22 Jul '13 00:37>
This video for the mindset that always assumes people of long ago had to be religious because of lack of scientific knowledge. We underestimate sophistication of knowledge in pre-history civilization.
YouTube
YouTube
Originally posted by sonshipI'd like to see those ancient maps for validity of his claims. South America and Africa in the correct longitude. BTW, the video repeats itself around 13 minutes in. (the bit about Antarctica shifting south 2000 miles in a geological instant, endorsed by Einstein) Is there independent evidence of this?
This video for the mindset that always assumes people of long ago had to be religious because of lack of scientific knowledge. We underestimate sophistication of knowledge in pre-history civilization.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCxWUkaar5k
Originally posted by sonhouseBecause only idiots post in "science."
I'd like to see those ancient maps for validity of his claims. South America and Africa in the correct longitude. BTW, the video repeats itself around 13 minutes in. (the bit about Antarctica shifting south 2000 miles in a geological instant, endorsed by Einstein) Is there independent evidence of this?
If all of that is true, what kind of technology did ...[text shortened]... rctica? Could they have flown?
The main question though, is why is this post not in science?
Originally posted by sonshipUFOTV
This video for the mindset that always assumes people of long ago had to be religious because of lack of scientific knowledge. We underestimate sophistication of knowledge in pre-history civilization.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCxWUkaar5k
Originally posted by sonshipNice strawman. I have never heard anyone claim that people of long ago 'had to be religious'. In fact, here in Africa, religion arrived with the Europeans, so they clearly didn't 'have to be religious'.
This video for the mindset that always assumes people of long ago had to be religious because of lack of scientific knowledge.
Originally posted by twhiteheadNo, what is true is that one shows his intolerant bias when he starts assuming that everyone in a certain group he doesn't like (the religious, in this example) shares the traits of another group he doesn't like (the ignorant, in this example). This is called being prejudiced.
However, what is true is that to be religious nowadays, you have to lack scientific knowledge. This is even demonstrated by the type of youtube video religious people such as you post showing your total lack of education.
Originally posted by SuzianneSo similar to the intolerant bias you have for every post I make in this forum?
No, what is true is that one shows his intolerant bias when he starts assuming that everyone in a certain group he doesn't like (the religious, in this example) shares the traits of another group he doesn't like (the ignorant, in this example). This is called being prejudiced.
Originally posted by sonshipScience as we know it has a linear way of looking at everything.
This video for the mindset that always assumes people of long ago had to be religious because of lack of scientific knowledge. We underestimate sophistication of knowledge in pre-history civilization.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCxWUkaar5k
Originally posted by wolfgang59I've come across the 'ramp method' as the most likely way the pyramids were built. (Where lengthy ramps were built so that the huge (upto 400tonnes) stones could be put into place. )
UFOTV
He starts of by saying we have no idea how Stonehenge was built!!
Many, many re-enactments have shown various methods could have been
used and while we cannot know which method was used we certainly can
say it was possible. Likewise the pyramids etc. etc.
Originally posted by karoly aczelThe 'no known tools' theory is bullox. There have been found metal cutting tools that use sand as an abrasive and just saws right through stone, and one they found with multiple blades where 6 or more cuts could be made with the same tool so it was a mass production machine from 4000 years ago.
I've come across the 'ramp method' as the most likely way the pyramids were built. (Where lengthy ramps were built so that the huge (upto 400tonnes) stones could be put into place. )
There are a few problems with this, but the one that gets me is the fact that this way of building the pyramids, with only man power to push and pull huge stone blocks to ...[text shortened]... blocks are so precisely cut that no known tools of that era could have cut them so smoothly.
Originally posted by karoly aczelScience assumes that? Where do you get that from?
Science as we know it has a linear way of looking at everything.
It assumes that people from ancient history were less intelligent....
Originally posted by sonhouseOk thanks
The 'no known tools' theory is bullox. There have been found metal cutting tools that use sand as an abrasive and just saws right through stone, and one they found with multiple blades where 6 or more cuts could be made with the same tool so it was a mass production machine from 4000 years ago.
Here is one link showing saw marks on ancient stone:
http://www.theglobaleducationproject.org/egypt/articles/hrdfact2.php
Originally posted by karoly aczelHow did you make this estimate? According to Wikipedia:
.... would have taken at least 5 or so generations to build.
...to suggest the Great Pyramid was completed from start to finish in approximately 10 years.
Originally posted by twhiteheadIs it not true that in order to come up with a reasonable theory we must first make assumptions?
Science assumes that? Where do you get that from?
[b]... and knew less about the world than modern people do.
I think that depends on what you mean by 'about the world'. I think most of us know perfectly well that ancient peoples probably knew more about hunting and nature in general than most modern people do. But they sure didn't know about all ...[text shortened]... s or planets will do next, is revered, whether that prediction has any survival value or not.[/b]
Originally posted by twhiteheadI believe one researcher followed the 'ramp theory' , factoring in slave labor, 200-400tonne blocks and the tools used at that time, including the lifespan of people of the time, and came up with that figure.
How did you make this estimate? According to Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_pyramid_construction_techniques...to suggest the Great Pyramid was completed from start to finish in approximately 10 years.
I must note that some European Cathedrals took hundreds of years, but I suspect that pyramids were built within the lifetime of the builder for the reason you give.