Archaeologica.org

Minimalist wrote:

Had to fit in the channel so that it could be aimed.

Now I get it... thanks!

P.S.

Being part of a ballista crew looks like great fun!

stellarchaser wrote: But I have the feeling that for each picture you see from Visochica Hill, you post simmilar geological "example" allegedly proving it's not man-made.

What I want to say is that your arguments can be appliable to any square stone block found anywhere in the world and on any archeological excavations. As long that it's square, it can be natural, right? That proves nothing. Because it can be man made, too. And the opposite, of course.

This is not the argument, which I am making.

The basic argument being made by Mr. Osmanagic, Dr. Barakat, and Dr. El Hadidi is that the rectilinear shape of the stone blocks and the pseudopyramidal shape of their so-called "pyramids" are shapes that are impossible for natural processes have produced. By posting URL after URL for pictures of stone blocks after stone block from the Visocica Hill region and identifying them specifically as blocks from a man-made pyramid, Ciko is, in my opinion, is also arguing that it is impossible for nature to have made the rectilinear or quasi-rectilinear stone blocks shown in the pictures at URLs, which he posting. The problem with such arguments, including the statement that "It is really impossible that nature creates shapes like this. Maybe one, but not three or four sides of the hill as we have here.", is that they are readily demolished by any examination of the ranges of jointing and hill shapes produced by natural processes. The images, which I post of jointed bedrock are evidence that show that nature has quite often produced rectilinear blocks identical to those being found around the Visochica Hill area. Elsewhere, i.e. on the Ma'at message board, people have posted numerous pictures of natural pyramid-shaped hills, including one found in Antarctica.

(Note: For a picture of Pyramid Peak go look at "A cloud passes by windblown Pyramid Peak, in Antarctica" at"

http://brandy.weblogs.us/poster/a-cloud ... 18375.html

(Also, in doing a search of the USGS Geographic Names Information Systems database, I found 112 mountains and hills with "pyramid" in its name. Of these, 12 are named "Pyramid Mountain", 45 are named "Pyramid Peak", 4 are named "The Pyramids", 5 are named "The Pyramid", 6 are named "Pyramid Butte(s), 6 are named "Pyramid Rock", and so forth. The abundance of hills and mountain with the term "pyramid" in their name suggests to me that pyramid shaped landforms are far more numerous then Dr. El Hadidi argues. It might an interesting exercise to use digital elevation models to compare how close some of them and Visochica Hill come to being true pyramids.)

The point, which I am making with my pictures, is that neither the rectilinear nature, in some cases an imagined rectilinear nature, of either the stone blocks or alleged pyramids is useless as either proof or even an indicator that either their blocks or the pyramids are in any manner man-made. Mr. Osmanagic, Dr. Barakat, Dr. El Hadidi, and Ciko need something more substantial then rectilinear blocks and three-side pseudopyramidal shapes as proof that they are man-made features.

stellarchaser wrote: If man is making square stones, and nature is making square stones (obviously they both do), there must be reliable and experienced scientist, or better to say science, who will determine what is man made and what is natural. And I believe it can be done only at the spot or through scientific analysis (of which you know much more than me of course). In other words, it's pointless to deny or confirm nature of these blocks before that analysis is done.

From the pictures, which I have seen, of stone blocks being posted by Ciko and on the Bosnian pyramids site, the vast majority of these stone blocks are not the square or rectangular stone blocks, which you talk about. For example, although the surface of the sides of these blocks might be either flat surfaces or rough approximations of flat surfaces, the sides of many lack the precise 90 degrees angles at their corners. Instead, at best, some of these stone blocks might qualify as parallelograms and in many cases, the orientation of the sides of many of the blocks, which are claimed to be man-made, are not even parallel. In my opinion, the wide range of variability in the shape, size, and orientation of the sides of individual blocks, which comprise the “tightly-fitted” stone layers, is better explained as having been formed by a continuous layer of rock having been broken in place. The effort needed to individually cut and fit blocks that vary so much from each other in size, shape and the parallelism in order to create the tightly fitted stonework argued to be man-made would require an amazing amount of effort that defies common sense. In case of some occasional pictures of what appear to be man-made stone walls, likely Roman, Medieval, or other origin, the loose-fitting nature of the wall do not make the variability of the blocks composing it a problem.

