The pyramid is over 300 feet high and may contain several rooms. It's built of stone blocks, which, according to the Daily, "indicates the presence at the time of a highly developed civilization . . . Archaeological excavations near the surface have uncovered a part of a wall and fragments of steps."
Geologist Nada Nukic says, "Visocica hill could not have been shaped like this by nature." It's worth remembering that the extensive pyramids of the Mayan culture in Mexico and Guatemala were overgrown and "lost" to modern civilization, until natives of these areas pointed them out to modern archeologists.
It's also worth noting that symmetrical pyramidal forms on Mars have been dismissed as potential archaeological sites because they're imperfect -- in other words, we shouldn't waste our time eyeing candidate ET structures because it's assumed that "aliens" will somehow only build structures immune to decay. And we're effectively asked to take that on faith, all the while happily dishing out contributions to SETI.
21 comments:
http://www.anomalynews.com/phorum/read.php?f=10&i=47&t=47 States ..."Visocica hill could not have been shaped like this by nature," geologist Nada Nukic tells the daily. "This is already far too more than we have anticipated, but we expect a lot more from further analysis," she concludes.
I think we all know just how unreliable news reports can be. Nada Nukic is identified as geologist, but we are given no info as to her true qualifications. Perhaps she's a true and wise professional: perhaps a student. From the available information I have seen, her credentials are simply not given.
But, if I ass-u-me her credible, this mount can in no way be considered natural. Also, http://politiken.tv/VisArtikel.iasp?PageID=384103&ExtID=344 has an audio-visual of the subject. Interesting. More next year.
As to Martian pyramids being natural, images can be found (not easily!) on the 'net of pyramidal sand dunes in NE Mexico and the Namib Desert, both active and cemented, and of roughly pyramidal and Sphinx-like erosional land forms in Egypt's Western Desert. So, it DOES occur in nature. Awful lot of 'em on Mars, though .... Which, for all I know, may very well to be expected, as winds may in fact blow from a single direction for months or years. Happens in areas here on Earth.
"Sitchin's choice to interpret the various ancient "mythologies" as being historical rather than fictive just so happens to fill a great many of those gaps in history of which ken speaks."
IMHO Sitchen was just another Hoagland. Gotta watch out for those guys; they'll feed you a load of crap and leave you feeling like the fool when their game is up.
I address Sitchin in my Mars book. In an nutshell: I think he might be onto something in a *general* sense, but I disagree with most of what he says.
TWilliam--
What I dislike most about Sitchin is his science. It seems to me he makes soaring errors about such things as planetary habitabality: a humanoid species surviving on --let alone evolving on -- a 12th planet with an orbit like the one he proposes? Not likely.
And why a "landing corridor" made of giant pyramids? Don't these aliens have GPS?
Etc.
"Either of which justify my original contention that academic opinion is not necessarily any more trustworthy than an "armchair" scholar's."
You're putting the opinion of armchair scholars on par with those of professional historians and archaeologists?!? Give me a fucking break, dude.
And I would hardly call the opinions of elementary school teachers "academic". Why are they teaching kids that everyone in Columbus's day thought the Earth was flat?? Because that's a general misconception circulating in our society, and these teachers simply tell kids what they assume to be the case (I don't recall many elementary school teachers to be especially notable for sophicated thought; one even told me -- when I was a child -- that the pilgrims mistook popcorn for snow when they first saw it). They are not drawing such ideas from approved textbooks.
People like Sitchin want to be professionals without all the hard work and years of study that go into it. His books are basically junk food for the mind.
"If it's warranted, yes."
And just how are Sitchin's opinions warranted in this manner?? Did you read (and I mean really READ) the links that Gordon gave you? What Sitchin offers us is *pop-archaeology*; naive and simple-minded people eat that shit up because it caters to their imagination while presenting an *appearance* of legitimate scholarship. As it is, there are down-to-earth reasons (besides the ones you have cited) as to why Sitchin is never taken seriously in academic circles.
"Teachers (even elementary school ones) are required, at least in most states, to have a degree, which means that they have been exposed to college professors."
It doesn't mean that they majored in history or archaeology while they were in college.
Retrospectively, none of my grade school teachers strike me as particularly intellectual individuals. They were more like clucking hens adopting a quasi-maternal role, there to encourage us to learn, as Gordon has pointed out. In short, most of them were simple little women completely capable of believing that the pilgrims mistook popcorn for snow. Or I wonder, was that in the curriculum too???
