesn't mean that they knew their true nature. The ancient Greeks didn't just practice astronomy; they also practiced astrology. To the Greeks, all lights in the sky were stars: The Sun was a star, the Moon was a star, the stars were the stars...there were all the fixed stars, and then there were the Sun, the Moon, and the five other "wandering stars" or asteres planetai. That is the origin of the word "planet": "wanderer." It did not mean "rocky or gaseous object in other orbits around the Sun." The ancients' awareness and understanding of the Universe was limited to the 6,000 or so lights visible in the night sky with the naked eye. If you'd asked them what the Milky Way is, or why the asteres planetai move while the other asteres do not, they could not have told you. If you'd asked them why the sun shines, they would have told you that the Sun is the god Helios, not that the sun shines due to nuclear fusion that converts hydrogen to helium. If you'd asked the ancient Chinese why the Moon has phases, they would have told you that the Moon grows to full and then is eaten by a dragon, after which it grows back. They would not have said, "The Moon orbits the Earth and what we see are changes in the illumination of the Moon's disc by the Sun." If you'd asked them why we always see the same face of the Moon, they would have had no idea what you were talking about. Why wouldn't you always see the same thing when looking at the Moon? They would not have said, "Well, you see, the Moon's rotation is phase-locked with the Earth, so that the Moon's period of rotation is the same as its period of revolution around the Earth, just like all the other moons in the solar system, including the 63 known moons of Jupiter." In fact, they had no idea what the true nature of the Earth is at all. The known "world" to them was what they knew of their own lands. Here we have another modern misinterpretation of words: The English word "world" (Old English weorold) has meant a lot of different things, including "universe." It wasn't a synonym for "planet Earth." All the other Indo-European languages had analogous terms. So get your terminology right.
The "ancient astronomers" were not astronomers in the modern sense of the term. Could they have launched a Hubble Space Telescope? Carried out Apollo missions or the Voyager missions? Could they have built huge radio telescopes in Puerto Rico? Did they map the surface of Venus with radar? Did they predict the existence of dark matter in the universe based on space-based telescope observations and sophisticated mathematics? Did they know anything about the solar wind, gamma-ray bursts, planetary magnetic fields, pulsars, red dwarfs, binary stars, black holes, or any of the other wonders revealed by modern astronomy? Could they have told you what a comet or a supernova explosion really is? Or would they have started talking about evil omens from the gods? In fact, leaving aside the "wonders," would they even have had any clue what you meant if you'd wanted to discuss a basic astronomical concept like "orbit"?
When considering the achievements of ancient civilizations, nothing beats clear thinking and a skeptical attitude. The ancients had no better an idea of what they were looking at in the sky than Timon and Pumbaa in The Lion King: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9vIK2...
I don't think that diminishes what they did accomplish. Being able to track the heliacal rising dates of stars and constellations throughout the year is pretty good. Figuring out precession is especially impressive given that a fairly long observation time would be required. Precessional knowledge appears to predate the reinvention of agriculture circa 10,000kya.One does have to wonder why the Egyptians and others were especially concerned with the part of the Milky Way that is the center of the galaxy. That could just be a coincidence but it might not be.
Ultimately we are all speculating based on fragmentary data - skeptics, ancient civ, and ancient aliens theorists alike.
Mark wrote: "James Morcan wrote: "We currently have a group poll running on this subject.The poll asks: Do you believe the Pyramids of Giza were constructed solely to be burial chambers (tombs) for the pharao..."
It's difficult to debunk everything. I have personally experimented with model size pyramids. The energies generated by that particular configuration is awesome especially in terms of amplifying the attributes of other items placed within their fields. I have experienced healing of chronic health conditions when I used a pyramid in conjunction with crystals. The billion dollar question is how did the ancients hit upon this magical configuration?
Mark, I love it when anyone speaks with absolute certainty about mysterious peoples who lived thousands or tens of thousands of years ago - that always cracks me up - so thanks for the entertainment!Oh wait, I assume you were going for the entertainment angle? I mean, surely you couldn't speak with that much certainty and be serious? ;)
James Morcan wrote: "The narrator alludes to the interior being made utilizing very advanced technologies and that it must have been something more than simply a tomb for kings and queens. I agree!..."I think has been mentioned here before, but no one was ever found buried in the Giza pyramids. The mummies of pharaohs and such were all found in tombs located in the Valley of the Kings.
James Morcan wrote: "Mark, I love it when anyone speaks with absolute certainty about mysterious peoples who lived thousands or tens of thousands of years ago - that always cracks me up - so thanks for the entertainmen..."I also find it entertaining when others speak with certainty about people who lived thousands of years ago based on "research" of questionable or totally unsupported pseudoscience.