Also, at a typical archaeological site, the bulk of stone blocks, being man-made and mass-produced, exhibit uniform, standard sizes and shapes, which are lacking in the pictures of stone blocks coming from the so-called Bosnian pyramids. For example, the majority of the various Egyptian pyramids consist of blocks or bricks, which are true rectangles and occur as standard sizes as the result of being mass-produced and designed for efficient construction. It might be common to see either non-standard size stone blocks or unmodified blocks used to build a **loosely fitted** stonewall, as seen in New England. However, the pictures of the "tight-fitting" Bosnian "stonework" exhibits none of the standardization of block sizes and shapes, which would indicate blocks intentionally designed for their production and the effecient construction of a structure as massive as pyramid.

Some of the stone blocks have joint patterns that form blocks that have absolutely no resemblance to either a square or rectangle. The jointing is so convoluted, irregular, and random that I wonder how any of tehse blocks can be argued to have been deliberate designed, manufactured, and used to construct a man-made layer of stone blocks. A good example of such stone blocks can be seen at:

http://www.bosnian-pyramid.com/gallery/ ... amid15.jpg

A significant problem with some the Bosnian stone blocks in the often photographed excavation at the “Pyramid of the Moon”, as well as in other excavations, is that the layers, which they comprise, clearly extend into and are interlayered with the local Miocene bedrock. Unless a person agrees with Dr. Michael Cremo and other aficionados of OOPARTS, that "man-made" artifacts have been found in strata of the Cenozoic and older eras as far back as the Precambrian, it should be quite apparent that these stone layers are quite likely nothing more than jointed bedrock. What can be observed in the excavations, the basic laws of superposition, and information published in peer-reviewed journals about the geology of the area are more than enough to prove that some of the layers of stone blocks, claimed to be man-made, are interlayered with the local bedrock and must predate the existence of man in the Visocica Hill region by at least a couple of million years.

Pictures showing laminated Miocene bedrock interlayered with layers of stone blocks claimed to be man-made are:

1. http://www.piramidasunca.ba/news/11060602/DSCF7337.jpg

2. http://www.piramidasunca.ba/news/11060602/DSCF7285.jpg

3. http://www.piramidasunca.ba/news/11060602/DSCF7286.jpg

These pictures are from the “Prona?en novi ulaz u podzemni tunel - 11.06.2006” web page at:

http://www.piramidasunca.ba/news/news_i ... NewsID=113

Also, it is a major problem that more than one layer of stone blocks being excavated at the Pyramid of Moon all exhibit well-developed ripple marks of the type found in both modern and ancient lakes. One interesting observation, which can be made from the posted pictures, is that all of the ripple marks within a layer, regardless of being on the different blocks, are oriented in the same direction. Even worse, in some pictures, the same ripple mark is split between separate blocks and perfectly matched across the joint. In order to have this happen, a single bed would have to been carefully reassembled piece by piece in exactly the same positions in the current layer from which they were excavated from the original layer. This is such a patently illogical proposition that some supporters of these stone blocks as being man-made, are forced to claim in an equally silly and rather amusing manner that these features, which are quite clearly natural ripple marks, are actually man-made “decorations”.

An excellent example of an unequivocal natural set of ripple marks from an excavation at the “Pyramid of the Moon” is:

http://www.bosnian-pyramid.com/gallery/ ... 79moj2.JPG

Another example of ripple marks is:

http://www.bosnian-pyramid.com/gallery/ ... 8168m3.JPG

stellarchaser wrote: Now we seeing that they are getting some real archeological artefacts (monoliths with inscriptions, standing wall). So the story of Visochica is not that simple. As any other geological or archeological site. Although Barakat said his opinion, he also suggested that team of international geologists should examine Visochica site. El Hadidi said the same. And that is what we need there.

