Bosnian pyramids, Part II, no photos please!

[Minimalist]

Rk, I would accept the jumbled compass points for the first photo and that what we are looking at IS the south side. Anyone who ever grew a garden knows that you get the best sunlight and plant growth with a southern exposure.

[Guest]

Fair enough, Bob. Just strikes me as strange that the path apparently runs all the round the foot of the hill, but nowhere can I see it climbing to the summit. Maybe just me eyes!
Speaking from my own viewpoint, if I had a hill that height on my doorstep, I'd climb it to see what the view was like. I'd expect others to do the same.

[DougWeller]

Schoch has a PHD in geology and geophysics from Yale which puts him quite a few rungs up the ladder from me.

Hancock relates that at the 1992 Convention of the Geological Society of America Schoch obtained the endorsement of 275 other geologists for his findings on the Sphinx (footnote #4) and in footnote #5 made a similar presentation to the 1992 Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, so, clearly....he is not just some guy who likes to look at rocks.

And Hancock is simply wrong. That never happened. He did a poster presentation on October 28th 1991 at the GSA -- there were 80 of these going on at the same time (you get given a booth, put up some posters, and chat to people when they drop by). They put up some photos and text but when some of my friends tried to find out exactly what data they presented, they met with more or less a brick wall.

It wasn't an oral presentation. The figure seems to have been picked out of a hat and in fact John Anthony West who was there with Schoch gives different figures at different times.

But the bottom line is that it wasn't a formal presentation, no one voted or in any way 'signed up' to his ideas. Maybe, just maybe, they had 275 visitors who nodded and said 'how interesting'. But definitely not 275 or any other figure of endorsements.

[Minimalist]

I can only tell you what he printed and he says 1992.

(I just checked his footnote and, fortuitously, since he quotes West's Serpent in the Sky, which I have handy, I was able to confirm that Hancock's quotation is 100% accurate. That is what West wrote.)

[Paul H.]

Fair enough, Bob. Just strikes me as strange that the path apparently runs all the round the foot of the hill, but nowhere can I see it climbing to the summit. Maybe just me eyes!
Speaking from my own viewpoint, if I had a hill that height on my doorstep, I'd climb it to see what the view was like. I'd expect others to do the same.

I would like to see aerial pictures of this. The way you describe it makes sounds like they are engaged in a small-scale version of contour (bench) mining, which cuts a narrow bench ("terrace") around a hill. This occurs because the mining follows a relatively flat-lying or gently sloping layer of coal where it intersects the side of the hill at a certain elevation. Contour mining is illustrated in "Coal Contour Surface "Strip" Mining" at;

http://66.113.204.26/mining/coal/contour.htm

The reason that the "path" runs along the base of the hill is that it is the layer of jointed bedrock, which they are exposing and underlies the hill and forms a line where it intersects the steep slopes of the hill. As they dig, they are exposing this intersection this layer with side of the hill and creating a cut, as contour mining does, that follows this line. Eventually if layer extends completely through the hill and they dig far enough, they will create a small bench ("path")around the entire hill. The bench is narrow, as in case of coal mining, because the thickness of overburden needed to be removed to expose the layer of rock increases rapidly as the bench is cut back into the hill to the point of being economically impractical.

Some pictures are:

1. http://66.113.204.26/mining/coal/Contour_Mining.jpg

2. Contour Mining, Kentucky Geological Survey
http://www.uky.edu/KGS/picturekentucky/ ... ining1.jpg
http://www.uky.edu/KGS/coal/contour1.htm

3. Contour Mining carves into the mountainside.
http://www.unitedmountaindefense.org/ph ... 2RawXS.jpg
http://www.unitedmountaindefense.org/EaganAreaMines.php

4. Contour Mine Pre-reclamation
http://ecorestoration.montana.edu/minel ... our_sm.jpg
http://ecorestoration.montana.edu/minel ... s&offset=5

Yours,

Paul H.

[stan]

Rk, I would accept the jumbled compass points for the first photo and that what we are looking at IS the south side. Anyone who ever grew a garden knows that you get the best sunlight and plant growth with a southern exposure.

For what it's worth, those dark trees are evergreens, like firs or hemlocks, and they tend to grow on the north sides of hills untill you reach further north, where they cover everything.
Just like here in North Carolina, where white pines grow on north facing
bluffs in the Piedmont, then are more generally distributed at higher elevations and farther north.

Furthermore, we don't know how much of the hill has been cut over by logging or for other purposes.

[Guest]

Thanks for that, Paul. You can see the photos I'm referring to on page 14, where Ciko posted them yesterday.

[Minimalist]

Uh-oh....more pyramids.


http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2006- ... 727356.htm

CHANGCHUN, June 21 (Xinhua) -- Chinese archaeologists have discovered a group of ancient tombs shaped like pyramids, dating back at least 3,000 years, in Jiaohe City of northeast China's Jilin Province.

[DougWeller]

I can only tell you what he printed and he says 1992.

(I just checked his footnote and, fortuitously, since he quotes West's Serpent in the Sky, which I have handy, I was able to confirm that Hancock's quotation is 100% accurate. That is what West wrote.)

Oh yes, that is what West wrote (although West uses different figures at times).

It is still wrong.

[DougWeller]

Rk, I would accept the jumbled compass points for the first photo and that what we are looking at IS the south side. Anyone who ever grew a garden knows that you get the best sunlight and plant growth with a southern exposure.

For what it's worth, those dark trees are evergreens, like firs or hemlocks, and they tend to grow on the north sides of hills untill you reach further north, where they cover everything.
Just like here in North Carolina, where white pines grow on north facing
bluffs in the Piedmont, then are more generally distributed at higher elevations and farther north.

Furthermore, we don't know how much of the hill has been cut over by logging or for other purposes.

Where are you in North Carolina?

[Minimalist]

Rk, I would accept the jumbled compass points for the first photo and that what we are looking at IS the south side. Anyone who ever grew a garden knows that you get the best sunlight and plant growth with a southern exposure.

For what it's worth, those dark trees are evergreens, like firs or hemlocks, and they tend to grow on the north sides of hills untill you reach further north, where they cover everything.
Just like here in North Carolina, where white pines grow on north facing
bluffs in the Piedmont, then are more generally distributed at higher elevations and farther north.

Furthermore, we don't know how much of the hill has been cut over by logging or for other purposes.

You must be some woodsman if you can tell what kind of trees those are from that photo!

They look like green blotches to me.

[stan]

Hey,Doug, are you about to pounce on me?
For being mistaken, or living in NC, or what?

If you really want to know, I live in the Piedmont. (Middle of the state).

Yes, Minimilist, I do study trees.

The color pattern you see on those Bosnian hills is typical of
the differences between deciduous and evergreen trees (obviously I don't know what species).
Those pictures were taken in the spring, when deciduous trees are especially light in color. They darken through the summer.

[Minimalist]

If they are Bosnian trees they may not do things the same way as other trees, though.

[Guest]

latley all that has been hashed out is the credibility of one person or the other; or length of visit of one geologist---was it long enough? sounds like a soap opera with double entendres.

is there any more news on this dig or is everything in a holding pattern until schoch and unesco have made their jaunts?

[Fortuneteller]

There is something new on the Foundation's web site. Osmanagich announced a public presentation of his research results:

"… A public presentation of current results of scientific research in the “Bosnian Pyramid Vallie”. The presentation will be delivered by the team of professionals led by the Egyptian experts…

… The results will be presented by using audio-visual methods and supported by slides…"

The presentation was scheduled for Friday, 23.06.2006, 10am. The presentation will take place at Congress Hall…"