actually the evidence for historical visitations is pretty dramatic as well - the Indian Vadic texts go into it, as do many cuneform tablets IF you trust Sitchins translations, which I haven't really seen definitively refuted.

@reddingofish:

ah but if you wanted to keep records for, say, thousands of years, printing on paper isn't going to cut it. for all we know they printed all kinds of things on fragile paper. In fact, the ONLY storage medium that lasts any considerable amount of time is, ta da, stone.

 Reply

For any of you that haven't seen it, you can start your "spiritual quest" at www.uhcg.org, with the warning that "(The) site contains scriptural truths that will challenge your thinking, adjust your mindset, and change your life forever!! Proceed with Anticipation!" The site's a real winner.

 Reply

meh, im not endorsing the sites - they were the first to come up under googling - do you always dismiss things out of hand because they happen to appear on disreputable sites as well as reputable ones? forgive me, I don't have all the time in the world to judge the links. but none of that changes the evidence.

 Reply

and for the record, im not saying i necessarily believe everything i'm talking about here. I'm just acknowledging, with an open mind, that there exist peculiar pieces of evidence for ancient high techonology.

so you can dismiss it all out of hand because it doesn't fit what Ms. Thompson taught you about Columbus in the 3rd grade or you could make a legitimate effort to examine the available data before coming to conclusions - which, i fear, is asking too much.

 Reply

[www.cracked.com]

 Reply

those are also pretty good examples of evidence for the "modern historians really don't know jack shit" theory : )

 Reply

The problem with stone being that many carvings don't hold up to weathering all that well. It was great for a couple hundred years, but by the time we find the stuff these days, most of it is worn to hell.

I agree that modern people treat the past like it's full of primitive idiots (pretty funny considering the level of idiocy in the world today), but "lost" technology is tough to swallow thanks to all of the hoaxes that have been perpetrated over the past two hundred years. It's very difficult to separate legitimate finds from people looking to create a sensational story.

Our ancestors had impressive technology, no doubt about it, but to what extent - who knows. Ancient peoples contributed to our current state more than we'll ever really comprehend. But that big question mark is thanks to the societal contributions of our forefathers from the 1600-1900s: arrogance and bullshit.

 Reply

Well I can see paper holding up, in the right conditions, for hundreds of years - but stone in the same environmental conditions would hold up for thousands of years.

This is why i believe that there is a good possibility the pyramid of giza contains within it probably volumes upon volumes of information dating back 10,000 years or more - why else would you build a gigantic, virtually indestructible, building out of stone? The pyramid was meant to last for a long time, and I only wish Zahi Hawass would let people poke around it more.

 Reply

Sure, the Phoenicians and the Greeks and Vikings later, were great seamen (hur hur), but to imply that there was more than an accidental discovery is pretty rushed.

Most likely ancient western ships discovered the new continent by accident and the captains either decided to keep the discovery a secret (to take sole advantage of the land) or the ships were marooned there, their crew becoming castaways who were either accepted by native tribes or sacrificed to the tribal gods. Or died of diseases.

The Vikings are another story, those I believe may have known about north America for some time, but decided to use the newfound land for looting and pillaging only. They were pretty petty to non-Vikings after all...

 Reply

Seriously, look into the Phoenecian copper mines in Michigan, and the sheer volume of the mining operation. Micheal Cremo is the guy you want to read, although there are a few others that escape my mind right now. Discovery of this land was no accident, and indeed it appears they knew right off the bat where to go for the copper.

Think of it this way, if you aren't advanced, you might look for copper ANYWHERE - and certainly you'd look close to home. The fact that they set out and went so far to a precise spot is pretty amazing shit.

 Reply

But that's the thing - they largely ignore those anomalous pieces of evidence that contradict the accepted "Man, though having the same capabilities of modern man for the last 100,000 years, was completely primitive and developed no technology or written languages until ~6,000 years ago" theory.

They like the fairy tale how it is now, with Columbus or Vespucci 'discovering' America.

You cannot deny the Badghdad battery, sir, and it is only one of many very strange artifacts.

Have you looked into the metal spheres of south africa? They are clearly artifice, and are made of a strange, non-reproducible alloy. They are hollow and contain aluminum oxide powder, and when placed on a level surface will rotate exactly twice in one year.

Oh yeah, I forgot, and they were found in a coal deposit estimated to be millions of years old.

 Reply

But lots of things are just equally ordinary things which people inflate to extraordinary proportion because they want to appear to possess some sort of "special" knowledge that sets them apart from the ordinary. The "Baghdad Batteries" are just elementary chemistry. Nothing surprising there. What's surprising is that you would expect these civilizations to NOT have elementary chemistry? Why would you?

And sure, Columbus didn't "discover" america. Plenty of people landed here before him. But they all left ARTIFACTS. Even if it was a single viking ship that landed in Newfoundland, they left plenty behind for us to find.

Historical study is built on conjecture based on evidence, and as evidence mounts and mounts and builds together, the picture of the world slowly comes into focus. Historians don't "ignore" things. They don't make believe that evidence doesn't exist. If there's something interesting about a mystery, eventually it will become researched, and will someday become fact.

Why don't you read about the discovery of Troy - how that went from myth to fact? Compare that to all the "facts" you know about the "high tech spheres" found in coal deposits "millions of years old".

History is a slow and inaccurate process. But the process of taking occult knowledge and using it as a basis to feel special is a very very very very quick one.

 Reply