From: William Treurniet <wtreurniet.nul> Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2012 17:24:42 -0400 Archived: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 18:29:30 -0400 Subject: Re: Ancient Aliens Debunked >From: Dave Haith <visions1.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <post.nul> >Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2012 00:38:48 +0100 >Subject: Ancient Aliens Debunked >http://tinyurl.com/9mpla2s >I know the flaws in Von Daniken's works have been exposed years >ago - all that stuff about UFO landing strips (since when have >saucers needed runways?) and models of ancient planes which are >obviously stylised birds. >But I've fondly clung to the unsolveable mysteries of gigantic >stone monuments that couldn't be moved without some lost >technology. >So when I settled down to watch this debunk of Ancient Aliens I >expected it to be the usual narrow minded cherry picking from >the sceptical crowd who can't think out of the box. >I haven't watched all three hours yet but I found myself >agreeing with just about all I viewed. >I'm still not totally convinced that 800 ton blocks could have >been moved just by brute force and cut to such precision with >primitive tools - but who knows? >I certainly don't anymore...... >I do know it doesn't need aliens to make complex crop formations >so maybe the good old human race can rustle up a pyramid or two >with enough slaves to do the work..... >For once I consider a sceptical piece provides a very valid >'balance' to a controversial TV series. >But I'm interested whether others think so too. I finally got around to watching the video. On the whole, it was good and I think it should be watched by anyone who has seen the Ancient Aliens series. Some reasonable alternatives to alien origins were presented. But I think some of its conclusions are also unlikely given information not discussed by either source. Llyod Pye makes the point that given the three Great Pyramids were constructed in about 100 years, it would have required fitting a stone every 8.5 minutes, 24/7, with no down time. The stones are from 10 tons up to 50 tons. Could the proposed internal ramp have handled such a rate? Assuming the man-power was available, laying one stone of that size every 8.5 minutes for 100 years is hard to imagine without the use of some additional sophisticated technology. http://www.lloydpye.com/flash/12-megaliths.swf Pye also discusses the stonework at Sacsayhuaman, Peru. The following is largely quoted from his page at http://tinyurl.com/8dwjpos Archaeologists say that hard rock hammered the stones into shape and polished them. When granite is polished, the softer elements in the rock wear down first, leaving microscopic and near microscopic quartz crystals protruding. When a "wedging" technique is used (when a wedge is fed into a crack or groove in the stone and used as leverage to fracture it), the direction of the fracture can't be controlled. Dr. Ivan Watkins, a Professor of Geology at St. Cloud University in Minnesota says that pounding, hammering, grinding, polishing with abrasives, and wedging, just don't match up with what he sees under the microscope. The stone is smooth, microscopically slick and even. The explanation given by Watkins is that heat can melt quartz fragments into a glaze that fills in the irregularities, like a ceramic glaze. The exact same sort of "melting" effect is produced by modern "thermal disaggregation" technology, essentially the focused heat found in lasers, which can be used to cut stone. So who did it, ancient aliens or humans? Switching topics, I thought if his argument about UFOs in art had been taken as far as it could have been, it might have supported the Ancient Aliens interpretation. He argues that medieval art is nothing but religious art, i.e., a circle of angels was drawn to look like a disc. But where did the idea of a circle of angels come from? One could argue that an actual disc object inspired the circle of angels, since the latter was something more familiar to religious artists. So who inspired the drawings, aliens in craft or religious imagery. Switching topics again, with respect to the Mitchell-Hedges crystal skull, he talks of the deceit surrounding the skull's acquisition and movements, but fails to mention a physical analysis by Hewlet-Packard which found it was made out of a single block of natural quartz crystal. There were no tool marks under high magnification, so it was not a modern creation. The conclusion was it had been made by hand over a period of several generations. Also, the jaw was a separate piece that had been cut from the same crystal - apparently almost impossible to do. One scientist concluded that for technical reasons, the skull should not exist. Any errors would have required starting over. Who had the expertise to grind and polish a single block that size - ancient aliens or multiple humans over generations? Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp