Ancient nuclear war and technology


#41

OK, then, maybe you should tell us exactly how the Egyptians were able to make perfectly straight cuts in massive pieces of rock. While you’re at it, why don’t you tell us how the Peruvians were able to transport pieces of granite weighing more than 100 tons five miles through mountainous terrain.


#42

[QUOTE=Asuri;48972]OK, then, maybe you should tell us exactly how the Egyptians were able to make perfectly straight cuts in massive pieces of rock. While you’re at it, why don’t you tell us how the Peruvians were able to transport pieces of granite weighing more than 100 tons five miles through mountainous terrain.[/QUOTE]

I will admit I am not an expert on Peruvian monuments, but Egypt is something I know. Once the overseers got to the quarry they surveyed the area and picked out the area where they would start to dig. The overseers measured out the area depending on what they were building. The workers would then sit and use rounded rocks and start digging. When they had dug far enough they would start digging their way under the stone and put wooden slats under it to help drag it. They would then drag it to the Nile and place it on a boat and then take it to where the monument was being built. Once the stone got there it was then sanded down to do a flat surface, it was then put on a ramp to be placed, then the painters would go up the ramp and to paint it.


#43

[QUOTE=Asuri;48962]That’s right, nobody really knows how they were built, or by whom. This is really the first time I’ve heard the theory of a lost human civilization, and I’ve heard the theory of extra-terrestrial visitors. Both are plausible, but the bottom line is, we don’t know.

I recall reading some Indian document that described interplanetary travel, and thinking, wow, that could literally be true. Unfortunately I haven’t been able to find that document again.[/QUOTE]

You just said a “Lost Human Civilization” and “Extra-Terrestrial Visitors” were both “plausible”. & then you said ancient Indian “Interplanetary Travel” could “literally be true”.
Your argument just lost all credibility.


#44

[QUOTE=Asuri;48972]OK, then, maybe you should tell us exactly how the Egyptians were able to make perfectly straight cuts in massive pieces of rock. While you’re at it, why don’t you tell us how the Peruvians were able to transport pieces of granite weighing more than 100 tons five miles through mountainous terrain.[/QUOTE]

Lol, it isn’t that difficult. Simple applications of mechanics and [B]large[/B] amounts of man labor. The Incans were known for their expansive civilization, their stout bodies, and their lungs (which had long adapted to the sparse air of the regions they populated).

Perfectly straight cuts in massive pieces of rock? It isn’t hard, once again. Simple tools and a good amount of polishing and shaping. It is akin to how lumberjacks can make smooth and perfect rectangular shaped logs out of the irregular and coarse things known as a tree trunk, with only their axe.

Grow out of your Western dogma Asuri. You do realize that all these speculations on “how this civilization could have done that” is a result of Western unwillingness to acknowledge that civilizations were more advanced than they have formerly touted them to be?

For example, here is an example of the mechanics I speak of:

Torque is defined as the tendency of a force to cause rotational motion.

The equation for torque is T (greek letter tau) = rFsin(theta).

Assume that you have a situation in which there is a 5 meter block of wood on a pivot point in the center. A person weighing 70 kilos gets on the left end of block of wood. You, weighing 80 kilos, wish for the system to be in static equilibrium. In other words, the sum of the external forces and the torques must equal 0.

So here is our equations as follows:

r1F1 - r2F2 = 0.

r2F2 = r1F1

r2 = r1F1/F2

R2 is the distance from the center at which you must be to balance the system. The only forces acting on this system is the force due to gravity or the people’s weight. Nicely enough, these forces are perpendicular to the line of action.

(70 kg)(2.5 meters)(9.81 m/s^2)/(80 kg * 9.81 m/s^2) = 2.19 meters approximately.

In other words, you must sit that many meters away from the center to balance the system.

Now why did I go through this process of teaching you one of the fundamental aspects of Newtonian Mechanics? First of all, to show you that dealing with such heavy weights is not impossible. I have the math to prove it. Sure the darn things were many tons in weight. Then again, I wouldn’t put past the Incans, one of the most advanced civilizations in those times, to come up with something to transport those blocks of stone. Fulcrums and levers are quiet a universal technology you know.


#45

[QUOTE=Nietzsche;48964]Precisely. So these “experts” shouldn’t jump to ridiculous assumptions.

Interesting. I find many references to advanced concepts in Indian scriptures. For example, in the Mahabharata, there were a couple of lines that were talking about the transitory nature of the human body. It clearly stated that every “cell” in the body replaces itself every 6 or 7 years. And the last time I did research on this matter, I found it to be true (when one includes the skeleton and other factors apparently). Of course, I am not sure whether my sources were trustworthy, but it is something I will look into further.[/QUOTE]

Every year the body is over 98% completely rebuilt, new at a molecular level.

Maybe you should do some more homework… :rolleyes:


#46

[QUOTE=Indra Deva;48994]Every year the body is over 98% completely rebuilt, new at a molecular level.