As to what selected ancients thought they knew, it was often a lot closer to what we think than you might imagine. They knew the earth was a sphere and they measured its size. The Carthaginians proved the sphere by sailing down the west coast of Africa, and noting that eventually the Moon looked upside down. Aristarchus measured the size of the moon and its distance from us, and the distance to the sun. He got the absolute values somewhat wrong, but you try doing that with the sort of instruments available then. Aristarchus put forward the heliocentric theory, and the planets were considered by many to be lumps of rock reflecting sunlight.The big problem came when Aristotle proved experimentally that the Earth did not rotate (effectively coming very close to the principle of least action. How many readers of this post could work out the principle of least action from what he had available?). Aristotle's problem was that the experiment was actually beyond his capability - even now I think you would need fairly sophisticated equipment to prove the earth rotates.
We are too hard on the ancients. I hint at the problems in my novel "Athene's Prophecy", and I suspect the details would surprise a lot. They did experiments. Unfortunately, the required accuracy was beyond their equipment at the time.
Can we say with any certainty though, Ian, what equipment they had at the time?I'm really not sure we can.
Personally, I think the only correct approach when assessing the ancients is to say we really do not know what they had. On the one hand it appears they were scientifically primitive compared to us. On the other hand, it's not clear whether today with all our technology we could build pyramids as brilliantly and intricately and mathematically precise as the ancients did. Seems our scientists keep discovering new things about the pyramids each year.
So I'm staying on the fence or remaining agnostic with it all.
Mark wrote: "I also find it entertaining when others speak with certainty about people who lived thousands of years ago based on "research" of questionable or totally unsupported pseudoscience. ..."Ah, but unlike you I don't see anybody else in this group speaking with anything like your certainty. All I see are other members saying this or that MAY have happened, but not really being sure at all and also being open to the idea that all these exotic theories about the ancients could be BS. And even this thread is called Evidence for scientifically advanced Ancient civilizations? - there's a question mark there meaning there could be no evidence and the ancients may have had no advanced tech whatsoever.
Exactly James. Anyone, mainstream or fringe, should be fence sitting. New discoveries are constantly being made which sometimes disproves previous conclusions . All we can do is keep assembling pieces of the puzzle and keep an open mind.
Problem as I see it is scientific academia never likes admitting it has very few pieces of the jigsaw. Hence you get definite theories like "the Egyptians built the pyramids as tombs" instead of admitting what we all can sense is true: our scientific establishment basically don't know shit about the Egyptians and are just guessing at this stage :)
James, to show that the earth rotates, Aristotle wanted to drop a stone from the vertical. What happens is the stone is rotating slightly faster up there, and so will drift eastwards, and also towards the equator. Aristotle's scheme was to throw the stone up, but the problem with either propelling upwards or dropping downwards is exactly where is the vertical? The variation you get is very very small, and getting the angle right is very difficult. Even with a modern theodolite, this experiment is difficult to do.
Controversial ancient artefacts are known to disappear soon after they are found ... intelligence agencies are known to sweep the sites where they are found ... so how do we reach a consensus in this topic if the evidence is being systematically destroyed !Another explanation for ancient artefacts is that we may have already reached the pinnacle of evolution a long time ago.
Return to the Brain of Eden: Restoring the Connection between Neurochemistry and Consciousness
A wrote: "Controversial ancient artefacts are known to disappear soon after they are found ... intelligence agencies are known to sweep the sites where they are found ... so how do we reach a consensus in this topic if the evidence is being systematically destroyed !..."Yup, there are certainly strong rumors of suppression of ancient technologies and artifacts being discovered. And yes, if that's true, then it'd be impossible for the average person, or even the average scientist, to accurately assess the Ancients and their level of sophistication.
anybody mentioned Jean Pierre Houdin's theory? ...that the pyramids were built from the inside out...they say that remnants of these internal ramps are still there...quite interesting theory.
Lisa wrote: "anybody mentioned Jean Pierre Houdin's theory? ...that the pyramids were built from the inside out...they say that remnants of these internal ramps are still there...quite interesting theory."Oh those ramps...probably some interior deco job was being done ; )
actually, 3D technology proves his theory is possible.
Whitney Strieber has an article on his website about new organization founded to investigate ancient civilization and their technologies.The Organization for the Research of Ancient Cultures Aims to Uncover the Secrets of Forbidden Archaeology : http://www.unknowncountry.com/news/or...
Martin wrote: "Whitney Strieber has an article on his website about new organization founded to investigate ancient civilization and their technologies.The Organization for the Research of Ancient Cultures Aims..."
