Page 47 of 57
Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 9:55 am
by marduk
Just because the Club says that the Egyptians could not do it that way does not make it true
oh
and because a journalist who writes books which have been completely debunked by experts says they can that makes it true
what an amusing double standard you demonstrate there min
Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 12:19 pm
by Digit
And when experts improve their record I'll start believing everything they tell me simply because they say so.
Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 5:08 pm
by Beagle
Minimalist wrote:Good point.
As I recall, 10,500 BC (or so) marked the lowest point in the sky for the constellation of Orion. Beginning a 26,000 year precessional cycle from that point ( The First Time? The time of the gods??) It rises for 13,000 years relative to the horizon before beginning the slow descent. Bauval wants us to believe that the Egyptians knew this because they were watching the skies as far back as the eleventh millenia BC... even though they didn't start building the pyramids until the 3'd millenia bc.)
Hancock theorizes some sort of secret society which maintained the knowledge for all those years but it is hard to envision any human enterprise succeeding for that long. We don't seem to have the stick-to-it-ivness for such long term projects.
Besides, in addition to the world wide flood myths there are other myths which were widespread. Many cultures had a notion of a time when the gods lived among men ( a Golden Age, if you will) and, as Von Daniken pointed out, the notion of a war in the heavens shows up in a lot of places, too.
Forgetting the war in the heavens for the moment, the idea of the gods living among men is somewhat novel. Only christians ever came up with a corporeal god...I think as a marketing technique, but that's just me. Most other religions are content to have their invisible man in the sky with just an occasional prophet (or huckster) showing up to pass the word along to the rubes.
Yet, supposedly primitive men in random places looked back to a time when lots of gods walked the earth. Interesting.
GH finishes this small section by talking about the legends of the Viracocha people. Among those legends are that the Viracochas leave "after the deluge", traveling by sea.
Also mildly interesting, way back on page 91, at the bottom, Hancock cites the work of Ivan Guzman de Rojas, a Bolivian computer scientist from the '80s, who theorized that the Aymaran language was algorithmic, and was in fact a bridge language. You can re-read the rest if your interested.
It seems now, that GH begins his conversation with J.A. West.
Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 10:11 pm
by Minimalist
Tiahuanaco is a mystery. Who would build a city near a lake without being on the lake? Of course, as the water receded they could have built a road to try to keep up with the falling water but that has a kind of Keystone Kops image to it.
Anyway, this study:
http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:yZR ... cd=6&gl=us
discharges into Lake Poopo in the more arid central Altiplano. During the late Quatern-ary the Rio Desaguadero valley was the site of several generations of palaeolakes and wetlands thatformed during periods of increased precipitation and local runoff, augmented by increased overflowfrom Lake Titicaca. Sediments recovered by drilling in eight localities along the 390-km long valley ofthe Rio Desaguadero yield a regional history of lacustrine sedimentation and effective precipitation.Lacustrine strata in the drill cores record 12 distinct wet periods in the past 50 000 years. Four of thesewet periods resulted in the formation of major palaeolakes in the Rio Desaguadero valley: duringthe last glacial maximum from before 20 000 to 16 000 cal. yr BP, during the late glacial fromabout 14 000 to 12 000 cal. yr BP, in the early Holocene from about 10 000 to 7900cal. yr BP, andin the late Holocene from 4500cal. yr BP to present. The period that appears to have beenmost arid was between 7900 and 4500 cal. yr BP.
So, it seems that from 20,000 BC down to 7,900 there was plenty of time for Posnansky's Tiahuanaco to have developed along the banks of this large lake.
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 4:57 am
by marduk
And when experts improve their record I'll start believing everything they tell me simply because they say so.
so until then you'll accept anything Hancock says because hes making money form saying so
nice
double standard again
if youre going to trust anyone Roy you'd best trust someone who isn't talking out of their ass and laughing at you for being so gullible and for not looking at the facts yourself
lets hope that as you get older you don't need surgery of any kind
still I'm sure that as you won't trust a real surgeon that guy in the fruit market will do any op you need for half the price
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 5:39 am
by Digit
I had the surgery earlier this week actually Marduk but it wasn't on my brain, and when you'ved lived long enough to look back on some of the present day ideas you will have as little faith in their pronouncements as myself.