The problem is that there are real and very valuable man-made structures, which have been built, and archaeological deposits, which have accumulated on Visochica Hill. The problem is that they have been conflated and confused in the imaginations of Mr. Osmanagic with natural hills and jointed bedrock to construct a chimera, much like the Archaeoraptor, which is composed of completely unrelated parts. Yes, there is real and very significant archaeology to be found on Visocica Hill region. The problem is that is not single shred of evidence to connect the real artifacts and real man-made structures with the jointed bedrocks and hills, which Mr. Osmanagic and his supporters also claim to be man-made.

It would be interesting to have such a team of international geologists investigate the site. However, the team certainly need to have at least of sedimentologists familiar with lake deposits on it. Whether, Mr. Osmanagic and his supporters would listen to anything that they had to say given that they completely ignored the first set of geologists, whose expert opinion they requested.

Best Regards,

Paul H.

The basic argument being made by Mr. Osmanagic, Dr. Barakat, and Dr. El Hadidi is that the rectilinear shape of the stone blocks and the pseudopyramidal shape of their so-called "pyramids

Pseudopyramidal ?

Per a previous post, Paul, I am wondering what constitutes a real pyramid in the mind of members that post here. Please give us your definition.

Paul H. wrote: This is not the argument, which I am making.
(...)
Best Regards,

Paul H.

Hey Paul, is it possible that the intrinsic properties of those laminated bedrocks could explain the pyramidal shape of that hill?

I think that maybe the orthogonal repetitive structure of those jointed bedrocks can induce to easier erosion on some directions, just like in crystals, where their repetitive structure leads to well-defined breaking and erosion planes. (Er I hope you know what I mean)

Well that's just a theory that I pulled out of my hat. I might be very wrong

24 June 2006

Barakat: ‘This is man-made pyramid’

The two Egyptian scientists working at the Bosnian pyramids - geologist Barakat and archeologist Lamia El Hadidi – have made some of their findings public prior to completing their work at the site. They conclude that there are ancient man-made structures in the Visocica Hill region.

When he first arrived in Bosnia, geologist Barakat said that Visocica Hill was probably ‘some kind of primitive pyramid’. After more than a month working at the site, his opinion remains unchanged.

Barakat said, “For me, as a scientist and geologist, there’s still no doubt that this is man-made. I think that humans cut, polished, reshaped and formed stone blocks {that form the pyramid), bringing them here and adding them to the existing hill in order to give the shape of a pyramid to the hill.”

Archaeologist El Hadidi added that a large archaeological site has been found on the so-called Pyramid of the Moon, near to the Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun. She said they were unable, at this stage, to date the site, saying that further research is needed. However, she confirmed earlier conclusions that this site also represents a pyramid. “It is really impossible that nature creates shapes like this. Maybe one, but not three or four sides of the hill as we have here. There is still a lot of work to be done here, if we want to unveil all the secrets of this valley.”

Scepticism about the existence of the pyramids remains within parts of the scientific community. This may be partly because the site in Bosnia does not represent our traditional image of pyramids - as in Egypt - but a different kind of structure where stones have been placed around an existing hill to form the shape of a pyramid.

A complex of manmade tunnels has also been found at the site. It has been suggested that the tunnels may connect the three pyramids. In one of the tunnels, a large polished monolith has been found with unknown carved inscriptions including arrows and a shape similar to our letter ‘E’.

http://bosnian-pyramid.com/gallery/Exca ... amid62.jpg

http://bosnian-pyramid.com/gallery/Exca ... amid63.jpg

They conclude that there are ancient man-made structures in the Visocica Hill region.

that isn't a stretch as we know there are man made construction on the hill. i think it has been posted repeatedly.

when you separate the previously known construction from that which Os states is there then maybe we will listen...

that isn't a stretch as we know there are man made construction on the hill. i think it has been posted repeatedly.

no no no and 1000 times NO

there was no construction on the moon pyramid and there is amazing results, and on the sun pyramid it was a little castle from 1300 century on the topp of the hill that is all , that is all , nothing more

and they are digging 100 -200 meter away from that area

do you wanna see the castle


here



on the topp of the hill, nothing is left

Ciko wrote:

that isn't a stretch as we know there are man made construction on the hill. i think it has been posted repeatedly.

no no no and 1000 times NO

there was no construction on the moon pyramid and there is amazing results, and on the sun pyramid it was a little castle from 1300 century on the topp of the hill that is all , that is all , nothing more

and they are digging 100 -200 meter away from that area

do you wanna see the castle


here



on the topp of the hill, nothing is left

Ciko, it is known that there was a castle, a roman fort and at Visoko a medieval town.