Worth including that article in full, I think, Martin:
The Organization for the Research of Ancient Cultures Aims to Uncover the Secrets of Forbidden Archaeology
Thursday, March 31, 2016
While mainstream science is still slow to accept the possibility that human civilization might extend back past 3,500 BCE, there are still maverick researchers that delve into facts and findings that suggest that humans have been forming sophisticated social and technological structures for far longer. Unfortunately, there are few formal organizations that can coordinate such studies, with research being carried out by individuals and, at best, small groups.
The Organization for the Research of Ancient Cultures, or 'ORACUL', is an NPO that is being formed by Robert Schoch, a geologist famous for studying the age of the Great Sphinx of Giza, based on evidence of water-based erosion on the sculpture, amongst a host of other colleagues. ORACUL's aim is to help facilitate and coordinate research efforts into this forbidden archaeology, "Through research advocacy, publishing, and educational outreach, further evidence for mankind's remote and forgotten past will be uncovered.", according to their website.
Aside from his own research on the Sphinx, Schoch also cites the presence of Göbekli Tepe, shown to have origins that predate the end of the last ice age, as well as other sites that hint at the existence of a high-civilization that abruptly ended around that time. Schoch is calling on cryptoarchaeological enthusiasts to help fund the project, that will facilitate field research, educational outreach programs, and conferences.
Read the original source: http://www.unknowncountry.com/news/or...
James Morcan wrote: "Martin wrote: "Whitney Strieber has an article on his website about new organization founded to investigate ancient civilization and their technologies.The Organization for the Research of Ancien..."
I don't think there is any doubt that there were earlier civilisations. Jericho dates from about 7,000 BC, I gather, and there would almost certainly have been civilisations in Mesopotamia. There is also clear evidence for civilisation that existed in the Sahara and migrated to the Nile valley as the desertification took place. It depends, of course , now what qualifies as civilisation, and of course, remains are harder to find the older you get. Early buildings may have been made of wood, and that rots. Even if made of stone, later civilisations tend to acquire easily available stone.
But what about the theory that these ancient civilizations were scientifically advanced, Ian?
James Morcan wrote: "But what about the theory that these ancient civilizations were scientifically advanced, Ian?"Not a huge amount of evidence. The Babylonians certainly knew a b it about astronomy, but there is no reason they could't have got that by observation. The Egyptians developed geometry, but an important point is, if this sort of thing came from aliens, why did it take so long to get algebra, which is extremely useful in science?
The theory that ancient Civilizations were scientifically advanced doesn't hinge on whether aliens contacted humans tho.Or even if aliens exist or not.
The interesting thing is Aristotle laid down the scientific method, and then made two huge blunders by ignoring his own methodology. Similarly, the Romans were actually quite skilled engineers, as were the ancient Egyptians. The hydraulic anti-earthquake engineering at Karnak is extremely impressive.
So the ancient Egyptians, having built the pyramids (which engineers and scientists don't yet fully understand and keep discovering new things about ever single year), only qualify as "quite skilled engineers"?
They were every skilled engineers. Actually, there is a hieroglyph story of how they did it, and it is quite interesting. For example, while dragging the huge blocks of stone, they had someone in the front of the block pouring water on the sand to lubricate it. Very clever.
Ian wrote: "They were every skilled engineers. Actually, there is a hieroglyph story of how they did it, and it is quite interesting. For example, while dragging the huge blocks of stone, they had someone in the front of the block pouring water on the sand to lubricate it. Very clever. ..."Keep in mind that's only a theory (i.e. not proven) and other hieroglyphs appear to contradict that story of the construction. Not saying it's wrong necessarily, but there needs to be more evidence to prove any single theory.
I think we tend to forget that Egypt wasn't a single monolithic civilization but changed over time. There were two kingdoms, then one kingdom. At some point Kush took over. Eventually Alexander the Great conquered Egypt and put the Ptolemies in charge. Then Rome came along ....Over several thousand years, beliefs changed. I also suspect a lot of knowledge was lost. Most scientific knowledge was kept by the priestly caste. If it was written at all, it was written in code.
There is a lot we don't know about Egypt and maybe never will. We've never found any telescopes but their knowledge of astronomy implied they had them or learned from someone else who had them. Since Egyptians were skilled glass makers, I tend toward the latter.
Jim wrote: "I think we tend to forget that Egypt wasn't a single monolithic civilization but changed over time. There were two kingdoms, then one kingdom. At some point Kush took over. Eventually Alexander the..."Yup, and there's also the theory that the pharaohs weren't the creators of the pyramids but simply the inheritors of them.
