11,000 B.C. Extinction

Historic planetary instability and catastrophe. Evidence for electrical scarring on planets and moons. Electrical events in today's solar system. Electric Earth.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: 11,000 B.C. Extinction

Unread postby Chromium6 » Fri May 11, 2012 10:20 pm

"Zep Tepi" - Egyptian Creation Myths
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... gQ42zHipY#!

Monuments to Life - Robert Bauval: The Sphinx
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZA9JysD5ASk
On the Windhexe: ''An engineer could not have invented this,'' Winsness says. ''As an engineer, you don't try anything that's theoretically impossible.''
Chromium6
 
Posts: 534
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 5:48 pm

Re: 11,000 B.C. Extinction

Unread postby Chromium6 » Sat May 12, 2012 5:12 pm

If the "Gold Capstones" for the Giza Pyramids really existed, it would radiate the "eye" of the Sun at particular times of the year. I'm sure the "priestly" class of the ancients enjoyed watching the illumination at the top of the limestone masonry... as above so below. The "eye" and predicting it, probably left a good impression on the servile "builders" led by these rulers. I guess "they" built the Giza Pyramids to warn them of when they would loose "control" of the "heavens" and possibly the "crowd" as chaos ensued. ;)
On the Windhexe: ''An engineer could not have invented this,'' Winsness says. ''As an engineer, you don't try anything that's theoretically impossible.''
Chromium6
 
Posts: 534
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 5:48 pm

Re: 11,000 B.C. Extinction

Unread postby Chromium6 » Sun May 13, 2012 12:20 am

The Azores Triple Junction is about right where Plato said Atlantis was about the time of the Pole-Shift:
http://www.missionatlantis.com/atlantis ... eology.pdf

A Georgian-Russian researcher's perspective:
http://www.cosmogeology.ge/chapter-%2833%29.pdf
On the Windhexe: ''An engineer could not have invented this,'' Winsness says. ''As an engineer, you don't try anything that's theoretically impossible.''
Chromium6
 
Posts: 534
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 5:48 pm

Re: 11,000 B.C. Extinction

Unread postby Lloyd » Sun May 13, 2012 8:04 pm

Peratt via Talbott
Anaconda » Fri May 11, 2012 11:37 am:
- There is a substantial body of evidence to support a mechanism to introduce large amounts of energy into the Earth's crust & mantle which could account for the mass extinctions of 11,000 B. C.
- I subscribe to Dr. Anthony L. Peratt's theory that a High-Current, Z-Pinch Aurora enveloped the Earth and most likely has enveloped the Earth many times in the Earth's past.

Earth in a Vice
* That's a phrase Velikovsky used. I thought I posted a reply to your quote above, but I don't see it. I mentioned that Talbott is the one who told Peratt that many petroglyphs seem to resemble plasma phenomena, so Peratt likely knew also about Talbott's Saturn Theory, though he could not attribute catastrophic events in the past to Saturn, because it would have been too controversial. The image of Earth in a plasma flow, is suggestive of a Z-pinch, and it or something similar gave Fred Jueneman the idea that Earth may have been squeezed by such a Z-pinch, while following Saturn before and after entering the heliopause. That would have made Earth egg-shaped, until the Z-pinch ended, when it would have become spherical, expanding at the equator and shrinking along the polar axis, leaving evidence of "continental drift".
Lloyd
 
Posts: 4317
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: 11,000 B.C. Extinction

Unread postby webolife » Mon May 14, 2012 1:27 pm

I have a difficult time trying to visualize how anything could survive such a planet-squeezing plasma pinch, and we know from the fossil record that a majority of the varieties on earth died during the period to which we attribute continental drift [or earth expansion if that's your preconception]; yet many did survive... here we are :) --- how can this be justified? In particular, how is this justified in the short time frame represented by the title of this thread? I know how I think about this, but what about you?
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2516
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: 11,000 B.C. Extinction

Unread postby seasmith » Mon May 14, 2012 7:23 pm

~
37kyo Carving of Interplanetary Plasma Tube ??

