How did ancient peoples know "so much"?

[kevin]

Altonhare,
Pyramids,
If You are researching them I hope you realise there are some 45,000 known in the americas alone?
I would recommend you concentrate on the mica at teotihuacan, and ponder why they would, and how they would utilise specific mica from 2,000 miles away?
I consider immense knowledge far in advance of what is COMMONLY known now was employed by the pyramid builders, and the accumulation the aether is involved, all the talk of burial and rituals is a cover, or veil, for the sheep.
Kevin

[junglelord]

Altonhare,
Pyramids,
If You are researching them I hope you realise there are some 45,000 known in the americas alone?
I would recommend you concentrate on the mica at teotihuacan, and ponder why they would, and how they would utilise specific mica from 2,000 miles away?
I consider immense knowledge far in advance of what is COMMONLY known now was employed by the pyramid builders, and the accumulation the aether is involved, all the talk of burial and rituals is a cover, or veil, for the sheep.
Kevin

You the man Kevin, keep telling the sheep to wake up, its going to happen.
We are the good stewards telling of period of enlightenment.

[junglelord]

Altonhare,
Pyramids,
If You are researching them I hope you realise there are some 45,000 known in the americas alone?
I would recommend you concentrate on the mica at teotihuacan, and ponder why they would, and how they would utilise specific mica from 2,000 miles away?
I consider immense knowledge far in advance of what is COMMONLY known now was employed by the pyramid builders, and the accumulation the aether is involved, all the talk of burial and rituals is a cover, or veil, for the sheep.
Kevin

You the man Kevin, keep telling the sheep to wake up, its going to happen.
We are the good stewards telling of the period of enlightenment.

[kevin]

Junglelord,
I KNOW why these buildings are positioned and sized as they are, as I do with the megalithic structures and churchs and cathedrals.
The geometry is utilised to match precisely the buildings to match exactly what is relevant to the geometry at that area about the sphere of the planet.
The finer geometry involved is also to match harmonically with the geometry, these in mexico are 4pi height to base.
All of the sculptures on these buildings are clear to myself, because I KNOW.I have the ultimate advantage, I utilise the available senses, the vast majority of people don't, I suspect that is by design for good reason/s.

Most people think in a negative conspirecy way, I try to work out the consequences of such as our present military having hold of this knowledge, so as exciting and natural as it is to drive forward with the re-discovery of what past people have known, it needs to be tempered with the consequences.
I sense a higher intelligence guiding the release of this information, with the ultimate ability to squash it's miss-use instantly.
the weaponisation of the aether will make nuclear seem like sparklers.

The miss-use of this knowledge lies at the core of it's sudden loss imo.
http://www.philipcoppens.com/orionimage.html
http://greatpyramidmystery.com/Archaeol ... erica.html

All of the names of these sites are ASSUMPTIONS, made by those who cannot see.
Think electrically and harmonically with the refractive index of each material utilised and where it is utilised been central to the manipulation of the aether flowing, it is easily manipulated and acts symbiotically with all it has created, it made everything, if you therefore mirror precisely its geometry with materials positioned exactly to match and to control , then those that cannot see will think in terms of water flows, as they can see the water, but I can see the aether flows, therefore sluices and moveable gateways take on adifferent usage to my strange view of this system.

I assure you that each specific material refracts /deflects the aether in a detectable direction, and that will be to a match of that specific materials cellulaer index, often shown with light, but light is not all it appears.
The hard to grasp involvement of many people because of our human FIELDS ability to also do this , especially when concentrated in crowds of people will be the basis of religious gatherings, think how a flock of birds react together, or a shoal of fish, think football crowds.
Kevin

[Grey Cloud]

Hi Gary,
I have no problem with Atlantis or some of the other individual elements of Tsarion's 'theory'. What gets my goat with these authors is that they just assemble as many buzz words together as possible and Tsarion is a good example: aliens, DNA, Quantum, Jesus, Grail, Atlantis, Gnosis, Alchemy, Qabala, etc. Although Tsarion name dropped the likes of Plato, Aristotle, Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, etc it is obvious that he has never read any of them. Instead he quotes come mostly from other modern alternative researchers.
There was quite a long 'recommended reading' list at the end and I will be checking it out as there were a lot of texts that I had not heard of.
As a last thought: As far as I recall there is no mention of evil magicians or uber technology in Plato's account of Atlantis.

