Hatrack River
Home   |   About Orson Scott Card   |   News & Reviews   |   OSC Library   |   Forums   |   Contact   |   Links
Research Area   |   Writing Lessons   |   Writers Workshops   |   OSC at SVU   |   Calendar   |   Store
E-mail this page
Hatrack River Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Forum » Active Forums » Books, Films, Food and Culture » Monolithic structures not sufficiently explained (Page 3)

  This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   
Author Topic: Monolithic structures not sufficiently explained
ElJay
Member
Member # 6358

 - posted      Profile for ElJay           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So, did you notice where I addressed that in my post?

quote:
The video shows him demonstrating on a concrete pad, undoubtedly because it's easier and more dramatic, and lets him use a smaller fulcrum, but when it shows him moving a barn with the same technique it's over grass.
Just because he's doing it on a hard surface doesn't mean it only works on a hard surface. He didn't move the barn over a hard surface, it's clearly moving over a field. On the 2nd link, which is his website, it specifies it's a muddy field so he had to go pretty slowly. If he'd done it when the ground was frozen, he would have been able to go faster.

(Also, you probably shouldn't call people with gender neutral names "brother." Just sayin'. [Wink] )

Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
my bro eljay, my dude, my man, my masculine entity, my male, my stamen-bearing androecium flora structured dude friend guy, how's it hanging brother with a robust sexual dimorphism, how's your dude man things that you are doing *high fives repeatedly* yo we were thinking of doing a bunch of dude stuff like wrestling and math you wanna come *does a kickflip out of the thread*
Posts: 15242 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_   Email Stone_Wolf_         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
My brother "Stone_Henge_"

We call him Hengy.

[Big Grin] [Wink]

Posts: 6506 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ElJay
Member
Member # 6358

 - posted      Profile for ElJay           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
[Roll Eyes]
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_   Email Stone_Wolf_         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
[Confused]
Posts: 6506 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_   Email Stone_Wolf_         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That WOULD work on frozen ground.
Posts: 6506 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ElJay
Member
Member # 6358

 - posted      Profile for ElJay           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It would also work on non-frozen ground with a rock the size of a softball instead of the 1" one he was using. With a couple the size of basketballs, you could move the monolith stones over rough terrain. Just think of how much more teetery a book would be balanced on a tennis ball vs a superball. It's the same principle, you just have to scale up.
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
Stone_wolf, i want you to make two complete lists for us so that we're not just chasing down your "some people say" or "nobody can REALLY prove" shit.

The first list should be "things Stone Wolf believe is true about the ancient structures that modern science/archaeology deny"

The second list should be "things Stone Wolf thinks that are false about the current archaeological record of the ancient structures"


Posts: 15242 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_   Email Stone_Wolf_         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I am not that organized
Posts: 6506 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CT
Member
Member # 8342

 - posted      Profile for CT           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Stone_Wolf_, I think you might have a sort of intuitive approach to understanding the world. You're a Big Picture guy, right? And you want people to watch the movie because -- I think -- you found it overall to be convincing in feel, and you think others will, too?

I think a lot of the people in this discussion aren't just Big Picture thinkers. I think several of us are both detail-oriented and the kind of people who find it difficult to overlook inconsistencies or errors of fact for the Big Picture view. In fact, I suspect many of us react to errors in the details with suspicion about the overall reliability of the Big Picture claims.

You "are not that organized" and so (I think) you don't necessarily approach evaluation in a step-by-step, methodical way. That's not something you have to change. It might be, however, that discussion about whether something is convincing won't work between you and people who are that organized and methodical when they are engaged in evaluation.

For me, I can't get past hand-wavey bits (or errors of omission or commission) to see the Big Picture -- it's all built up from the details. So when you ask me to watch the tape, all I can think as I'm watching is, "but what about . . .? and haven't you . . .?

I think this is a recipe for frustration. I really do. That doesn't mean the conversation wasn't started in good faith, and I think it can be ended in good faith if anyone chooses, too.

Posts: 831 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_   Email Stone_Wolf_         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Thanks CT!

I suspect you are correct.

I had intended to answer all questions, but I really never intended my suspicions to be publicly aired...safe to say I have some out there beliefs and chalk it up to my well rounded charm...heh.

