|
|
Post by grishnakh on Jul 26, 2017 5:21:14 GMT
There's no way the Greeks had machines that could do that, or leave those marks, although they had the knowledge of the principle of the steam engine. This is one of those anomalies which has both qualifications, must for now side with the tool marks which makes it pre-flood (>10800BC). Ok but why would they need machines? They had elbow grease remember, like I said earlier they also used steel picks. "Archaeological investigation on the site has given us a lot of information regarding Cave di Cusa and how it was used. The site itself is covered in 60 blocks of rock, many of them cylindrical in nature, in various stages of carving, strewn haphazardly around the site (some in situ) that were originally intended for the construction of the temple. The stone from this site was used for columns at the temple, and many columns still exist at the site today. The rock is in different stages of being quarried, so it is evident that the abandonment of the site occurred rather quickly. There is evidence of pick marks on the rocks from various stone tools, so archaeologists have been able to determine the methods used to quarry the stone. Many efficient and advanced methods were used to carve the stone, like grooves and holes put on "architraves" that allowed ropes and beams to be threaded through them to aid in lifting the rock. It shows how crafty and intelligent ancient peoples were in working on this site." Yes the columns were segmented, I assume thats what you were getting at, here are a few photos of the temples where the quarried stone was used:  The Temple of Hera at Selinunte (Temple E)  Temple C Temple E was reconstructed in 1959 and I think Temple C was also, I believe they were all toppled by an earthquake. The greek historian Thucydides, recorded the founding of Selinunte under the leadership of a man called Pammilus, about 100 years after the foundation of Megara Hyblaea, with the help of colonists from Megara in Greece, which was Megara Hyblaea's mother city. Thucydides vi. 4, vii. 57; Scymnus 292; Strabo vi. p. 272. The date of its foundation cannot be precisely fixed, as Thucydides indicates it only by reference to the foundation of Megara Hyblaea, which is itself not accurately known, but it may be placed about 628 BCE. Diodorus places it 22 years earlier, or 650 BCE, and Hieronymus still further back in 654 BCE. The date from Thucydides, which is probably the most likely, is incompatible with this earlier date. So certainly not around 12,000 years ago bro... and remember its limestone, not granite, much much softer rock like that doesn't keep well out in the weather. St Isaacs Cathedral was actually constructed between 1818 and 1858 but lets not quibble, those granite pillars would have been turned on a huge fucken lathe eh? The greeks invented the lathe didnt they? I found this while I was looking into that: "Look at ruins around the word and note that most columns of any significant diameter were stacked from shorter sections. Note also the use of very tough cements to 'adjust', much as a carpenter or body and fender beater uses fillers yet today. AFAIK, they were hand chiseled with the help of templates to insure roundness and matchup between work teams. Stone is still worked in a similar manner yet today in some parts of the world, though the Craftsmen in backwater areas of China are now cheating with diamond blades in angle-grinders and such. No point in being stupid about it..." www.practicalmachinist.com/vb/antique-machinery-and-history/turning-milling-stone-244339/ |
|
|
|
Post by grishnakh on Jul 26, 2017 5:25:48 GMT
 Turning a 60 foot 6 foot thick granite pillar back in 1901 bruv hectic |
|
|
|
Post by Mad Scientist on Jul 26, 2017 5:47:08 GMT
Turning a 60 foot 6 foot thick granite pillar back in 1901 bruv hectic Cool stuff, bet they didn't have that in 1700, lol. Listen, the only thing that keeps me back from making a decision for myself on these pillars is the machine tool marks. Just for sake of argument, imagine these pillars being found at some stage, reworked etc, it's not far fetched if you would look at them as fossils, size doesn't matter here, especially if they were buried originally and perhaps worked on (like some sort of coating or some) although the latter might be unreasonable to include. Limestone also has the same properties of Granite when it comes to density. But more importantly, even worked on or not, these rocks are very old Grish, so for them, 12000 years is probably peanuts, so why shouldn't anything limestone have survived from before. Anyway...  |
|
|
|
Post by ratrodrob on Jul 26, 2017 6:05:18 GMT
Back in the not too recent past knowledge of how to do anything "technical" was often a guarded secret, you had to be in a Guild & of the right family & patronage etc etc, for that reason alone knowledge is easily lost, and strange tools that no one else understands just get left to rust & rot. The "machine" could even have been something like a giant compass that had a slot for a chisel & "all" that was required was a sht load of elbow grease. Yes DH knowledge was guarded at all costs, even the artisans and craftsmen (not labourers) whom built the Taj Mahal had their hands cut off at the completion so as not to be able to repeat their work or teach it to others RRR |
|
|
|
Post by grishnakh on Jul 26, 2017 20:55:04 GMT