For example. Pterosaurs can't fly. Dinos are cold blooded lizards. South America could never have been joined to Africa. Iguanadon had a horn on its nose. Diplodocus waded into water to support its weight, could not have been a land dweller. Trains running freely through Box Hill tunnel would reach 150mph and everybody would die. The universe is static not expanding. Newton studied alchemy and and astrology. etc etc.
Not a particularly good record is it? And many who made those pronouncements made money out of them and reputations as well.
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 6:42 am
by Forum Monk
Its an oft repeating theme in these pages, Digit. Today's big idea, is tomorrow's red face. Seems there are very few absolutes in science. I wouldn't be surprised if one day, a realm is discovered where mathematical axioms are no longer absolute.
Each generation thinks they have a patent on the answers. Probably the only absolute is, time changes everything.
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 6:49 am
by Forum Monk
marduk wrote:so until then you'll accept anything Hancock says because hes making money form saying so
After reading the articles at SkepticWiki, for example, I wonder if the money is still rolling in. Von Daniken recently had his enterprises go bankrupt.
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 6:51 am
by Digit
Hi Monk. That is of course the view point I was trying to impress on Marduk. In some cases the greater the support the greater the amount of egg on ones face.
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 6:57 am
by Forum Monk
btw Digit, I noticed you were absent for a while, but didn't realize you had surgery. Hope you have a speedy and satisfactory recover.
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 7:00 am
by Digit
Thanks Monk. Appreciated.
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 7:13 am
by marduk
Hi Monk. That is of course the view point I was trying to impress on Marduk. In some cases the greater the support the greater the amount of egg on ones face.
so your surgery was done by the local vegetable seller then was it
you're being such a hippocrite you can't see it
as science progresses they make less and less mistakes
this is whats known as scientific method where you build on what you have learned
youre pronouncement that south american ruins are far older than what orthodox science claims is built on what exactly ?
1) how long have you studied those ruins
2) which published works from experts have you read on the age of the ruins
3) what evidence do you have that said ruins are older than is claimed for them
see what you basically did was just proclaimed Graham Hancock the leading edge in dating research
he isn't
hes the thumb on the iguanodonts nose
he bases his research on claims made by other pseudohistorians from decades ago
so what you are doing basically to give you a metaphor with your surgery is jumping in a time machine and letting a surgeon from the 1950s carry out the op
now pardon me for saying so but imo this makes you some kind of world class idiot if thats the approach you want to take with your health
and world class idiots is exactly the readership that Hancocks crap is aimed at
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 7:28 am
by Digit
Er, Marduk, it wasn't my eyes that were worked on either, but as I am blind in one eye perhaps you would be so good as point me in the direction of where I said anything at all about anciest ruins anywhere old chap.
As for studying let me make a simple observation for you. According to one group global warming is man made. Another group states that it is part of a natural cycle.
One group says the Hobbits are a new species, another groups says that they are not.
Please explain to a mere mortal how to decide which group is correct, as unless you have carried out any independent research on site, or of the remains etc you, like the rest of us, have to work with the info released by the opposing groups.
If you are tying your banner to either group in my examples please explain how you arrive at the decision.
Head or tales perhaps?
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 7:49 am
by marduk
Please explain to a mere mortal how to decide which group is correct
Roy this discussion is not about Hobbits or Global warming
it is about Hancocks claim that Tiahuanaco is older than orthodox scientists claim
maybe you should read the last post before you randomly state your opinion
If you are tying your banner to either group in my examples please explain how you arrive at the decision.
Head or tales perhaps?
what made you decide on surgery ?
same question
same answer
an expert told you didn't he
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 8:57 am
by Digit
Agreed Marduk, it wasn't about GW or Hobbits, neither were my comments about ruins, but about the experts who not infrequently get things wrong.
Concerning doctors, I was a few years ago being treated for conjunctivitis, 3 wks later I woke up blind in one eye!