[Grey Cloud]

Here's another couple of essays on the Pyramids:
The Gravity Cubit
http://www.grahamhancock.com/forum/CreightonS5.php?p=1

The Celestial Spheres of the Great Pyramid; The Truth Behind the Legends
http://www.grahamhancock.com/forum/FordR1.php?p=1

The first one features Alton's pendulum. For all you maths bods: would it not be possible to obtain the length of the forearm/cubit from this:

Vitruvian Man

[kevin]

Grey cloud,
The question of MEASURE has had me checking and checking what I detect endlessly, especially such as prof Thoms created and back engineered measure.

I consider that all of creation is upon a matrix of fixed measure, therefore from many points within that system a MATCH for the measure can be deduced by many various and fantastic devices, BUT, it is the absolute all permeating system that I concentrate upon.
I KNOW why the churchs etc are positioned where they are, and revel in finding ones that don't quite fit, there are several near me here, one is in a village called Radway (Knights templar land?) I went checking the church and found it out of place, not quite positioned in the village as I KNOW where they should be, luckily a lady saw me wandering around it and asked what I was doing, I explained and She said "Maybe you will find where it should be , where it was before they moved it to here"
I showed her where my rods pointed to to where I thought it should be, and She agreed, I went off to that spot to find an empty plot marked as the former site of the church before been moved in the mid 1800's.
There's another re-build in banbury, and it is aprox 18 inchs out of position, it is always crumbling and doesn't FEEL right.

They had obviously forgotten the knowledge of why the churchs were placed precisely where they are, and it's all to do with the available geometry and electrical transfer that occurs at very specific geometry.(fleur de lisle )

I consider that this measure and geometry is universal, not earth bound, thus the sun and moon are part of that geometry, and their size and apparent movements are a consequence of the geometry, very annoyingly the measure is not precisely as per inchs are now fixed at, it only shows over longer distances as a fractional difference, but in some ways I am pleased about that, as I am clearly not trying to fix inchs into anything, I think of my measure as finchs( fibonacci inchs)
in honour of fibonacci.
I do KNOW the very precise measure involved, I have worked it all out by checking and checking especially over large distances, and I sure have had some strange looks in french cathedrals that are ideal indoors to achieve this with long tape measures and my dowsing rods, le sorcier, they say.
They really don't know what to make of me doing this, so I play upon their fear and just plow on checking, I plead I can't speak french which helps, as they can't tell me to leave.
Kevin

[altonhare]

Altonhare,
Pyramids,
If You are researching them I hope you realise there are some 45,000 known in the americas alone?

I'm just reading the material presented on this board. So far I see nothing that indicates the Egyptians (or any other civilization) used anything but cleverness, hard work, patience, and basic tools to build their structures and make their calendars. The "Great Year" is particularly compelling but I have no reason, at this point, to believe it could not be done with a suitably high pendulum and careful painstaking observation/calculation.

Grey Cloud,

I read about the gravity cubit, very good stuff. The author seems to understand the principles of measurement well, that time is essentially comparative distance-traveled by some object. Essentially measurements of time reduce down to measurements of distances-traveled.

His theory is very compelling with the various patterns and relationships presented. It is inconceivable that a culture would undertake such a large project and elect to choose the dimensions haphazardly. Rather it makes a lot more sense that they would have analyzed all the measurements available to them and sought some kind of order and symmetry among them.

The second link was interesting too. The Egyptians were truly deliberate and focused in everything they undertook.

[Grey Cloud]

Cheers Kevin,
Have you checked out this character:
cernunnos
http://images.google.co.uk/images?gbv=2 ... os&spell=1
Alternative spelling:
cernunos
http://images.google.co.uk/images?hl=en ... ages&gbv=2

[Grey Cloud]

Just came across this little snippet from Eusebius' Preparation. He's quoting Alexander Polyhistor:

'And this Moses, they said, was the teacher of Orpheus; and when grown up he taught mankind many useful things. For he was the inventor of ships, and machines for laying stones, and Egyptian arms, and engines for drawing water and for war, and invented philosophy.

Yes, it is the Moses but that aside, I wonder what such a machine was? I also wonder as to what the difference was between a machine and an engine.

[junglelord]

Machines do not have combustion engines.

[nick c]

hi GC,

Just came across this little snippet from Eusebius' Preparation. He's quoting Alexander Polyhistor:

'And this Moses, they said, was the teacher of Orpheus; and when grown up he taught mankind many useful things. For he was the inventor of ships, and machines for laying stones, and Egyptian arms, and engines for drawing water and for war, and invented philosophy.