So, don't you think that maybe you're finding old houses?

If you see the pictures of Visocica Hill, you can see they have little houses on the hill. Maybe the middle ages guys who lived there built some houses too. It's an easier explanation than to imagine that you're finding ruins of some forgotten pyramid-shaped temple.

Paul

did you see some of the last pictures on the Foundation web site, like this one http://www.piramidasunca.ba/news/23060602/P1010061.jpg or this one http://www.piramidasunca.ba/news/23060602/P1010056.jpg (it's in " Na istočnoj strani piramide otvorene nove probne sonde - 23.06.2006". I don't know how you call it in english, a folder ? ("pli" in french) ; it seems to me perfectly natural, there are a lot of this type of "folded" bedrocks near my home. But the Foundation thought them important enough to put them on the web site...

Ciko

How do you know there never were any constructions on the "pyramid of the moon" ? I think every body agrees the region was inhabited since the Neolithic ; the fact that none known city, citadel or temple is recorded on this hill does not mean that nobody ever lived there : shepherds, for example, who could build some small houses on the hill...

And as for Visocica, there was not only a "small castle" ; if you read here
http://www.aneks8komisija.com.ba/main.p ... ew&id=2409 the text of the Commission for National Monuments, you can learn that :
in 1984, the archaeologist Pavo Andelic found that the fortress was built on rough natural blocks, but that it was clear that some artificial terraces and platforms for houses had been made below the fortress in the abrupt and rocky slopes. The commission has found some remains on such terraces south of the fortress, and reminds that in the cadastral books all the slopes of the hill, as far as the highest houses of today Visoko, are named "Grad", like the old city itself, even if they are now deserted.

So there could be some middle age buildings, even 200 meters of the citadel.

Irna

Ciko, it is known that there was a castle, a roman fort and at Visoko a medieval town.

it was castle, on the topp of the sun pyramid yes, some rests of roman fort and there was no town there , how can you have town

in area with 30 meters X 60 meters

So, don't you think that maybe you're finding old houses?

but on the moon pyramid, there was no houses or towns , it is not repoerted that moon pyramid was inhabited

and this photos come from moon pyramid

steps
http://www.bosnian-pyramid.com/gallery/ ... 86step.JPG

stone blocks
http://www.bosnian-pyramid.com/gallery/ ... 689no9.JPG

walls
http://www.bosnian-pyramid.com/gallery/ ... G_0734.jpg

http://www.bosnian-pyramid.com/gallery/ ... amid62.jpg


those photos come from moon pyramid, it is not written anywhere that this hill was inhabited

If you see the pictures of Visocica Hill, you can see they have little houses on the hill.

where can you see little houses ???

Maybe the middle ages guys who lived there built some houses too.

there was no town, it was a castle with king and queen, no houses

It's an easier explanation than to imagine that you're finding ruins of some forgotten pyramid-shaped temple.

only a castle and some rests of roman fort nothing special

ther was no town, no houses, nothing more

Ciko wrote:only a castle and some rests of roman fort nothing special

ther was no town, no houses, nothing more

The letter sent to the UNESCO contains (http://www.archaeology.org/online/featu ... UNESCO.pdf) description of the area where Osmanagich’s foundation digs.

"The Visocica hill – location of the Bosnian medieval capital Visoki

...On the Visocica hill, …, are
the remains of the royal Bosnian town of Visoki. The remains of the town's main fort, located on the summit of the hill, are protected as a national monument..."