Image

http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2 ... tml?ref=em

zotz de zeus
seasmith
 
Posts: 2813
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: 11,000 B.C. Extinction

Unread postby Chromium6 » Tue May 15, 2012 8:18 pm

seasmith wrote:~
37kyo Carving of Interplanetary Plasma Tube ??

Image

http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2 ... tml?ref=em

zotz de zeus


Well seasmith, that kind of reminds me of a guy with a "hot" girl writing about it later? ;) Personally, I don't hold the EU effects and Pole-shift effects as mutually exclusive. If one was documented as fact, then the other is likely documented as fact as well. EU effects do "A" while Pole-Shift effects do "B" within a few hundred years. If 2012 goes down without a "bang", I'll eat humble grapes. ;)
On the Windhexe: ''An engineer could not have invented this,'' Winsness says. ''As an engineer, you don't try anything that's theoretically impossible.''
Chromium6
 
Posts: 534
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 5:48 pm

Re: 11,000 B.C. Extinction

Unread postby seasmith » Wed May 16, 2012 9:08 am

Well seasmith, that kind of reminds me of a guy with a "hot" girl writing about it later?
-chromium6

A big, fat, Round one ? ;)

Of course we'll never know, but i was struck by the carefully chiseled roundness.
Given the penchant for ancient humans to anthropomorphize celestial events, and the fecundity they ascribed to celestial deities, there could be some mixed metaphors there.

~
seasmith
 
Posts: 2813
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: 11,000 B.C. Extinction

Unread postby Chromium6 » Wed May 16, 2012 9:00 pm

Six hundred years after Herodotus, the Roman scholar Pomponious Melas recorded in "De Situ Orbis" that:

"The Egyptians pride themselves on being the most ancient peoples in the world. In their authentic annals one may read that since they have been in existence, the course of the stars has changed direction four times, and that the sun has set twice in the part of the sky where it rises today."

if precession ref 8 - then maybe 39,000 years.


6) The Palermo Stone and the Torino Papyrus both give lineages of the first known rulers of Egypt, of the Old Kingdom.

The Palermo Stone contains a reference to a calendar of 320 days supposedly used sometime early in the Old Kingdom.

http://www.perceptions.couk.com/sphy.html
On the Windhexe: ''An engineer could not have invented this,'' Winsness says. ''As an engineer, you don't try anything that's theoretically impossible.''
Chromium6
 
Posts: 534
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 5:48 pm

Re: 11,000 B.C. Extinction

Unread postby seasmith » Thu May 17, 2012 7:03 am

~
A New Count of Potentially Hazardous Asteroids


May 16, 2012: Observations from NASA's Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE)
The new analysis suggests that about twice as many PHAs as previously thought reside in low-inclination orbits, which are roughly aligned with the plane of Earth's orbit.

...

The NEOWISE analysis suggests a possible origin for the low-inclinaton PHAs: Many of them could have originated from a collision between two asteroids in the main belt lying between Mars and Jupiter. A larger body with a low-inclination orbit may have broken up in the main belt, causing some of the fragments to drift into orbits closer to Earth and eventually become PHAs.


http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/sc ... 16may_pha/
seasmith
 
Posts: 2813
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: 11,000 B.C. Extinction

Unread postby Chromium6 » Thu May 17, 2012 7:09 pm

We could be at the doorsteps of another Ice Age
By F. Guimaraes

Recent studies and observations indicate that we’re entering a phase of very low solar cycles. The present cycle C24 is already showing signs of being lower than C14 at the beginning of the XX century ( http://www.leif.org/research/Polar%20Fi ... e%2024.pdf
and http://www.leif.org/research/SC14-and-24.png ), and cycle C5 at the lower point of the Dalton minimum ( http://www.landscheidt.info/images/sc5_sc24.png ).

This means that C24 is showing signs that we could be entering a new Maunder minimum anytime soon.

The polar fields should have flipped at the end of cycle C23, around 2008-2009, but they continued with the same polarity, showing a stretched pattern ( http://www.leif.org/research/Solar-Pola ... 66-now.png ) similar to what happened at the end of the 1960′s but more pronounced, which could lead to “break” of the field into a “quadripolar” mode very soon.

This is another indication of the very low intensity of the present cycle.

