If we are to talk about a long vanished ancient world civilization (and there is evidence of it), then we don't really have any RECORDS of that civilization/society.
The Pyramids, Tiahuanaco, The Sphinx, the legends of the Great Flood, the legends of Atlantis.....on and on.
If this civilization did exist at one time, it's not impossible that they had reached a level of altruism that we are far away from today. .....Or maybe they were just like us. But we can't know for certain.
I never subscribed to ancient civilization. But that is because I don't believe the world to be ancient, as well. To me, it negates the current man, by hoping for something better from those before us. By standing in awe of the simplistic nature of society, we continually add to the diminutive quality of our own current state we live in. It gives us a way out for our unacheived existance, not a pillar of responsibility to stand on for those around us.
Mind you this is only a commentary and quite possibly a narrow view of the world, and humanity as I have come to realize it.
http://www.geopolymer.org/science_ar...ion_theory.htm
This book claims that the "great pyramids of Egypt were built with re-agglomerated stones, a natural limestone made like concrete." I have an easier time believing this than all the smiling happy non-slaves pushing tons of stone up ramps in the desert. Supposedly this guy has proof.
Some of the things here cannot be explained away though...
I don't deny the possibility of an ancient civilization that was also altruistic compared to modern man. If they did exist in such a state, why didn't they last longer. My observations of history tell me that empires, nations, and city-states lasted until they fell into decay, morally. Moral decay is based in self-centeredness. When people act out of selfish desires, they cause problems for themselves and everyone else. The ancient Hebrews are one example, as long as they followed God's standards of behavior, they enjoyed peace and prosperity. As soon as they abandoned those standards, they encountered problems until they were eventually carried away into captivity.
There may have existed a highly advanced civilization that made modern man look like cavemen in comparison, but as yet I've seen no evidence of it. If one did exist, it was plagued with the same human nature problems we have today.
The average height of land above sea level for the earth is 5449 inches. This is also the height of the pyramid...
The Great Pyramid is the most accurately aligned structure in existence and faces true north with only 3/60th of a degree of error. The position of the North Pole moves over time and the pyramid was probably exactly aligned at one time.
The Great Pyramid is located at the center of the land mass of the earth. The east/west parallel that crosses the most land and the north/south meridian that crosses the most land intersect in two places on the earth, one in the ocean and the other at the Great Pyramid.
"If true, this indicates knowledge beyond the scope of their abilities. How can they possibly have known the average height of land for the earth?
It kind of makes you wonder what is in the ocean where the east/west parallel crosses...
Pilot, you ask if there was such an ancient civilization that predated recorded history then "why didn't it last?"
That's the whole basis of the predominant theories concerning it:
The theory is that this ancient world civilization was destroyed by a major Earth cataclysm.
My own theory about it is that this ancient civilization was destroyed when an Earth crustal displacement took place some time around 11,000 years ago.
If you are interested in the theory of Earth crustal displacement it is a theory put forth by a man named Charles Hapgood, and supported by a somewhat famous scientist named Albert Einstein.
But whether it existed or not, I am not claiming that it was altruistic or without evils, I am only saying that it can't be proven one way or the other.
Originally posted by Rick5150 The average height of land above sea level for the earth is 5449 inches. This is also the height of the pyramid...
The Great Pyramid is the most accurately aligned structure in existence and faces true north with only 3/60th of a degree of error. The position of the North Pole moves over time and the pyramid was probably exactly aligned at one time.
The Great Pyramid is located at the center of the land mass of the earth. The east/west parallel that crosses the most land and the north/south meridian that crosses the most land intersect in two places on the earth, one in the ocean and the other at the Great Pyramid.
"If true, this indicates knowledge beyond the scope of their abilities. How can they possibly have known the average height of land for the earth?
It kind of makes you wonder what is in the ocean where the east/west parallel crosses...
Still wrestleing some of these, not so much the height of land, as that changes and seems a rather convenient coincidence, but the land mass one is very intriguing, though I don't believe it is necessarily beyond our scope. The astonomical relationship is also very understandable. It is one of the things that our society has lost, along with our birds and the like, the ability to navigate and orient ourselves simply with the stars...
[i] It is one of the things that our society has lost, along with our birds and the like, the ability to navigate and orient ourselves simply with the stars... [/b]
Still wrestleing some of these, not so much the height of land, as that changes and seems a rather convenient coincidence, but the land mass one is very intriguing, though I don't believe it is necessarily beyond our scope.
Hey, I am not saying I believe all this. I think a lot of it is coincidence or simply one of the sleight of hand mathematical games that gives you the results you are "supposed" to get.
Some of the "facts" are a lot like saying "if you take everybody in the world's street address number, add them together and divide that by their average ages and then multiply that by the distance from the earth to the sun (in inches) and divide that by the number of how many pets we owned in 1974, it exactly equals the number of insects thought to be in Egypt divided by the number of gallons of water that were in the Nile (in those days)which of course equals the amount of dust particles in found on the great pyramid during lent. It had to be Aliens. How could we forsee this?" With enough manipulation, you will make a match.
My position here is not what I necessarily believe, but to give alternate theories to keep these ideas coming. I think it is a great debate, but if everybody is going to take the same side, it will be a short one. No matter what evidence is presented, it has not been strong enough in my opinion to completely support any theories yet. If the answers are so obvious, we should be able to build a full-scale replica of the great pyramid using only the tools that were available to the ancient Egyptians. Not just stacking the blocks, but include all the chambers and get them to be within 1/60 of an inch without tape measures and micrometers.
It is statements like this that get me thinking:
"The mortar used is of an unknown origin. It has been analyzed and it's chemical composition is known but it can't be reproduced. It is stronger than the stone and still holding up today."
For my part, I am always interested in learning about ancient civilizations, advanced or not. Likewise, I am always interested in hearing theories that attempt to explain the phenomena and circumstantial evidence we observe today. The evidence we have today appears to point toward one or more highly advanced civilizations existing in the past. How highly advanced? I don't know. More advanced than we are today? I don't know. All I know is that it is easy to misinterpret data. It is also easy for us today to assume that ancient civilizations were far less advanced than we think. Remember the ice man found in the Alps? The scientists who studied him and his clothing and equipment found that he was more advance than they originally thought. I am one of those who think that skills and knowledge are lost over time and over generations. For example, many skills that were common in the 19th century, such as blacksmithing, are hardly practiced anymore. The same thing applies to the knowledge and skills of the ancient Egyptians, Babylonians, Assyrians, etc. Again, I am always willing to discuss theories concerning these matters, because I learn something new each time, which usually prompts more questions.
Originally posted by Rick5150 It is statements like this that get me thinking:
"The mortar used is of an unknown origin. It has been analyzed and it's chemical composition is known but it can't be reproduced. It is stronger than the stone and still holding up today."
Funny what happens when you add enough blood to the mix...
Can't wait till they determine the reason Yankee Stadium has so much strength behind it is because they remodeled it with the remains of Jimmy Hoffa...
I was watching some workers repair the concrete from an 8-story building that was only about 20 years old. I began speaking to one of the workers who had come down from the scaffolding to take a break. He said it is common to have the cement deteriorate in 10-20 years and need repair. You have buildings from long ago that have withstood way more abuse than these buildings ever will. Cheap materials?
Quote:
Funny what happens when you add enough blood to the mix...
Some of the best inventions were discovered by accident. You may be onto something.
Fun with Pyramids
