The Paranormal, UFO's, and Mysteries of the Unknown
- Thread starter MusicForFish
- Start date
-
Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!
Go here and give us your nominations!Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
damn is right..
if that paper is correct.. the old -whomever- that lived there had a "concrete" they could make that is apparently higher quality than any concrete the modern era has.
if that paper is correct.. the old -whomever- that lived there had a "concrete" they could make that is apparently higher quality than any concrete the modern era has.
Chukzombi
Millie's Staff Member
- 73,146
- 214,433
no shit. i have to keep from getting too excited about this. because if thats true. it means that all this time people like me, Kiroy and MFF were claiming the ancient civs had high technology and getting laughed at, now have been vindicated. but gotta see how this pans out for now. it will be interesting to see what date they get when the carbon-14 test can be done. if its anywhere older than 6000 years, the history books will have to be rewritten.
Chukzombi
Millie's Staff Member
- 73,146
- 214,433
Gobekli Tepe rewrote history because it used to say that 12k years ago humans were just cavemen hunting with spears. They tried to explain GT away as an anomaly. If it's revealed we really had hi tech and before known civilizations. That would turn the world on its head. Especially tech we can't even reproduce today.
Last edited:
- 1
B_Mizzle
Avatar of War Slayer
- 7,965
- 15,968
They'll just leave it as is. The modern scientific narrative is more like a religion at this point than real science.
- 3
- 1
iannis
Musty Nester
- 31,351
- 17,657
Concrete is not high technology. It is impressive and a more advanced technology than we assumed they had, but it is not high technology.
That term should mean technologies which rely on a suite of other technologies to exist. Stoneforming and basic metallurgy are low technologies. So is most carpentry. That's most technology pre industrial revolution. That's not magic, it's just a function of regimentation and the evolution of tools.
There are surviving Roman era gearwork clocks. That object actually is high technology, but you can see the society that produced it was not.
Which, again, is higher than anyone thought they had. And it is, at the very least, recognizable as technology without having to abstract the meaning of that word. So it is impressive enough without having to misrepresent. It indicates a higher level of social organization and a lesser need for brute labor.
I don't think anyone believes the ancients were stupid. They had wildly different circumstances to deal with.
That term should mean technologies which rely on a suite of other technologies to exist. Stoneforming and basic metallurgy are low technologies. So is most carpentry. That's most technology pre industrial revolution. That's not magic, it's just a function of regimentation and the evolution of tools.
There are surviving Roman era gearwork clocks. That object actually is high technology, but you can see the society that produced it was not.
Which, again, is higher than anyone thought they had. And it is, at the very least, recognizable as technology without having to abstract the meaning of that word. So it is impressive enough without having to misrepresent. It indicates a higher level of social organization and a lesser need for brute labor.
I don't think anyone believes the ancients were stupid. They had wildly different circumstances to deal with.
Last edited:
- 2
Being able to get a concrete out of this that is good at both compression and tension (modern concrete sucks at tension) if economical could revolutionize the concrete industry. Think about it mix the concrete up pour into forms and in 30 days or so) you have literally a solid STONE foundation. One solid piece no joints, just solid stone the only joints would be footing to wall and wall to stone floor. Heck I bet they could come up with a process for a continuous pour to eliminate all joints. You could do a footing/wall fairly easily, just getting the floor incorporated would be a bit harder, but not that hard to design.
True, but again IF that paper is right, it is made sort of like concrete, probably water the volcanic sand, the "binding" agent, pour into mold, wait, then stone resultant. Thought about the foundation, realize that it would be rather simple. Even with using current tech. Have the form be similar to an injection mould incorporate the footing into the mould. Bam done.
iannis
Musty Nester
- 31,351
- 17,657
Once again, polishing agents much like composite stone (concrete, asphault, the stuff you're talking about above) is not high technology. It is low technology, possibly advanced low technology.
High technology is being used as a buzzword. The term has a meaning. It's forgivable that most people would not be aware of that, I only know it because I read some engineering textbooks my grandfather gave me in my twenties. but it is not forgivable that these presenters are either unaware or intentionally misusing the term. Technics is esoteric but a real thing.
This is not the path to credibility. Which is a shame, because it seems like there is merit in the claims of more advanced technology than is commonly understood.
It makes them sound desperate. You don't need to be desperate with proof. They may be able to show applications of rudimentary chemistry.
It's almost like they've been hungry for so long that the smallest morsel becomes a feast. I get it on an emotional level, but it they want to promote this idea and these findings they need to stop.
The information is interesting though.
High technology is being used as a buzzword. The term has a meaning. It's forgivable that most people would not be aware of that, I only know it because I read some engineering textbooks my grandfather gave me in my twenties. but it is not forgivable that these presenters are either unaware or intentionally misusing the term. Technics is esoteric but a real thing.
This is not the path to credibility. Which is a shame, because it seems like there is merit in the claims of more advanced technology than is commonly understood.
It makes them sound desperate. You don't need to be desperate with proof. They may be able to show applications of rudimentary chemistry.
It's almost like they've been hungry for so long that the smallest morsel becomes a feast. I get it on an emotional level, but it they want to promote this idea and these findings they need to stop.
The information is interesting though.
- 1
Chukzombi
Millie's Staff Member
- 73,146
- 214,433
are you watching these videos are are you just reading the titles on the thumbnails?
- 2
- 1
iannis
Musty Nester
- 31,351
- 17,657
It would be tucking fascinating to me if there was detail in how the pyramids could have functioned as hydroelectric generators. That would be a case of ancient high technology.
But I've never seen that. I've seen the theory stated and then pages of rambling following it. That is a giant red flag, and absolutely should be for anyone that wants to take the idea seriously.
But I've never seen that. I've seen the theory stated and then pages of rambling following it. That is a giant red flag, and absolutely should be for anyone that wants to take the idea seriously.
iannis
Musty Nester
- 31,351
- 17,657
I watch it till I hit that bias. They don't all have it, which surprised me. One of the vids about composite stone I thought was quite good. There was another about a stone lathe in India (much more recent, not prehistory) which was also very good.
There are honest presenters.
And there's guys who are gonna tell you it's aliens.
I'm taking issue with the presentation more than the content. The majority of the content is just conjecture, and that's fine. Well and good. Not all of it is though. The parts that aren't have to be held to a higher standard. Those really are the interesting parts.
I think they're onto something with those bits. I really do.