Turning a 60 foot 6 foot thick granite pillar back in 1901 bruv hectic Cool stuff, bet they didn't have that in 1700, lol. They didn't build St Isaacs in the 1700's bro... it was 1818 -1859... if thats the point your making. The origin of turning actually dates to around 1300 BCE when the Ancient Egyptians first developed a two-person lathe !! I thought it was the greeks, but na they just copied that. An important early lathe in the UK was the horizontal boring machine that was installed in 1772 in the Royal Arsenal in Woolwich. It was horse-powered and allowed for the production of much more accurate and stronger cannon used with success in the American Revolutionary War in the late 18th century. One of the key characteristics of this machine was that the workpiece was turning as opposed to the tool, making it technically a lathe (see attached drawing). Heres a good write up on that lathe: vintagemachinery.org/mfgindex/imagedetail.aspx?id=5265 |
|
|
|
Post by grishnakh on Jul 26, 2017 21:37:12 GMT
Listen, the only thing that keeps me back from making a decision for myself on these pillars is the machine tool marks. Just for sake of argument, imagine these pillars being found at some stage, reworked etc, it's not far fetched if you would look at them as fossils, size doesn't matter here, especially if they were buried originally and perhaps worked on (like some sort of coating or some) although the latter might be unreasonable to include. Limestone also has the same properties of Granite when it comes to density. But what machine tool marks? Every report I have seen states very clearly that the tool marks are man made and it seems to be corroborated by greek historians too bro... If you think limestone has the same properties as granite, you obviously don't climb. Granite is clean, solid and strong. Its gold to climb because of this, nothing beats granite. Places like Yosemite are a mecca... limestone however has many problems so is really only used for what we call sport climbing. Thats using pre-placed steel bolts as protection instead of placing your own gear as you go. Reason being, limestone is notorious for being crumbly and unprotect able because of its frailty. Its just millions of tiny skeletons all joined together.. Heard of tufa? Its a limestone stalagtite formation, hanging from the rock face. Tufa grows as the rock gets older, because calcium from the rainwater dripping off it, keeps adding to the feature.. Limestone is a very dynamic rock, it doesn't stay the same for long. The severe erosion of limestone is clearly visible to the naked eye anywhere you look:  see ^ very eroded, but sure its not gonna disappear, just wash away... The great pyramid was not built entirely of limestone at all. Pink Granite from Aswan, and basalt too I believe. The granite gave the structure its strength, look where they used it... The Tura Limestone blocks used as capping stones were quarried from below ground, the white limestone is actually some of the hardest stuff you can find, where as that limestone at Cave di cusa is some of the softest... Limestone has huge variation in types, this variation extends to its properties... here are some examples:  Varieties of limestone. Chalk (upper left) is a marine limestone consisting of tests of microscopic algae and foraminifera. Tufa (upper right) is a chemical precipitate of calcium carbonate. Fossils are very common in marine calcitic sedimentary rocks. Rocks such as coquina are wholly composed of fossils but so-called normal limestones may be also highly fossiliferous. The sample (lower left) is from the Ordovician. Grainstone is a coarse-grained grain-supported variety that contains almost no limy mud (micrite).  |
|
|
|
Post by Mad Scientist on Jul 27, 2017 3:51:41 GMT
Listen, the only thing that keeps me back from making a decision for myself on these pillars is the machine tool marks. Just for sake of argument, imagine these pillars being found at some stage, reworked etc, it's not far fetched if you would look at them as fossils, size doesn't matter here, especially if they were buried originally and perhaps worked on (like some sort of coating or some) although the latter might be unreasonable to include. Limestone also has the same properties of Granite when it comes to density. But what machine tool marks? Every report I have seen states very clearly that the tool marks are man made and it seems to be corroborated by greek historians too bro... If you think limestone has the same properties as granite, you obviously don't climb. Granite is clean, solid and strong. Its gold to climb because of this, nothing beats granite. Places like Yosemite are a mecca... limestone however has many problems so is really only used for what we call sport climbing. Thats using pre-placed steel bolts as protection instead of placing your own gear as you go. Reason being, limestone is notorious for being crumbly and unprotect able because of its frailty. Its just millions of tiny skeletons all joined together.. Heard of tufa? Its a limestone stalagtite formation, hanging from the rock face. Tufa grows as the rock gets older, because calcium from the rainwater dripping off it, keeps adding to the feature.. Limestone is a very dynamic rock, it doesn't stay the same for long. The severe erosion of limestone is clearly visible to the naked eye anywhere you look: see ^ very eroded, but sure its not gonna disappear, just wash away... The great pyramid was not built entirely of limestone at all. Pink Granite from Aswan, and basalt too I believe. The granite gave the structure its strength, look where they used it... The Tura Limestone blocks used as capping stones were quarried from below ground, the white limestone