This low intensity could lead to a period of no sunspots as observed during the Maunder minimum between ~ 1640 to 1710 ( http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... umbers.png ), which could be the realization of the so called “Livingston-Penn” effect, which predicts a similar phenomenon in the near future (
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress. ... spots2.pdf
and http://www.leif.org/research/Livingston ... %20far.pdf ).

Therefore, all the above and other analyzes (there is more, eg., the pattern of 90k-10k years characteristic of Glacial and Interglacial periods, etc.) indicate that the prediction of a “kill shot” from the Sun by Patrick Geryl and others, will not happen, quite the opposite: we could be at the doorsteps of another Ice Age.

When asked what he thought of the “kill shot” model during our times, Leif Svaalgard called it “sensationalism”.

Robert’s book “Not by Fire but by Ice” has it’s name for a reason. People are being lured to look in the wrong direction by MSM, IPCC and others, but the facts are very clear and show a completely different problem that humanity will have to face very soon.

A problem of much colder weather worldwide, not hotter.


http://iceagenow.info/2012/05/doorsteps-ice-age/
http://iceagenow.info/2012/05/heading-i ... physicist/
On the Windhexe: ''An engineer could not have invented this,'' Winsness says. ''As an engineer, you don't try anything that's theoretically impossible.''
Chromium6
 
Posts: 534
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 5:48 pm

Re: 11,000 B.C. Extinction

Unread postby kell1990 » Thu May 17, 2012 10:42 pm

seasmith wrote:~
A New Count of Potentially Hazardous Asteroids


May 16, 2012: Observations from NASA's Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE)
The new analysis suggests that about twice as many PHAs as previously thought reside in low-inclination orbits, which are roughly aligned with the plane of Earth's orbit.

...

The NEOWISE analysis suggests a possible origin for the low-inclinaton PHAs: Many of them could have originated from a collision between two asteroids in the main belt lying between Mars and Jupiter. A larger body with a low-inclination orbit may have broken up in the main belt, causing some of the fragments to drift into orbits closer to Earth and eventually become PHAs.


Could someone explain why the fragments floating around between Mars and Jupiter aren't the remains of at least one planet that was smashed by another celestial object> Mathematically, another object should be there, not as cloud of debris.

Does anyone have a good explanation as to why there is this cloud of debris there? If it isn't the result of a previous collision?

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/sc ... 16may_pha/
kell1990
Guest
 

Re: 11,000 B.C. Extinction

Unread postby webolife » Fri May 18, 2012 2:20 pm

Some Lagrangian type considerations indicate the likelihood that the gravitational tug of war between Jupiter and the Sun make the asteroid zone a fairly thin ridge for anything substantial to sit upon. But I am not opposed to a collision scenario; or the idea that a number of the objects, incl our own moon, now orbiting other planets were once eccentric asteroids that were gravitationally captured by the more massive planets.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2516
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: 11,000 B.C. Extinction

Unread postby Chromium6 » Wed May 23, 2012 8:42 pm

Hancock is not always the best source...

but always keep in mind the Dixon Relics that were found in the Giza Pyramid... should be able to predict a fairly reasonable "precession" date like 2012:

http://www.viewzone.com/crichton.html

Image
----------
Image
Axial precession

This article is about the astronomical concept. For precession of the axes outside of astronomy, see Precession.
For other types of astronomical precession, see Precession#Astronomy.
Precessional movement of the Earth. The Earth rotates (white arrows) once a day about its axis of rotation (red). This axis itself rotates slowly (white circle), completing a rotation in approximately 26,000 years.

In astronomy, axial precession is a gravity-induced, slow and continuous change in the orientation of an astronomical body's rotational axis. In particular, it refers to the gradual shift in the orientation of Earth's axis of rotation, which, like a wobbling top, traces out a pair of cones joined at their apices in a cycle of approximately 26,000 years [1] (called a Great or Platonic Year in astrology). The term "precession" typically refers only to this largest secular motion; other changes in the alignment of Earth's axis — nutation and polar motion — are much smaller in magnitude.