"...…the false idea that the medieval town of Visoki was only the size of 30x60m. It would be very difficult to believe that the capital of the medieval Bosnian Kingdom and also a very important trade center of the area, mentioned in numerous charters of the 14th and 15th century was smaller than a football field…"

"The Visoko region – location of the earliest historical traces of the Bosnian statehood
…The Visoko region is, in many ways, the heart of the historic Bosnia. It is home to the remains of over five different neolithic settlements1; of Illyrian and Roman ruins (fortifications and roads); of numerous medieval necropoleis of stecci (sing.: stecak; a particular form of Bosnian medieval tombstones, often decorated with reliefs and inscriptions). In addition, there is the nearby village of Muhasinovici, where a decorated plate with inscription of a famous 12th-century Bosnian ruler, Kulin ban, was found (also indicating remains of a church and settlement in the vicinity), as well as the village of Arnautovici (the medieval town of Mile where Bosnian 14-15th century kings were crowned) with the remains of King Tvrtko's royal and burial church. The remains of the royal medieval town of Visoki, a preserved national monument, sit right on top of the hill Osmanagic claims to be a pyramid and in the town of Visoko itself are three old Ottoman mosques and the Orthodox church of St. Procopius, all national monuments. Even more important, this region is known for occasional and accidental archaeological finds that indicate yet more historical structures, but systematic long-term archaeological projects have never been carried out here.

The late Bosnian archaeologist, Mr. Pavo Andjelic, after years of studying the region, in the late 1980s proposed that the early medieval Bosnian town of Desnek should be searched for in that very area. Desnek and Katera are the first Bosnian urban settlements from the 10th century to be mentioned in a written historical source, the Byzantine scripts of Constantine Porphyrogenitos.These towns have not yet been located by the Bosnian archaeologists…"

eratoh wrote:thats from historyaid aka "andy campman". i'm pretty sure thats not his real name. he is a hugely prolific russian? fellow who seems to be trying to translate a library unless he's just an endless fountain of ... stuff

bulgars start here
http://historyaid.com/2005/07/32/the-mo ... a-trident/

The article contains the claim that the swastika and six-pointed star symbols were of bulgarian origin, which is not the main stream opinion. Do you know by any chance the basis for this claim? Thank you!

Irna wrote:Paul

did you see some of the last pictures on the Foundation web site, like this one http://www.piramidasunca.ba/news/23060602/P1010061.jpg or this one http://www.piramidasunca.ba/news/23060602/P1010056.jpg (it's in " Na isto?noj strani piramide otvorene nove probne sonde - 23.06.2006". I don't know how you call it in english, a folder ? ("pli" in french) ; it seems to me perfectly natural, there are a lot of this type of "folded" bedrocks near my home. But the Foundation thought them important enough to put them on the web site...

Having been preoccupied with planning for some field work, I have not noticed these figures. Thanks, for bringing them to my attention. At this time, I will likely disappear for a time and focus my attention on geologic mapping and, with luck, a short expedition into the local marshes and swamps in search of lost settlements and the Louisiana equivalent of a pyramid. Hopefully, I will find out how good I am at using GIS systems, remote sensing data, and common sense to differentiate between man-made and natural features. Regardless, the fun aspect about geology is there always comes a time, when the boss has to let out you of the office and pay you for hiking around the countryside far, far away from any computer console, blackberry, and other digital devices, except a camera and GPS unit.

The English terminology is "folds" or "folded strata". If you want to see pictures and diagrams explaining the terminology go to Google images at http://images.google.com/ and search using the either the terms "folds" and "geology" or "folds" and "structural". A person will find both pictures and diagrams of folds. A nice diagram illustrating the different fold types and terminology can be found in a "A GEOLOGICAL TRANSECT FROM NEW YORK CITY TO NEW JERSEY" at:

http://www.dukelabs.com/Abstracts%20and ... age003.jpg and http://www.dukelabs.com/Abstracts%20and ... al0209.htm

The manual also explains folds.

Best Regards,

Paul

Hello Paul, A page or so ago I asked you a question. How do you define a pyramid? Thanks.