If that's true, then Egypt would be similar to the pyramids at Teotihuacan in Mexico where it was initially thought the Aztecs built the pyramids - it was later discovered there was an earlier civilization (who apparently vanished without a trace) and the Aztecs literally found the pyramids about a 1000 years later...
I'm of two minds over who built the pyramids. I've also heard they inherited them. I also think the cartouche that Vyse "found" with Khufu's name is probably fake. OTOH, I think they found writing describing the project to build them and it's about the right time frame as Khufu.
The the pyramids, don't forget these were built over many centuries, and the early ones were quite small and quite crude, with geometric irregularities. This is a fair indication that the builders learned as they went along, and not that they were taught at the beginning (which would imply the earlier ones should be the best).
It's been argued that the smaller ones were inferior later copies of the Giza originals. If you accept the official dating of Giza, then they are the pinnacle.For now, I accept the official dating on the pyramids because I don't believe there is any better evidence to suggest otherwise. OTOH, the sphinx...
There is good evidence the sphinx in the original form (until, I think, Ramses II egotistically put his face on it) is very old, maybe up to 12,000 yrs old.
I knpw a lot has been said about pyramid technology . I personally find this one a really good take ob it .https://youtu.be/RUl_twSIY9U
So much time for technology to advance. So much we do not really know about the limits of our physical laws. We may very well be looking at true ancient civilizations, a strange result of a porous nature to spacetime that we never suspected before, or a combination of the two.It is certainly true that we can no longer scoff at the possibility that Atlantis was real.
The video was interesting. I had read about most of what was in it already. While they mentioned quartz from an oscillating standpoint, they didn't mention that quartz is also piezoelectric and that the granite in the pyramids contains quartz.Also, while they alluded to tool marks on the cut stone, there's a lot more where that came from. There are stone vases or bottles (for lack of a better word) that are paper thin and hollowed out from hard stone with narrow necks and wide bottoms. There are identical statues that show machine tool marks which implies something like CNC technology.
I'm glad they mentioned the telluric currents. I think they may be important. I'm still not sure how they were able to use that energy and for what. They had to have power tools, were those powered by this earth energy? Did they use it some other way? Something like qigong?
I've long suspected that feng shui was the remnant of a forgotten technology using earth currents just like modern astrology is the superstitious remnant of what was once a science.
Minor point, Jim - essentially all granite contains quartz. If it did not, it would not be granite :-)
Jim wrote: "I've long suspected that feng shui was the remnant of a forgotten technology using earth currents just like modern astrology is the superstitious remnant of what was once a science. ..."Totally agree, Jim.
A lot of what is called quasi science or mumbo-jumbo is probably a residue of different types of highly-sophisticated sciences that we lost along the way during different "reboot events" such as the burning of the Library of Alexandria, floods, earthquakes, etc.
Also think when we search for any possible technologies of the Ancients, we are bound to try to superimpose our current scientific models onto them. Meaning, we look for similar construction equipment or tech like computers etc as we assume that's the only way...
But, as you allude to with mentions of earth energies and Qi Gong, the Ancients may have not needed similar building equipment or computers or even flying machines with traditional propulsion as they may have been tapping into Nikola Tesla-style energies that are organic to the earth and universe...
I also wonder if the loss of that technology is connected with later civilizations engaging in mass human sacrifice. The Aztecs and Incas, relative latecomers in their areas, were some of the most enthusiastic human sacrificers. I wonder if that is because they lost the key to the technologies they inherited and were trying to get the gods to restore whatever it was.
Ian, my point is that the granite in the pyramid could be another source of power, a component of the machine. With tons of limestone pressing down on it, there would certainly be an electric charge.
Jim wrote: "Ian, my point is that the granite in the pyramid could be another source of power, a component of the machine. With tons of limestone pressing down on it, there would certainly be an electric charge."I am not sure what it would power. I have been inside the great pyramid, and really there isn't much there.
Ian wrote: "I am not sure what it would power. I have been inside the great pyramid, and really there isn't much there. ..."Which either means A). You are correct and your eyes didn't deceive you and there's nothing to the pyramids at all, OR B). You weren't looking in the right way and missed something obvious right in front of your eyes.
Not trying to patronize, but it's very difficult when our eyes and minds are trained to only look for scientific sophistication that fits our own modern world. For example, there could be various types of advanced science, some which may not even need technology or perhaps very little tech...
There's a sarcophagus shaped box, that wasn't a sarcophagus, which was carved with diamond tipped drills...for one thing inside the Great Pyramid. There are shafts aligning to star systems and stuff too... And there's some metal in that there secret passage 'n all... And maybe the granite powers the pyramid itself.
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...
http://www.invisibletemple.com/sacred...
http:/..."
If it was the initial design, it could be interesting that they were trying new things or getting creative.