Earth's precession was historically called precession of the equinoxes because the equinoxes moved westward along the ecliptic relative to the fixed stars, opposite to the motion of the Sun along the ecliptic. This term is still used in non-technical discussions, that is, when detailed mathematics are absent. Historically,[2] Hipparchus is credited with discovering precession of the equinoxes. The exact dates of his life are not known, but astronomical observations attributed to him by Ptolemy date from 147 BC to 127 BC.

With improvements in the ability to calculate the gravitational force between planets during the first half of the 19th century, it was recognized that the ecliptic itself moved slightly, which was named planetary precession as early as 1863, while the dominant component was named lunisolar precession.[3] Their combination was named general precession instead of precession of the equinoxes. Lunisolar precession is caused by the gravitational forces of the Moon and Sun on Earth's equatorial bulge, causing Earth's axis to move with respect to inertial space. Planetary precession (actually an advance) is due to the small angle between the gravitational force of the other planets on Earth and its orbital plane (the ecliptic), causing the plane of the ecliptic to shift slightly relative to inertial space. Lunisolar precession is about 500 times larger than planetary precession.[4] In addition to the Moon and Sun, the other planets also cause a small movement of Earth's axis in inertial space, making the contrast in the terms lunisolar versus planetary misleading, so in 2006 the International Astronomical Union recommended that the dominant component be renamed the precession of the equator and the minor component be renamed precession of the ecliptic, but their combination is still named general precession.[5]


Effects

The precession of the Earth's axis has a number of observable effects. First, the positions of the south and north celestial poles appear to move in circles against the space-fixed backdrop of stars, completing one circuit in 25,772 Julian years (2000 rate). Thus, while today the star Polaris lies approximately at the north celestial pole, this will change over time, and other stars will become the "north star".[2] The south celestial pole currently lacks a bright star to mark its position, but over time precession will also cause bright stars to become south stars. As the celestial poles shift, there is a corresponding gradual shift in the apparent orientation of the whole star field, as viewed from a particular position on Earth.

Secondly, the position of the Earth in its orbit around the Sun at the solstices, equinoxes, or other time defined relative to the seasons, slowly changes.[2] For example, suppose that the Earth's orbital position is marked at the summer solstice, when the Earth's axial tilt is pointing directly towards the Sun. One full orbit later, when the Sun has returned to the same apparent position relative to the background stars, the Earth's axial tilt is not now directly towards the Sun: because of the effects of precession, it is a little way "beyond" this. In other words, the solstice occurred a little earlier in the orbit. Thus, the tropical year, measuring the cycle of seasons (for example, the time from solstice to solstice, or equinox to equinox), is about 20 minutes shorter than the sidereal year, which is measured by the Sun's apparent position relative to the stars. Note that 20 minutes per year is approximately equivalent to one year per 25,772 years, so after one full cycle of 25,772 years the positions of the seasons relative to the orbit are "back where they started". (In actuality, other effects also slowly change the shape and orientation of the Earth's orbit, and these, in combination with precession, create various cycles of differing periods; see also Milankovitch cycles. The magnitude of the Earth's tilt, as opposed to merely its orientation, also changes slowly over time, but this effect is not attributed directly to precession.)

For identical reasons, the apparent position of the Sun relative to the backdrop of the stars at some seasonally fixed time, say the vernal equinox, slowly regresses a full 360° through all twelve traditional constellations of the zodiac, at the rate of about 50.3 seconds of arc per year (approximately 360 degrees divided by 25,772), or 1 degree every 71.6 years.

For further details, see Changing pole stars and Polar shift and equinoxes shift, below.

History

Hellenistic world
Hipparchus

Though there is still-controversial evidence that Aristarchus of Samos possessed distinct values for the sidereal and tropical years as early as c. 280 BC,[6] the discovery of precession is usually attributed to Hipparchus (190–120 BC) of Rhodes or Nicaea, a Greek astronomer. According to Ptolemy's Almagest, Hipparchus measured the longitude of Spica and other bright stars. Comparing his measurements with data from his predecessors, Timocharis (320–260 BC) and Aristillus (~280 BC), he concluded that Spica had moved 2° relative to the autumnal equinox. He also compared the lengths of the tropical year (the time it takes the Sun to return to an equinox) and the sidereal year (the time it takes the Sun to return to a fixed star), and found a slight discrepancy. Hipparchus concluded that the equinoxes were moving ("precessing") through the zodiac, and that the rate of precession was not less than 1° in a century, in other words completing a full cycle in no more than 36000 years.

Virtually all Hipparchus' writings are lost, including his work on precession. They are mentioned by Ptolemy, who explains precession as the rotation of the celestial sphere around a motionless Earth. It is reasonable to assume that Hipparchus, like Ptolemy, thought of precession in geocentric terms as a motion of the heavens.
Ptolemy

The first astronomer known to have continued Hipparchus' work on precession is Ptolemy in the 2nd century. Ptolemy measured the longitudes of Regulus, Spica, and other bright stars with a variation of Hipparchus' lunar method that did not require eclipses. Before sunset, he measured the longitudinal arc separating the Moon from the Sun. Then, after sunset, he measured the arc from the Moon to the star. He used Hipparchus' model to calculate the Sun's longitude, and made corrections for the Moon's motion and its parallax (Evans 1998, pp. 251–255). Ptolemy compared his own observations with those made by Hipparchus, Menelaus of Alexandria, Timocharis, and Agrippa. He found that between Hipparchus' time and his own (about 265 years), the stars had moved 2°40', or 1° in 100 years (36" per year; the rate accepted today is about 50" per year or 1° in 72 years). He also confirmed that precession affected all fixed stars, not just those near the ecliptic, and his cycle had same period of 36000 years as found by Hipparchus.
Other authors

Most ancient authors did not mention precession and perhaps did not know of it. Besides Ptolemy, the list includes Proclus, who rejected precession, and Theon of Alexandria, a commentator on Ptolemy in the 4th century, who accepted Ptolemy's explanation. Theon also reports an alternate theory:

According to certain opinions ancient astrologers believe that from a certain epoch the solstitial signs have a motion of 8° in the order of the signs, after which they go back the same amount. . . . (Dreyer 1958, p. 204)

Instead of proceeding through the entire sequence of the zodiac, the equinoxes "trepidated" back and forth over an arc of 8°. The theory of trepidation is presented by Theon as an alternative to precession.
Alternative discovery theories
Babylonians

Various assertions have been made that other cultures discovered precession independent of Hipparchus. At one point it was suggested that the Babylonians may have known about precession. According to Al-Battani, the Chaldean astronomers had distinguished the tropical and sidereal year (the value of precession is equivalent to the difference between the tropical and sidereal years). He stated that they had, around 330 BC, an estimation for the length of the sidereal year to be SK = 365 days 6 hours 11 min (= 365.258 days) with an error of (about) 2 min. It was claimed by P. Schnabel in 1923 that Kidinnu theorized about precession in 315 BC. Otto Neugebauer's work on this issue in the 1950s superseded Schnabel's (and earlier, Kugler's) theory of a Babylonian discoverer of precession.[7]

In recent decades, the hypothesis was revived and amplified in de Santillana and von Dechend's Hamlet's Mill (Harvard University Press, 1969). In an application of extreme Panbabylonism to archaeoastronomy, they proposed that a Babylonian mythological account of the precession gave rise via diffusion to similar myths around the world, even as far away as China, Polynesia, and North America. While their theory has not been widely accepted in academia, it anticipated the recent popular revival of interest in precessional archeoastronomy.[citation needed]
Ancient Egyptians

Similar claims have been made that precession was known in Ancient Egypt prior to the time of Hipparchus, but these remain controversial. Some buildings in the Karnak temple complex, for instance, were allegedly oriented towards the point on the horizon where certain stars rose or set at key times of the year. A few centuries later, when precession made the orientations obsolete, the temples would be rebuilt. However, the observation that a stellar alignment has grown wrong does not mean that the Egyptians understood that the stars moved across the sky at the rate of about one degree per 72 years. Nonetheless, they kept accurate calendars and if they recorded the date of the temple reconstructions it would be a fairly simple matter to plot the rough precession rate. The Dendera Zodiac, a star-map from the Hathor temple at Dendera from a late (Ptolemaic) age, supposedly records precession of the equinoxes (Tompkins 1971). In any case, if the ancient Egyptians knew of precession, their knowledge is not recorded in surviving astronomical texts.