Yes, it is the Moses but that aside, I wonder what such a machine was? I also wonder as to what the difference was between a machine and an engine.

Simple machines would be inclined planes, levers, pulleys, screws, etc. An engine is a more complex machine that converts heat into mechanical energy, such as by internal combustion (ex-gas engine) or external combustion (ex-steam engine). The word 'engine,' would in ancient times, refer to complex machines. The steam engine was known at least two thousand years ago, though it is doubtful that it was put to practical use on any kind of scale.
I think that Eusebius' reference of "machines for laying stones" pertains to cranes, levers, and such. "Engines for drawing water" may refer to things like water wheels or even an [url2=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archimedes%27_screw]Archimedes Screw[/url2].

nick c

[altonhare]

hi GC,

Just came across this little snippet from Eusebius' Preparation. He's quoting Alexander Polyhistor:

'And this Moses, they said, was the teacher of Orpheus; and when grown up he taught mankind many useful things. For he was the inventor of ships, and machines for laying stones, and Egyptian arms, and engines for drawing water and for war, and invented philosophy.

Yes, it is the Moses but that aside, I wonder what such a machine was? I also wonder as to what the difference was between a machine and an engine.

Simple machines would be inclined planes, levers, pulleys, screws, etc. An engine is a more complex machine that converts heat into mechanical energy, such as by internal combustion (ex-gas engine) or external combustion (ex-steam engine). The word 'engine,' would in ancient times, refer to complex machines. The steam engine was known at least two thousand years ago, though it is doubtful that it was put to practical use on any kind of scale.
I think that Eusebius' reference of "machines for laying stones" pertains to cranes, levers, and such. "Engines for drawing water" may refer to things like water wheels or even an [url2=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archimedes%27_screw]Archimedes Screw[/url2].

nick c

I think the likely distinction between "engine" and "machine" was with regards to the states of matter. Specifically, in a machine all the components retain their state (solid, liquid, or gas) whereas in an engine some component(s) converts from one state to another i.e. in combustion engine liquid->gas and steam engine the water goes liquid->gas and a possible fuel (coal) goes solid->gas.

On the other hand a the parts of a machine composed of cranks, gears, pulleys, hydraulics, and levers essentially retain their state.

[Jaythree]

Some say ideas are "out there floating around" to be captured. Bear with me on this. It's a personal story I can't explain.

I lived in a house for some years that was called a dome. It was designed in 1947 by Bruce Goff, a noted architect, for Ruth Ford, a watercolor artist. The house was so unusual that in 1950 Life magazine gave it six pages in color. I bought it in 1980, after previous owners had let it go to seed, and as I rebuilt decayed structures began to feel that more was involved than an architectural experiment. I had begun to get into Velikovsky and the pioneer plasma physicists. Then it struck me (forgive me here, but like a thunderbolt), that the house was not a dome at all, but a precise model of a spiral (electrical) galaxy. See photos at http://www.flickr.com/photos/thompsonph ... fordhouse/, but you can't fully appreciate the similarity without visiting the house (which in Aurora, Illinois). The dome is actually a toroid, about 140 feet in circumference, sunk into the earth. The external supporting structure consists of 41 (a plasma filament bundle number) curved steel spokes spaced around the toroid like lines of force. In the center, a conical copper chimney, about 25 feet high, with a tall welded spire on top shoots smoke and sparks above, looking just like a galactic jet. All around the interior perimeter are neon (plasma) tubes for lighting, the light washing down the inside and outside walls. The curving walls to a height of seven feet are of large blocks of cannel coal mortared together with chunks of green bottle glass, giving the effect of a transmutation process. Two satellite structures give the effect of spiral arms. There is much spiral work on the interior.

OK,, here's the point. This house was designed, I believe, well before the idea of an electric spiral galaxy with polar jets and a toroidal belt was conceived, and before telescopes could see outside the visible light spectrum. Certainly neither the architect nor client had any exposure to physics. The original design proposal was in fact quite different. Yet the collaboration of the two artists resulted in this amazing model. So, where do ideas and visualizations come from? Those tablets in 2001: A Space Odyssey?

[Grey Cloud]

Hi Jaythree,
Interesting story and interesting house. I noticed that there was a pino in one photo, and I was wondering what the acoustics were like. There seems to be a lot of hard, smooth(-ish) surfaces in there.