Maybe you should do some more homework… :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

Sources please? According to my research, I saw that biologists used to say it took 6-8 years; nowadays they assert it is an ongoing process, out of the reluctance to assign an exact time span to such bodily developments.


#47

[QUOTE=Star Light;48952]I spent too much time getting a degree in Anthropology with a concentration in Ancient Near Eastern Cultures to have my mind clouded with white christian bias.[/QUOTE]

What does this mean?

That Christians are white?

Or are you just singling out white Christians, and that all white Chritians are biased?

Or are you referring to a small subset of white Christians who are biased?

And in what way does this bias express itself?


#48

[QUOTE=thomas;49017]What does this mean?

That Christians are white?

Or are you just singling out white Christians, and that all white Chritians are biased?

Or are you referring to a small subset of white Christians who are biased?

And in what way does this bias express itself?[/QUOTE]

Most Christians are white.

Everyone is biased. The problem arises when groups of people have power over all others. Then the bias of the ruling people creeps into media, academia, and society. Guess which group has the power Thomas.


#49

[QUOTE=thomas;49017]What does this mean?

That Christians are white?

Or are you just singling out white Christians, and that all white Chritians are biased?

Or are you referring to a small subset of white Christians who are biased?

And in what way does this bias express itself?[/QUOTE]

That means that I actually went out and got a college education. I happened to focus my studies on human evolution and ancient cultures from the near east. I didn’t say all christians are white. I simply meant that the vast majority of white christians seem to think they are superior to everyone else. They tend say things like “I don’t mind gay people” and “I can tolerate other religions”, which are just dripping with “I’ll tolerate you, but I’m still right”. Christians tend to have this bias. They will “tolerate” and “be accepting” of all others, but that still means that you don’t like it and you still think you’re right.


#50

[QUOTE=Star Light;49021]That means that I actually went out and got a college education. I happened to focus my studies on human evolution and ancient cultures from the near east. I didn’t say all christians are white. I simply meant that the vast majority of white christians seem to think they are superior to everyone else. They tend say things like “I don’t mind gay people” and “I can tolerate other religions”, which are just dripping with “I’ll tolerate you, but I’m still right”. Christians tend to have this bias. They will “tolerate” and “be accepting” of all others, but that still means that you don’t like it and you still think you’re right.[/QUOTE]

Wow. THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I HAVE BEEN SAYING FOR 500+ POSTS!!! WOW!! AMAZING! SOMEONE WHO FINALLY SEES REASON!

I might add that even those who have renounced Christianity have a hard time getting rid of this intrinsic doctrinal ignorance and bias since it is so intertwined with white/Western supremacist ideals (which when compared with the condition of the rest of the world, gives a strong foundation for such misconceptions).


#51

Sanded with what? By hand? I doubt it. The stones in Peru were cut. You can not make perfectly straight and square cuts in granite with hand tools. The narrator on the the video that SD linked to said that the stones weighed 160 tons. It would take two of the largest cranes available today to even lift something that heavy. We could not transport something that heavy today. They not only transported them, they set them into place in such a way that the joints are perfect, without mortar. People don’t don’t realize how extraordinary that is.


#52

[QUOTE=Indra Deva;48991]You just said a “Lost Human Civilization” and “Extra-Terrestrial Visitors” were both “plausible”. & then you said ancient Indian “Interplanetary Travel” could “literally be true”.
Your argument just lost all credibility.[/QUOTE]

First of all, I’m not arguing anything. These things came from somewhere. Somebody built them. Do you have any better ideas? There are people who are far more qualified than I am who believe strongly in the alien visitor theory. You’ve got your head in the sand if you don’t think it’s possible.


#53

[QUOTE=Asuri;49025]Sanded with what? By hand? I doubt it. The stones in Peru were cut. You can not make perfectly straight and square cuts in granite with hand tools. The narrator on the the video that SD linked to said that the stones weighed 160 tons. It would take two of the largest cranes available today to even lift something that heavy. We could not transport something that heavy today. They not only transported them, they set them into place in such a way that the joints are perfect, without mortar. People don’t don’t realize how extraordinary that is.[/QUOTE]

They were sanded by rounded rocks that were harder than the stones. I’m not sure why you doubt it, but that really doesn’t matter. I do realize how extraordinary this is, that is why there is so much attention on it. Also ancient people had excellent astrology and aligned their monuments according to celestial beings. That is why things were placed so perfectly.


#54

You think not? Maybe in your inexperienced mind, but in the real world, it takes power. And technique. Oh yeah, I almost forgot, it also takes tools, really good powerful tools. You can’t run those kinds of tools from a teeter totter.