Michael Rice wrote in his Egypt's Legacy, "Whether or not the ancients knew of the mechanics of the Precession before its definition by Hipparchos the Bithynian in the second century BC is uncertain, but as dedicated watchers of the night sky they could not fail to be aware of its effects." (p. 128) Rice believes that "the Precession is fundamental to an understanding of what powered the development of Egypt" (p. 10), to the extent that "in a sense Egypt as a nation-state and the king of Egypt as a living god are the products of the realisation by the Egyptians of the astronomical changes effected by the immense apparent movement of the heavenly bodies which the Precession implies." (p. 56) Following Carl Gustav Jung, Rice says that "the evidence that the most refined astronomical observation was practised in Egypt in the third millennium BC (and probably even before that date) is clear from the precision with which the Pyramids at Giza are aligned to the cardinal points, a precision which could only have been achieved by their alignment with the stars. This fact alone makes Jung's belief in the Egyptians' knowledge of the Precession a good deal less speculative than once it seemed." (p. 31) The Egyptians also, says Rice, were "to alter the orientation of a temple when the star on whose position it had originally been set moved its position as a consequence of the Precession, something which seems to have happened several times during the New Kingdom." (p. 170)

The notion that an ancient Egyptian priestly elite tracked the precessional cycle over many thousands of years plays a central role in the theories expounded by Robert Bauval and Graham Hancock in their 1996 book Keeper of Genesis. The authors claim that the ancient Egyptians' monumental building projects functioned as a map of the heavens, and that associated rituals were an elaborate earthly acting-out of celestial events. In particular, the rituals symbolised the "turning back" of the precessional cycle to a remote ancestral time known as Zep Tepi ("first time") which, the authors calculate, dates to around 10,500 BC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_precession


Graham Hancock interview... (not always the best source but get a cup of coffee) ... and remember this is 2012. ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4k8pdJ2so4
On the Windhexe: ''An engineer could not have invented this,'' Winsness says. ''As an engineer, you don't try anything that's theoretically impossible.''
Chromium6
 
Posts: 534
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 5:48 pm

Re: 11,000 B.C. Extinction

Unread postby Chromium6 » Sat May 26, 2012 1:58 pm

This article mentions that a 12,000 year ago event likely destroyed Puma Punku.

Ancient Mysteries - Puma Punku in Tiahuanaco 95

By daveearley
See all 10 photos
The Ancient Structures

They are arguably the oldest, and most baffling ruins on the face of the Earth. It is hard to imagine how they did not come to be known as one of the wonders of the world like the Great Pyramid. Spectacular in its own right, the Great Pyramid is, yet it pales in comparison to the ruins of Puma Punku in Tiahuanaco, in South America.

The ruins of Puma Punku are one of four structures in the ancient city of Tiahuanaco. The others three structures are; The Akapana Pyramid, the Kalasasaya Platform, and the Subterranean Temple.

Even with modern day technology and information, these structures defy logic, and confound those who seek to solve the mysteries that lie within them. The ruins of Puma Punku are said to be the most fascinating, and most confusing of all.

Who built these structures?
How were these structures built?
Why were these structures built?

These are all questions on the minds of those researching these ancient structures, and they are not easily answerable, if they can even be answered at all.

Puma Punku

If pyramids were more than difficult to create several thousand years ago, then how much more difficult would it have been to build Puma Punku?

Puma Punku is believed to have once contained a great wharf, and a massive four part structure. Yet all that remains today are megalithic ruins from some cataclysmic event in history. A great earthquake? A comet that came too close to the Earth? A worldwide flood? These are all possible causes to the destruction of the once great structure that is now the ruins of Puma Punku.

Not only is there evidence to support the claim of a cataclysmic flood, but there is even evidence to support the theory that people once lived there before such a flood even occurred. The suspected flood could have happened somewhere around 12,000 years ago, and there is scientific evidence of tools, bones, and other material within flood alluvia, which suggests that a civilized people were there prior to any flood. Other evidence, that being carvings of bearded people that are not Andean, have been recorded throughout the area.

Could the ruins of Puma Punku be evidence of a long lost civilization?
What Makes The Ruins Unique?