"Hell, medical diagnosis (a "professional opinion") is wrong about 50% of the time or more - a statistic that hasn't improved much in a century - an appalling level of "wrong opinions" among a group of "professionals" whom one would at least expect have one of the most rigorous curriculums out there."
Does this mean you would listen to an armchair hobbyist "physician" before going to a doctor/surgeon with academic credentials?
"Wonder what that whole "Star of Bethlehem" thing might be about?"
Actually, there's very little reason to believe that the "Star of Bethlehem" ever even existed.
"Although life has been found in increasingly more hostile environments, one thing necessary for evolution (and the Nibiru have _our_ genetic structure or similar remember, so we can infer they evolved and require much of the things we do) is a relatively _stable_ environment."
This is going off on a tangent, but the violently instable environment on Mars (even during its ancient "spring") can furnish an argument against the probability that life forms so complex as to be sentient ever evolved there. Mars has always wobbled violently on its axis (due to lack of gravitational pull from a sizeable moon), causing severe oscillations in climate/temperature with the alternating seasons. Mars has also been more vulnerable to bombardment by asteroids (in comparison to Earth). In short, the conditions on Mars have always been volatile. I think it (probably) takes a certain degree of environmental stability for higher, more complex forms of life to have a chance to develop. The Martian environment may have been able to sustain simpler, more robust critters -- but the odds for producing highly complex biology on the order of homo sapiens, I think, was pretty minimal.
Upon such considerations, it becomes less likely that the ruins in Cydonia (if they are indeed ruins) originated with an indigenious species. I find it more probable that a space-faring race had visited Mars in the distant past, in order to study it and/or to extract natural resources from it.
"My main problem with the "Martian immigration" hypothesis is just that I'm having a hard time conceiving why a civilization advanced enough to travel between the stars would revert to building megalithic structures typical of a much earlier phase of civilization."
A lot of the "tracks" on Mars look like they've been left behind by heavy machinery. Also, many of the "artifacts" on Gerald's blog look like mechanical parts. Would you consider these to be indicative of an earlier phase of civilization? Most of the so-called "megalithic structures" may not be artificial at all...But what I specifically had in mind were the "parallelogram" and the "square", not to mention such anomalies as the bald head, et al.
"It seems likely (especially if they came from another star) that they explored at least some of the other worlds of the solar system, including earth."
Yes, I agree. Could it be possible that these visitors used _human slave labor_ on Mars, and that those slaves were the ones responsible for building the "megalithic structures" and apparently humanoid sculptures that we see on the planet??
Of course, if the ruins on Mars constitute the work of human slaves, it follows that they were built relatively recently (as opposed to those ruins being build billions of years ago).
"I've not heard him claim any of these ideas as his own, or even that they're right (nor do I). It's just what it says. Which is back to my original point that it's all a matter of opinion anyway... :^p"
I would trust informed opinion over the opinion of someone like Sitchin.
They had dictionaries back in the days of Sumer and beyond. Scholars use these to determine the meaning of words.
"Yes. Dictionaries written in languages no one now speaks, translations of which are just as subject to debate as any other writings from the time."
Mind expounding on this point?
Twilliam,
I see. Are you an expert in the translation of dead languages? If not, what qualifies you to make the assertion above? Are you sure you know what you're talking about?
"I find it difficult to accept the idea that all these ancient high civilizations that appeared seemingly without antecedent and with a full-blown written language and culture, would dedicate literally tens of thousands of painstakingly crafted written tablets to FICTION."
This is because you do not understand what myth is to a given culture, and what role it plays in that culture. In short, you know very little about how cultures develop and function. The ancients in the Near East did not draw a clear, definitive line between fact and fiction -- much unlike our empirically based world-view today. They were much less precise in their preception of reality; for them the waking world and the dream world flowed together in a manner that is difficult for us to comprehend. The gods were not literal personages from some remote Planet X; they and their celetial abode were the stuff of dreams.
The fact that Sitchin so completely fails to understand the nature of culture and myth is probably the biggest strike against him.
The fact that Sitchin so completely fails to understand the nature of culture and myth is probably the biggest strike against him.
Ditto.
"I am aware that this is a common assumption within the relevant disciplines."
It goes beyond assumption. The knowledge as to how myth functions within a given culture comes from observation upon observation made by cultural anthropologists. Moreover, their conclusions happen to compliment what we know about human behavior from modern psychology. All we need to do is put 2 and 2 together in order for a fairly definite picture of human nature to emerge. There are patterns in the way people have behaved throughout history anywhere in the world. In this light we begin to understand the myths of the ancient Near East.
Sitchin's literal reading of that mythology is in the end a form of fundamentalism. His simplistic, anthropologically naive approach is no different from that of creation scientists who argue that God created the world in seven 24 hour days. Why do creationists make this error? Answer: Because they have no clue as to what culture is or how it works.
"As far as I recall from various readings over the years, once one strips away the cultural window dressing, the various origin stories appear to share common roots."
Sorry, but I don't think this is true. There is nothing similar in the origin stories of Norse mythology (for instance) as compared to those of the Yanomamo of South America. Maybe you should go back and read various mythologies from all over the world -- ancient Near Eastern, ancient Far Eastern, Hindu, various African, various Native American, various ancient European --and see if you can discern ANY commonality between them.
Face it, Twilliam, vindicating Sitchin's view is a lost cause. The man is a quack.
*71* comments! A record (I think)!
"Maybe it is, maybe it isn't *shrug*. The bottom line is we don't really know. We may think we do, but we don't. I for one will continue to withhold judgement on the matter..."
OH COME ON!!! This sort of response is a mere subterfuge!!! Not only is your answer void of honesty, it is also unfair to those of us who have been attempting to reason with you up to this point.
In effect you are saying, "Ultimately we can't know if Sitchin is right because there always remains the possibility -- no matter how remote, no matter how INFINITISMALLY SMALL -- that he, though obviously ignorant of celestial mechanics, antropology, ancient language, genetics, biology or history -- there remains the possibility that he, this pure and utter quack, might turn out to be right -- not because he knew what he was talking about, but as it were, by shear accident."
Twilliam, what the fuck?!? Obstinate refusal to admit it when you've been wrong (especially when this fact is obvious to everyone else) is base, foolish and childish. My advice to you: Grow the fuck up.
thank's
Obat Kondiloma Akuminata Ampuh
Obat Atasi Kondiloma Akuminata Ampuh
Obat Hilangkan Kondiloma Akuminata Ampuh
Obat Kondiloma Akuminata Paling Ampuh
Obat Kondiloma Akuminata Super Ampuh
good
Obat Ambeyen Sudah Akut
Obat Ambeien Akut
Obat Ambeien Sudah Sangat Akut
Pengobatan Ambeien Sudah Akut
Jual Obat Ambeien Akut
Jual Obat Alami Ambeien Sudah Akut
Obat Ambeien Sudah Akut
Jual Obat Ampuh Ambeien Sudah Akut
Kumpulan Obat Ambeien Akut
Obat Ambeien Sudah Akut
Kumpulan Obat Ambeien
Kumpulan Obat Alami Ambeien Sudah Akut
Artikel Obat Alami Ambeien Sudah Akut
Obat Ambeien Sudah Akut
Artikel Obat Ampuh Ambeien Sudah Akut
Artikel Obat Herbal Ambeien Sudah Akut
Cara Pengobatan Kanker
Pengobatan Kanker Alami
Cara Pengobatan Kanker Ampuh
Cara Pengobatan Kanker Alami Ampuh
Cara Pengobatan Penyakit Kanker
Cara Pengobatan Kanker Alami
Pengobatan Penyakit Kanker Alami
Cara Pengobatan Penyakit Kanker Alami Mujarab
Cara Ampuh untuk Pengobatan Kanker Alami
Pengobatan Kanker Alami
Cara Pengobatan Kanker Alami
Cara Ampuh Pengobatan Kanker Herbal
Cara Manjur Pengobatan Kanker
Pengobatan Kanker Alami
Cara Manjur untuk Pengobatan Kanker Alami
Cara Manjur Pengobatan Kanker Herbal
Mengobati Penyakit Ambeien
Mengobati Penyakit Wasir
Penyakit Ambeien atau Wasir
Mengobati Penyakit Ambeien dan Wasir
Cara Mengobati Penyakit Ambeien
Cara Mengobati Penyakit Wasir
Penyakit Ambeien atau Wasir
Cara Mengobati Untuk Penyakit Ambeien atau Wasir
Terapi Mengobati Penyakit Ambeien
Terapi Mengobati Penyakit Wasir
Mengobati Penyakit Ambeien
Terapi Mengobati Penyakit Ambeien dan Wasir
Mengobati Penyakit Ambeien tanpa Operasi
Mengobati Penyakit Wasir tanpa Operasi
Mengobati Penyakit Ambeien
Mengobati Penyakit Ambeyen atau Wasir tanpa Operasi
Post a Comment