#55

[QUOTE=Asuri;49026]First of all, I’m not arguing anything. These things came from somewhere. Somebody built them. Do you have any better ideas? There are people who are far more qualified than I am who believe strongly in the alien visitor theory. You’ve got your head in the sand if you don’t think it’s possible.[/QUOTE]

Many things are possible. That does not mean that they are “plausible” or “literally true”.
How about this: THE EGYPTIANS BUILT THE PYRAMIDS. Just because you don’t know how they did it doesn’t mean that you should expound the problem with even more things that you don’t know.
Let’s try to keep Ockham from rolling in his grave and exhaust the truly plausible options before you start adding Extraterrestrials into the equation.
& who are these “far more qualified” people who attribute pyramids to aliens? Hmmm? :rolleyes:


#56

[QUOTE=Star Light;49021]That means that I actually went out and got a college education. I happened to focus my studies on human evolution and ancient cultures from the near east. I didn’t say all christians are white. I simply meant that the vast majority of white christians seem to think they are superior to everyone else. They tend say things like “I don’t mind gay people” and “I can tolerate other religions”, which are just dripping with “I’ll tolerate you, but I’m still right”. Christians tend to have this bias. They will “tolerate” and “be accepting” of all others, but that still means that you don’t like it and you still think you’re right.[/QUOTE]

And you think your views are right.

Does that therefore make you biased and mean that you think you are superior to the white-trash ignorant Christians?

Yes, I can tolerate other religions, but I do think my religion is right. If I thought one of the other religions that I tolerate was the right one, then I would conver to it. That’s not a feeling of “superiorty,” but just plain common sense.


#57

[QUOTE=thomas;49033]And you think your views are right.

Does that therefore make you biased and mean that you think you are superior to the white-trash ignorant Christians?

Yes, I can tolerate other religions, but I do think my religion is right. If I thought one of the other religions that I tolerate was the right one, then I would conver to it. That’s not a feeling of “superiorty,” but just plain common sense.[/QUOTE]

I’m not biased. It’s an observation. Instead of going on emotion and what I “believe”, I look at facts and make observations. There are holes in every religion not just christianity. That religion just seems to be the most prominent in the states and it’s the one we have been talking about. Look at talk radio, the news, our politicians, there seem to be leaning towards christianity. Even liberal politicians claim to be christian. That is where the christian run media comes into play. It’s everywhere.


#58

And I admit, I find the concept of the regression of man from what could have possibly been vastly more advanced states of civilization, intriguing.However, the archeological and scientific evidence is largely not in support of it.

It is true that the mainstream archeaological and scientific evidence is not in support of it, but if you watched the documentary I linked it shows very clearly archeaological findas have indeed been found which supports extreme antiquity of human beings and these findings have simply been ignored by the archeaological community on purpose or even suppressed, with some archeaologists losing their jobs over the matter. If humans have indeed been around for 2 billion years which the oldest archeaological find seems to suggest, it is certain that that we have techological civilisations in the past which are lost.

Sure, at first glance, those structures you speak of seem amazingly complex for their time. But what most amateurs don’t understand however is the tendency to look at these structures from a Westernized viewpoint. They view all other cultures as inferior and less civilized; hence the surprise most Westerners have at finding something amazingly complex in a country presently known to be poor and “backwards.” Like India. Or Central America and Mexico.

Neitzsche, this is not a Western vs others issue. In fact the mainstream Western archeaological community agree with you that the ancients built them using primitive methods(they also agree that Aryans invaded India) and do not at all claim they were incapable of bulding them. If you keep accusing everything of being Western chauvanism your valid criticisms of the West will be eclipsed by your invalid criticisms. Please be more discriminate in your accusations against the West, in order to maintain your credibility with objective readers.

In this case it is not a Western chanvainsitic view, but a view held by a minority of scientists and engineers which have examined the pyramids, and the South American cities and have found that given the primitive methods that are thought to be available to the ancients, it would have been impossible to build these structures. Some of those blocks weigh 450 tons in weight and they come from a source that is several miles away. In the case of the South American ones they come up from several miles high up in the mountain. We cannot move and transport blocks such heavy blocks with even the biggest and heaviest cranes in the world, then how could it be conceivable the ancients could do it with primitive means?
The engineers have also found evidence of very precise cutting and machining used in the stones on the Pyramid

These questions need to be answered on how it could be possible at all. If there is an explanation for it then we can settle this matter right now. But first I need proof that that such a feat can be done using primitive methods.


#59

[QUOTE=thomas;49033]And you think your views are right.

Does that therefore make you biased and mean that you think you are superior to the white-trash ignorant Christians?[/quote]

If what Starlight said is true…

– I happened to focus my studies on [B][I]human evolution[/I][/B] and ancient cultures from the near east –

… I believe that would equate to an anthropology degree, physical anthropology to be precise. It’s based on the study of SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE, not some little desert tribe’s mythology. There is a VAST difference.

Yes, I can tolerate other religions, but I do think my religion is right. If I thought one of the other religions that I tolerate was the right one, then I would conver to it. That’s not a feeling of “superiorty,” but just plain common sense.

You’re trying to apply “common sense” to your religious belief. Maybe you should just stop.


#60

Instead of going on emotion and what I “believe”, I look at facts and make observations. There are holes in every religion not just christianity.

So do you think what you believe based on your facts and observations is superior to what Christians believe?