Page 46 of 77
Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 2:00 pm
by Guest
we do know what was there on the hill as it has been mentioned several times. why is no one linking these stone 'paths' to the construction that was done previously?
these stones most likely would have been used for access to the castle or the roman builkding mentined already. these are not proof for a pyramid, these pictures only reinforce the naivity of the diggers and Os as they hold fast to their sinking ship.
look at the mortor used with those stone steps, looks too fresh to be 11,000 years old and also it looks very sloppy when you compare that to the pictures both minimalist and i have posted. ancient records and buildings demonstrate that ancient builders were not sloppy.
reply
Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 2:51 pm
by Guest
Minimalist wrote:
Hmmm.....I don't know about that one. The hill has been sitting there, ignored, for years and now because someone who is outside the club has started digging on it the club reacts by whining "we were going to dig there....someday."
To me that's just another facet of the "conspiracy theory" mentality. It's like the kid who takes his ball home because the rest of the gang refuse to let him call the shots.
Same with business; every time someone doesn't get a contract, they scream about "masonic conspiracies".
Minimalist wrote:They would have treated Heinrich Schliemann the same way
Except that when Schliemann was around, there was no "science" of archaeology. It was the hobby of antiquarianism, and still only a few decades old.
Minimalist wrote: I, for one, do not believe that nature could have formed 4 equal-sized slopes at the same angle by itself
Oh, I don't know. This looks pretty close-
www.liamlyons.com/rural9.htm
Re: reply
Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 3:09 pm
by Minimalist
RK Awl-O'Gist wrote:Minimalist wrote:
Hmmm.....I don't know about that one. The hill has been sitting there, ignored, for years and now because someone who is outside the club has started digging on it the club reacts by whining "we were going to dig there....someday."
To me that's just another facet of the "conspiracy theory" mentality. It's like the kid who takes his ball home because the rest of the gang refuse to let him call the shots.
Same with business; every time someone doesn't get a contract, they scream about "masonic conspiracies".
Actually, I think it's the exact opposite. The kids could have played with the ball anytime they wanted but until someone else picked it up and started playing with it, they weren't interested.
Minimalist wrote:They would have treated Heinrich Schliemann the same way
Except that when Schliemann was around, there was no "science" of archaeology. It was the hobby of antiquarianism, and still only a few decades old.
Totally agree and Schlieman did a lot of damage to Hisarlik... still, he was the one who had the vision. Being right makes up for a lot.
Minimalist wrote: I, for one, do not believe that nature could have formed 4 equal-sized slopes at the same angle by itself
Oh, I don't know. This looks pretty close-
www.liamlyons.com/rural9.htm
That's not a great picture but one side looks far more heavily eroded than the other, and the other two sides are not visible. That is actually what I would expect from nature where one side is exposed to the prevailing winds. Besides, you know what they say about "close."[/b]
reply
Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 3:38 pm
by Guest
Agreed, it's not a great picture, but you have to allow for it being distorted by the angle of perspective. Besides, it was the only one I could find of that hill!
The kids didn't have a ball to play with until someone brought one out. That doesn't mean the ball's owner gets to dictate rules & regulations.
Just because Osmanagich has decided to be first to dig that hill doesn't mean that he's right and every other archaeologist in the world is wrong. Most hold down academic jobs teaching the discipline, which is why they can't afford the time or money to drop everything and go excavate their favourite site willy-nilly. It's got sod-all to do with 'clubs', 'cliques' or any other paranoid crap.
Doesn't apply to rich Bosnian playboys with nothing else to do, of course.
Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 4:20 pm
by Minimalist
I think you are being a bit naive about academic politics, RK. They can be as vicious as any other kind.
Still the point remains that he has started digging and he is unlikely to stop so why not relax until he's finished. I rather doubt that he is going to find and destroy the Holy Grail up there.
reply
Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 4:23 pm
by Guest
With respect, I'm not; been there, done it.
Anyway, you're right about Osmanagich not being likely to stop anytime soon.
Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 4:32 pm
by Minimalist
Then you should know that there is nothing that an "expert" hates more than a dilettante.
I am reminded of the comment by one Frontinus, a Roman water commissioner, bragging about his aqueducts:
"With such an array of indispensable structures carrying so many waters, compare, if you will, the idle Pyramids or the useless, though famous, works of the Greeks!"
Since the Romans controlled the area for so long it seems unlikely that they would have built a "useless" pyramid.
reply
Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 2:57 am
by Guest
True!
DougWeller,
Remember the post you made in the Bosnian Pyramids Forum, when you asked for a translation of a Foundation document and were told it was an "agenda"? Any chance you could re-post your expose of Osmanagich's Board of Directors' "Old Pals Act" here?
Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 6:03 am
by Fortuneteller
100.000 years ago? Fascinating. Since the earliest Homo Sapiens Sapiens in Europe only go back about 40,000 years. That gives some insight into her knowledge.
Doug, She specialized in Paleolithic age, so I assumed she meant Neanderthals.
Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 8:54 am
by Frank Harrist
Nothing justifies his "slapdash" methods. A few test trenches and a few cores would tell them where they needed to dig. Just wholesale digging huge sections without screening the dirt or anything. Having tourists traipsing all over, moving huge stones to display in the town square. That ain't real archaeology. He's just rushing it too much and missing a lot of stuff, I'm sure. I want to see what's there too, but I don't condone his methods.
Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 9:01 am
by Frank Harrist
f9 wrote:Last pictures show paved structure.It is clear that have equal distance between stones all around,and have tipicaly cut in-out plates on top...probably with better finish.That means it is more technical solution
used probably 5 BC.I think that Sam have missed the point with piramyd theory.
In the period of 7 bc to 3 bc "spiritual centres"in the Balcans have not been centralised city but many smoll willages mostly on the hills overlooking the walley.Later ,when these willages have grown come up building of single main city.On some places some willages ceased to exsist
and latter only one or two of the willages become place where city have grown.There are at least 20 places with different stages in the development trought Balcans.This is time to time giveing trouble to pinpoint right location of the cities from antic times even there are topographical informations based on distances from road markings left from Roman times.
Probably Visocica(Sun hill) is antic spiritual city wich have carried exsistence trought time,and rest of the hills are willages wich have ceased
probably during Roman times,and no memory have been left for these sittlements.
It is shame that there are no involvment from wider archeological comunity in Bosnia even Mr Osmanagich have asked them numerus times.
All this force and entusiasm can be usefuly used if there have been positive force throught.Even if there are no pyramid...this locations are of real prima importance for archeology.There are important reason for this.
Latter between 3 and 7 c AD these willages on the hills have been places where early christians have settled down building early christian basilics on and from the same material from these previous willages.basicaly from these have grown European civilisation what we know today.
Just a comment and I mean no offense. This guy sounds like Chehkov from Star Trek. I think it's cool. "Willage" lol. Sounds like he knows what he's talking about, though. I am not making fun of you, F9. I just like your accent, even in print it comes through.
Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 9:12 am
by Minimalist
Chekhov was cool!
Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 10:34 am
by Ciko
ehen you look at this photos you think this is horisontal placed stone blocks ,and you ask yourself howcan this be a pyramid
but when you see it from the side it looks like this
reply
Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 11:39 am
by Guest
Yes-it's
even more obvious that we're looking at bedrock, and not any kind of man-made structure.
Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 11:42 am
by Frank Harrist
Ciko, how old are you? You seem convinced. My problem isn't with you or even the possibility that this may be a pyramid. My problem is the unprofessional manner in which the dig is being carried out. On a real archaeological dig tourists aren't allowed to just walk around all over everything. Things are laid out square so that the placement of artifacts can be recorded. Huge oddly shaped swathes of earth aren't just dug up haphazardly. This is a circus sideshow conducted by the PT Barnum of Boznia. I find it difficult to believe that there are any pros there.