Posts: 6506 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
so what do we do to convince you that you shouldn't trust things like the Pyramid Code because they fail very basic tests of credibility and promote entirely false views at the expense of real scientific and anthropological knowledge
Posts: 15242 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_   Email Stone_Wolf_         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Why is that important to you?
Posts: 6506 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
At the end of the day, we like you and want you to be less wrong.
Posts: 37318 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_   Email Stone_Wolf_         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Thank you Tom.
Posts: 6506 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
We got to turn Pyramid Code into a drinking game, at least.
Posts: 15242 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_   Email Stone_Wolf_         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The narrator's questions are a bit...hmmm...shall we say...wildly speculative
Posts: 6506 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_   Email Stone_Wolf_         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
What might happen to a tomb that you can think of to cause the tomb to not have mummies and artifacts in it?

Why can you not carve granite and dolemite with copper tools, when it is possible to carve granite and dolemite with stone tools?

What is a "Ponu Ponku?"

What evidence exists for the eight mile move of the Nile that makes the current dating of the pyramids' construction wrong?

There is a difference between a looted tomb and an the internal spaces of a broken engine...

"...Puma Punku (also called “Puma Pumku” or “Puma Puncu”). It is part of a large temple complex or monument group that is part of the Tiwanaku archaeological site near Tiwanaku, Bolivia.

Yes, I know the sourse is questionable...but the physical location should be accurate.

The 8 mile Nile drift is covered in the Pyramid Code...which you watched so... [Smile]

Posts: 6506 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ok so in that response you only really answered one of the questions.
Posts: 15242 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_   Email Stone_Wolf_         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I missed dolimite...but I hit the others...by my standards at least, heh
Posts: 6506 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So, please, address them substantively.
Posts: 15242 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_   Email Stone_Wolf_         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It isn't that copper tools straight up WON'T cut these hard stones...it's that the stones in question have flat plains on inside cuts, with zero chisel marks. Basically, one does not achieve the result one finds @ Puma Punku w/o powered tools.
Posts: 6506 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Risuena
Member
Member # 2924

 - posted      Profile for Risuena   Email Risuena         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Believe it or not, power tools would leave marks too. It's polishing/sanding that gets rid of marks, whether they were made by hand tools or power tools.

And while sanding can be sped up with power tools, it can still be done with lots of elbow grease and patience. Especially on something like sandstone.

Posts: 954 | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Puma Punku - Ancient Aliens debunked
quote:
AA: “This surface is as smooth as a table top, like in your kitchen. There’s no wave to it. This was machined.”

The sandstone and andesite stones at Pumapunku would have been easily worked with the most basic stone working tools, the idea that diamond tipped power saws were needed is ridiculous. The red sandstone was relatively soft and easy to work with, and even though andesite is pretty hard, because of the way it cooled it could be easily flaked off using stones as soft as 5.5 on the Mohs scale. Such pounding stones were found all over andesite quarries in the area.

Contrary to Ancient Aliens’ claims that archeologists are baffled by Pumapunku, Archeologists know the basics about how Pumapunku’s stones were cut and shaped. This is partly because there is evidence for this all over the site itself.

They actually used a method that almost all ancient stone workers used. They used hard -pounding stones to pound out troth like depressions; later on they used flat stones and sand to grind the stone to make a polished surface. We will see later on that this is also how the Egyptians, 1000’s of years before this, made their flat surfaced granite monuments like obelisks.

Sand, as we will see later when we look at Egypt, has extremely hard particles in it and, if placed between a flat surface and a rock, can polish even the hardest stones known to man. In fact, the harder the stone is the better it can be polished using sand.

We will also see that how sand can turn a piece of copper into a very efficient granite saw or granite drill – a method which the Egyptians utilized quite well.

Some stones at Pumapunku that Ancient Aliens would never show the cameras are the ones that were in the middle of this process. They show that at the same time a stone was being pounded by stone hammers, which created these troth like depressions, the grinding and polishing was taking place on the other end of the stone. Unfinished stones like this one clearly show how they were shaped – and it wasn’t with lasers.

There is also unmistakable evidence of stone hammers having been used in the places that were never meant to be visible, like where certain stones would be connected with one another. And because of that, it’s hard for me to believe Eric Von Daniken’s next claim, because it would mean that the alien tool box had a laser gun right next to a stone hammer.


Posts: 11065 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_   Email Stone_Wolf_         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hmmm...I'm having difficulty articulating my reaction...but conflicted is part of it.

Regardless, I appreciate the intent and efforts of posters contributing.

Posts: 6506 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2