is actually some of the hardest stuff you can find, where as that limestone at Cave di cusa is some of the softest... Limestone has huge variation in types, this variation extends to its properties... here are some examples: Varieties of limestone. Chalk (upper left) is a marine limestone consisting of tests of microscopic algae and foraminifera. Tufa (upper right) is a chemical precipitate of calcium carbonate. Fossils are very common in marine calcitic sedimentary rocks. Rocks such as coquina are wholly composed of fossils but so-called normal limestones may be also highly fossiliferous. The sample (lower left) is from the Ordovician. Grainstone is a coarse-grained grain-supported variety that contains almost no limy mud (micrite). Exactly the reason I stay away from the Greek stuff, I totally agree that softer stone was no problem for the Greeks to use for building and shaping stuff... Now you mentioned the marks on the side being identified as being made by Greeks, I missed that, then again, they also claim that the great pyramid is a tomb, so. Cause I gotta say, from those pics they really look like the marks on many other structures which are identified as (tech) tool marks. However, there are many anomalies in Greece which cannot be simply disregarded, yet, as mentioned I keep away from Greece simply cause it's a true Rabbit hole, lol. I don't know if you've watched this vid yet, you'll like it if you didn't. Thanks for clearing up the St. Petersburg thing, it's something that was bugging me ever since that New Earth channel brought it up. Glad you tackled this one.  |
|
|
|
Post by grishnakh on Jul 27, 2017 8:53:23 GMT
thanks bro, I think I have or one similar Whats your thoughts on the use of diamond to cut the stone, a diamond tipped circular saw. Bronze or copper only needs to be used for the tool itself, the cutting blade is diamond... I just don't know how it would be powered The ancients were clearly super clued up, its not impossible to think they could come up with an efficient cutting device but I think its also hard to tell with a lot of these sites, who has been there in the years since and defaced stuff with power tools. |
|
|
|
Post by Mad Scientist on Jul 27, 2017 9:15:00 GMT
thanks bro, I think I have or one similar Whats your thoughts on the use of diamond to cut the stone, a diamond tipped circular saw. Bronze or copper only needs to be used for the tool itself, the cutting blade is diamond... I just don't know how it would be powered The ancients were clearly super clued up, its not impossible to think they could come up with an efficient cutting device but I think its also hard to tell with a lot of these sites, who has been there in the years since and defaced stuff with power tools. It's not that easy, many of these areas are considered way off in the middle of nowhere, so tell me, how can someone deface anything way off and in the middle of nowhere be using a power tool. It's one of those mainstream BS explanations. I've been looking into this stuff for a long time now, it has come to the point off boredom really. Thing is, all these people who tell you all these similarities are coincidences, they have no clue, truly none, of what they're on about. Like I mentioned, the Greeks were good at copying old world stuff, yet, even the Greeks re-used Old World remnants. Most People look at the popular stuff/sites and try to find explanations based on Mainstream babbling, when you start looking world wide, well bro, everything changes, I mean everything, there are areas they first off all don't show you, second, many Western Sheep don't even know about most sites existing. Do you really think the Baltic Sea Anomaly (for instance) is a UFO, no Man, feck that, it's a ruin. Most of it's cousins lie melted and exploded in South America. See, there was a time, way before the flood where there was something going on here (war) which melted mountains and made entire cities vanish and explode. Why do you think they find oo-parts inside rocks sometimes, they've got the entire understanding of how those rocks formed wrong simply because they refuse to add this reality to the mix. The evidence is around this Globe in Abundance and still they refuse to face reality, this entire Planet's population lives inside a travesty. So, how would they cut the diamond?  |
|
brillbilly
Cave Dweller
I'm a Genetic creation not a random mutation
Posts: 109
|
Post by brillbilly on Jul 27, 2017 21:34:34 GMT
You guys have made some great points,The real Hidden History was never ment for us good folk,so all we can do it try to work with what we know so far,and that's mainly MS bollox.!
These Ancients sites were not placed at random,The stone used was as important as the location and the technology used was not just isolated to this site.! From my understanding from our first days on Earth we've been subjugated from knowing who we are and how we came to be.Evolution cannot explain how some 200.000 years ago Humans underwent a massive transformation.MS offers us 2 camps of thought!..Darwinism and Creationism, one is based on data and the other is based on belief...I think there's a 3rd option..Intervention!..I think Humans are a Hyrid created by a more advance race and the offspring of that race passed on Knowledge to a select few...Some of you would be suprized to know just how many of todays landmarks are based on very Ancient sites and the BluePrints have been passed from one Secret order to another.!
Some know the truth and they hope us Minions as they see us don't work it out!
|
|