It is highly unlikely that any of the stones in Puma Punku were cut using ancient stone cutting techniques, at least not those that we are aware of.

The stones in Puma Punku are made up of granite, and diorite, and the only stone that is harder that those two, is the diamond. If the people who built this place cut these stones using stone cutting techniques, then they would had to have used diamond tools.

If they didn't use diamonds to cut these stones, then what did they use?

Not only were these stones really hard to cut, but they are also extremely heavy. One of these stone ruins weighs in at about 800 tons! These are big stones, and they are really heavy. The nearest quarry is at least 10 miles away from the site of the ruins. How in the world did these people move these blocks that weighed many tons, and how were they able to form a structure with them?

With the technology that we currently have today, it would be extremely difficult to recreate the site of these ruins, if possible at all. If we can't do it, then how did these ancient people accomplish this task? This could have taken place anywhere from 500 b.c. all the way back to the Ice Age.

These ancient people had to have been very sophisticated, knowing astronomy, geomancy, and mathematics. However, there are no records of this work. To build a place like Puma Punku, there must have been significant planning, and writing involved, but there is no record of any of this.
Interlocking Stones

There is one more significant thing to mention regarding the ruins of Puma Punku. Not only were these stones cut somehow, but they were finely cut. The cuts on these stones are perfectly straight. The holes cored into these stones are perfect, and all of equal depth.

How is it that these ancient people were able to cut stones like this?

It is as if only master builders were allowed to come in and construct Puma Punku. All of the blocks are cut so that they interlock, and fit together like a puzzle. There is no mortar. There are only great stones that once fit together creating a structure some four levels high.

If these people could have moved these large stones to this precise location, then obviously they also had a way to place them one on top of another, but how in the world was this accomplished?

There are no trees in the area, the nearest quarry is at least 10 miles away, and we have no records as to how any of this could have been done. As far as most are concerned, there is no way that the Andean people could have done this 2500 years ago. If they couldn't have done it, how is it possible that an even older group of people accomplished it?
Who Did All This???

The simple answer; we have absolutely no idea who did all this, or even how they could have done it.

There have been a few suggestions, but as you could imagine, they are widely criticized for the most part.

One suggestion has been made that there had to have been some kind of ancient aliens who interceded on humanity's behalf, and our ancestors learned how to do all of this from them.

There are actual records of mythical origin, regarding gods and the part that they took in the creation of these places. Not sure how we have certain mythical records, yet no records of plans or writing that contributed to the creation of these places?

Another suggestion, is that a cataclysmic event such as a flood, wiped out these ancient peoples along with any records they may have kept. There is some evidence to support this suggestion. Perhaps these ancient people were technologically advanced at some point, and all but a few were wiped out by a major flood. The remnant would have had to start civilization all over again, and of course the ancient records would be lost.

These may be stretches of the imagination, but places like Puma Punku were constructed somehow, and if it would be very difficult for us today to build a place like Puma Punku, then how did these ancient people accomplish it?

Did they have advanced technology similar to ours, and then die off?

Maps have been found that would seem to support this theory. Maps such as the Piri Reis (1513), and the Oronteus Finaeus (1531), have been found that pre-date European discoveries. Not only are these maps precise, but they seem to claim that they are copies from even older maps.

These maps show the coastline of South America, rivers, and even part of Antarctica which was not thought to have been mapped until 1818. These maps contain landmarks, as well as depictions of the areas which appear to be very accurate. Some people don't believe that these maps could have been made without flying over these areas in the sky.

Just how much did these ancient people know, and what were they able to do?

The Bible records a worldwide flood that killed off everyone except for Noah, and his family. Some legends claim that there have been a total of 4 cataclysmic events that have wiped out the majority of the worlds population thus far.

Is this what happened to these ancient people who built Puma Punku?

To this day, it remains an ancient mystery.


http://daveearley.hubpages.com/hub/Anci ... Tiahuanaco
On the Windhexe: ''An engineer could not have invented this,'' Winsness says. ''As an engineer, you don't try anything that's theoretically impossible.''
Chromium6
 
Posts: 534
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 5:48 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Universe - Planetary Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests