If you have any interest in Giza's electric capacity, I'd suggest checking out Alexander Putney’s ebook Phi, or his website in general. Whether or not the author's other ideas are believable or not, the basis of plotting out ancient structures on the basis of standing resonant wavepatterns, and subsequent discoveries based on them, bear scrutiny.
"Norway was the most difficult to transform from polytheism to Christianity......The most conflict was seen during a fifty year period, 950-1000 CE, under King Haakon, a soft-handed pioneer of the Christian faith. Haakon's method was similar to Constantine's.......resulting in an attempt at a midway approach: temples were left to the pagans with churches built right beside them and though he refused on his own part to sacrifice to the Aesir and Vanir, he also refused to punish those who continued this practice. Haakon was able to begin the spread of Christianity throughout this region by showing kindness to the established polytheistic religion, enforcing the new while never exiling the old."
If Haakon's approach was s described, why then say that the MOST conflict seen in Norway occurred during his reign?
If the first skeletial photo is not a fake then this skeleton is most certainly not human. I only need to look at the ribs to know this they are manufactured ribs. Further, like many people I am wholly against grave robbing for any reason. It still goes on today for the sake of science. We as a civilisation have lost our soul.
Dear Konstantin, In order for you to gain acceptance for your proposal and all the credit which goes with it you would need to have somebody re-write it in a style which is understandable to the likes of me and others. I agree wirh Nick D also.
I believe it has been now established that the sarcophagus in Turkey, is actually depicts his friend, Hephaistion. It is likely one of the many pieces Alexander commissioned after Hephaistions' untimely death. The face matches other existing known sculptures.
These discoveries are fascinating, but there is something I don't understand. How can skeletons 9,000-13,000 years old be "Maya"? Am I to understand this to mean the Mayan civilization existed from 13,000BC to 1500AD??
Also, these caves are flooded because they are below sea level, correct? That would imply that any architecture found inside them, and any "graves" (meaning physical interrments or burials) must predate the catastrophic sea level rise at the end of the Younger Dryas approx. 13,000 years ago. That would make it amongst the most ancient architecture known.... and a little difficult to associate it with Mayan architecture dated to more than 10,000 years later.
What kind of stone is it? According to Egyptology, granite can be worked into shape with a precision of a thousanth of an inch using copper chisels, dolerite pounders, toothpicks, and dedication.
Sarcasm aside, I'm interested to know what caused the submergence of these structures. Was the lake previously much smaller? How deep beneath the surface are we talking about? Where does the water that feeds the lake come from?
I've always wanted a Mammoth burger. Maybe one day I'll get up to Alaska and make my own. If that kicks off the zombie apocalypse, so be it. Somebody's gotta do it, might as well be me.
I don't understand. If the civilizations described in 1542 by Gaspar de Carvajal vanished in the decades between his and subsequent explorations, that can hardly be blamed on long term globalist resource exploitation, and most definitely has rendered said civilizations as 'lost'.
And what is meant by the assertion that being "lost, misplaced or requiring re-discovery is not an intrinsic condition"? That no civilization ever disappears of their own accord, without the influence of another civilization purposely causing it? There are plenty of things that can lead to the destruction of civilizations that are based solely on the forces of nature.
Plus, "lost" is a purely subjective term. Something I lost can also be something someone else found. Some things become lost simply because everyone who knew of them died without passing on the information.
All of the legends of fantastical "lost" cities or civilizations in the Amazon also imply that there are plenty of indigenous peoples to whom said cities are not lost, though the civilizations that built them are, in the same way that Ancient Egyptian or Sumerian civilization is lost: by the changing of circumstances and the passage of time.
In the grand scheme of things, nothing is eternal. All of human civilization will eventually disappear as will humanity itself. Perhaps in some incredibly distant future, some other intelligent life form, either evolved on earth or having traveled here from some distant place, will find the fossilized remnants of humanity, and their news organizations will speak of the discovery of a lost civilization. They will be fascinated because on some level they know they will share the same fate.
Entropy increases, and things become lost. It is intrinsic to everything.
I think he meant the energy comes from the earth itself, or, more accurately, the sun. I inferred this from his description of the earth as a spherical capacitor, which is correct. The upper atmosphere is the positive terminal and the ground is the negative, and they are separated by an insulator made up of the bottom few layers of atmosphere, which are dense with pressure and humidity. The sun provides a daily charge of 120,000 terawatts to the upper atmosphere, keeping the capacitor at full potential. All one has to do is bridge the gap across the insulator with a conductor.
However, I had heard that it was the core material limestone that was an efficient conductor due in part to a high magnesium content, while the Tura limestone used for the casing had almost zero magnesium and thus was a near perfect insulator. If I read the article correctly, the author was saying the opposite--that the casing stones were the good conductors. But he was talking about very high frequencies, so perhaps that is the difference?
The entire structure is earthed, is it not? Where is the energy coming from for electrolysis? There is no method of conveniently isolating hydrogen and oxygen other than there relative densities, gases mix, as in the air your breathing made up of many gases, they don't conveniently separate out and no method is proposed for capturing them at the anode and cathode. The mixture of H2 and O2 is highly combustible and you propose to add electricity into the mix, what voltages are we talking about? Sorry, I don't get it. I still can't get past where the energy is coming from to power these processes to produce light.
I suspect you'll say the hydrogen produces the electricity to split the water, sorry that will not work it requires more energy than it would create.
GREAT book of fantasy and imaginative wishes! The only things missing were unicorns and little fairies. There is NOT a SHRED of physical evidence to PROVE this load of BS! This is just a book of lies and PC crappola designed to make the inventor-less, discovery-less negroids look better than they actually are!
Let me first say, I found this article interesting and I see your point of view. I have learned separately about giants and Adena culture in archaeology courses that I took while I was at university. While it was an interesting read, I felt that there were parts that were lacking support. Foremost, the references that were cited throughout the article while they are the original reports from the first researchers of the mounds (Dragoo (1955), Cadzow (1933), Flemming (1922), Carpenter (1956)), they are dated. These articles all came about a time where archaeology was in its scientific infancy and the thick description of human remains as “gigantic” is purely arbitrary. I am a person who stands at 5 feet and 7 inches, therefore anyone taller than me, I could refer to as a giant, however, I do not. A six-foot-tall person – even by our standards of today – is tall, but I would not classify them as a giant. Furthermore, a lot of the early archaeologists and researchers only recorded the cultural data, as presented in the article (the size of the mound and the number of artifacts found in the grave). An interpretation of the remains was never their forte, only cultural history and data. Therefore, the methodology and interpretation of the biological materials (i.e. human remains) can be skewed and should be reexamined in a modern understanding, especially in the cases where it was reported that an individual stood 9-feet tall. For example, Mark McConaughy, in his 2011 article “Burial Ceremonialism at Sugar Run Mound (36WA359), a Hopewellian Squawkie Hill Phase Site, Warren County, Pennsylvania” from Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology, readdressed the discoveries at the site and did not focus on the size of the individuals, but rather the cultural interpretation of the site that was ignored the first time. Additionally, I struggled with finding other reports about the giants being buried in the mounds other than what was provided in the article. Therefore, I would caution the usage of the term giant and when describing past people. This my opinion about this topic and I am willing to discuss more about it.
Here you can navigate quickly through all comments made in any article sorted by date/time.
Thank you for this marvelous article. Some people will never understand but that is not your mission.
AKA Tarshish, or Sea People. Predominantly Israelite led. Phoenician ships. Milesians from SW Turkey. And a small Canaanite mix.
If you have any interest in Giza's electric capacity, I'd suggest checking out Alexander Putney’s ebook Phi, or his website in general. Whether or not the author's other ideas are believable or not, the basis of plotting out ancient structures on the basis of standing resonant wavepatterns, and subsequent discoveries based on them, bear scrutiny.
The strange trumpeting sounds heard world wide might cause one to wonder if, at last, Heimdal is warning of Ragnorak.
Any theory other than a burial chamber is rubish.
"Norway was the most difficult to transform from polytheism to Christianity......The most conflict was seen during a fifty year period, 950-1000 CE, under King Haakon, a soft-handed pioneer of the Christian faith. Haakon's method was similar to Constantine's.......resulting in an attempt at a midway approach: temples were left to the pagans with churches built right beside them and though he refused on his own part to sacrifice to the Aesir and Vanir, he also refused to punish those who continued this practice. Haakon was able to begin the spread of Christianity throughout this region by showing kindness to the established polytheistic religion, enforcing the new while never exiling the old."
If Haakon's approach was s described, why then say that the MOST conflict seen in Norway occurred during his reign?
If the first skeletial photo is not a fake then this skeleton is most certainly not human. I only need to look at the ribs to know this they are manufactured ribs. Further, like many people I am wholly against grave robbing for any reason. It still goes on today for the sake of science. We as a civilisation have lost our soul.
“the objects were deposited around 90,000 years (ago) and thus they were made by Neanderthals”
Quite some sweeping statement that.
Dear Konstantin, In order for you to gain acceptance for your proposal and all the credit which goes with it you would need to have somebody re-write it in a style which is understandable to the likes of me and others. I agree wirh Nick D also.
I believe it has been now established that the sarcophagus in Turkey, is actually depicts his friend, Hephaistion. It is likely one of the many pieces Alexander commissioned after Hephaistions' untimely death. The face matches other existing known sculptures.
These discoveries are fascinating, but there is something I don't understand. How can skeletons 9,000-13,000 years old be "Maya"? Am I to understand this to mean the Mayan civilization existed from 13,000BC to 1500AD??
Also, these caves are flooded because they are below sea level, correct? That would imply that any architecture found inside them, and any "graves" (meaning physical interrments or burials) must predate the catastrophic sea level rise at the end of the Younger Dryas approx. 13,000 years ago. That would make it amongst the most ancient architecture known.... and a little difficult to associate it with Mayan architecture dated to more than 10,000 years later.
What kind of stone is it? According to Egyptology, granite can be worked into shape with a precision of a thousanth of an inch using copper chisels, dolerite pounders, toothpicks, and dedication.
Sarcasm aside, I'm interested to know what caused the submergence of these structures. Was the lake previously much smaller? How deep beneath the surface are we talking about? Where does the water that feeds the lake come from?
So if there is no physical treasure, what was the purpose of creating the cyphers?
I've always wanted a Mammoth burger. Maybe one day I'll get up to Alaska and make my own. If that kicks off the zombie apocalypse, so be it. Somebody's gotta do it, might as well be me.
I don't understand. If the civilizations described in 1542 by Gaspar de Carvajal vanished in the decades between his and subsequent explorations, that can hardly be blamed on long term globalist resource exploitation, and most definitely has rendered said civilizations as 'lost'.
And what is meant by the assertion that being "lost, misplaced or requiring re-discovery is not an intrinsic condition"? That no civilization ever disappears of their own accord, without the influence of another civilization purposely causing it? There are plenty of things that can lead to the destruction of civilizations that are based solely on the forces of nature.
Plus, "lost" is a purely subjective term. Something I lost can also be something someone else found. Some things become lost simply because everyone who knew of them died without passing on the information.
All of the legends of fantastical "lost" cities or civilizations in the Amazon also imply that there are plenty of indigenous peoples to whom said cities are not lost, though the civilizations that built them are, in the same way that Ancient Egyptian or Sumerian civilization is lost: by the changing of circumstances and the passage of time.
In the grand scheme of things, nothing is eternal. All of human civilization will eventually disappear as will humanity itself. Perhaps in some incredibly distant future, some other intelligent life form, either evolved on earth or having traveled here from some distant place, will find the fossilized remnants of humanity, and their news organizations will speak of the discovery of a lost civilization. They will be fascinated because on some level they know they will share the same fate.
Entropy increases, and things become lost. It is intrinsic to everything.
I think he meant the energy comes from the earth itself, or, more accurately, the sun. I inferred this from his description of the earth as a spherical capacitor, which is correct. The upper atmosphere is the positive terminal and the ground is the negative, and they are separated by an insulator made up of the bottom few layers of atmosphere, which are dense with pressure and humidity. The sun provides a daily charge of 120,000 terawatts to the upper atmosphere, keeping the capacitor at full potential. All one has to do is bridge the gap across the insulator with a conductor.
However, I had heard that it was the core material limestone that was an efficient conductor due in part to a high magnesium content, while the Tura limestone used for the casing had almost zero magnesium and thus was a near perfect insulator. If I read the article correctly, the author was saying the opposite--that the casing stones were the good conductors. But he was talking about very high frequencies, so perhaps that is the difference?
The entire structure is earthed, is it not? Where is the energy coming from for electrolysis? There is no method of conveniently isolating hydrogen and oxygen other than there relative densities, gases mix, as in the air your breathing made up of many gases, they don't conveniently separate out and no method is proposed for capturing them at the anode and cathode. The mixture of H2 and O2 is highly combustible and you propose to add electricity into the mix, what voltages are we talking about? Sorry, I don't get it. I still can't get past where the energy is coming from to power these processes to produce light.
I suspect you'll say the hydrogen produces the electricity to split the water, sorry that will not work it requires more energy than it would create.
GREAT book of fantasy and imaginative wishes! The only things missing were unicorns and little fairies. There is NOT a SHRED of physical evidence to PROVE this load of BS! This is just a book of lies and PC crappola designed to make the inventor-less, discovery-less negroids look better than they actually are!
Let me first say, I found this article interesting and I see your point of view. I have learned separately about giants and Adena culture in archaeology courses that I took while I was at university. While it was an interesting read, I felt that there were parts that were lacking support. Foremost, the references that were cited throughout the article while they are the original reports from the first researchers of the mounds (Dragoo (1955), Cadzow (1933), Flemming (1922), Carpenter (1956)), they are dated. These articles all came about a time where archaeology was in its scientific infancy and the thick description of human remains as “gigantic” is purely arbitrary. I am a person who stands at 5 feet and 7 inches, therefore anyone taller than me, I could refer to as a giant, however, I do not. A six-foot-tall person – even by our standards of today – is tall, but I would not classify them as a giant. Furthermore, a lot of the early archaeologists and researchers only recorded the cultural data, as presented in the article (the size of the mound and the number of artifacts found in the grave). An interpretation of the remains was never their forte, only cultural history and data. Therefore, the methodology and interpretation of the biological materials (i.e. human remains) can be skewed and should be reexamined in a modern understanding, especially in the cases where it was reported that an individual stood 9-feet tall. For example, Mark McConaughy, in his 2011 article “Burial Ceremonialism at Sugar Run Mound (36WA359), a Hopewellian Squawkie Hill Phase Site, Warren County, Pennsylvania” from Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology, readdressed the discoveries at the site and did not focus on the size of the individuals, but rather the cultural interpretation of the site that was ignored the first time. Additionally, I struggled with finding other reports about the giants being buried in the mounds other than what was provided in the article. Therefore, I would caution the usage of the term giant and when describing past people. This my opinion about this topic and I am willing to discuss more about it.
And you wonder why the zombie apocalypse happened. Eating 35,000 year old Bison meat is definitely the way to get the apocalypse started.
Pages