Conspiracy Theories?

[Werewolf]

Darklord, I think you are starting to take this personal.

As I stated before, I believe in the theoretical possibility of alien life. Considering the vastness of the universe the odds are quite favorable. But there is no proof they exist, have visted us, are visiting us or are responsible for our achievements. There is only opinion and wild conspiracy theories which have been debunked time and time again.

I understand why some might want to believe that aliens are responsible for our acheivements. I suppose it's more fun or exciting for some to believe E.T. is responsible for our technology than some boring human scientist or Egyptian architect or Mayan astronomer. But it's a discredit to our history and to the hard working men and woman that were and are actually responsible.

[darklord1967]

Darklord, I think you are starting to take this personal.

Exactly why do you say this?

You know, every time these debates come up on these boards, and I am asked to provide some sources for my opinions, I do so. And I am thorough. Because I am thorough, I am called long-winded (which is certainly true). But I am not the one who is the first to get "personal".

I merely offer my opinion on these topics as they come up, and others ask me to support my viewpoint.

You always label me as getting "personal", and yet nowhere in any of my previous posts have I done so. I have not attacked you nor anyone who disagreed with my conclusions / opinions. Nor have I taken an angry tone. Perhaps that is not obvious in writing.

At any rate, I have been careful to categorically state always in bold letters, to be absolutely clear that I am stating my own opinion. And it is with self-depreciating humility that I acknowledge the overall worthlessness of that opinion.

It is my posts that you have chosen to disagree with, and that is fine. I have NO PROBLEM with that, and I don't expect everyone to agree with me.

But if YOU make an observation about my stated opinion that I disagree with, is it "personal" of me to adrress this?

Clearly, it may be YOU taking this personally. Where you see "no proof" of the existence of extraterrestrial existence / visitation to this planet, I see an abundance of it.

But I have no problem with us agreeing to disagree.

I understand why some might want to believe that aliens are responsible for our acheivements. But it's a discredit to our history and to the hard working men and woman that were and are actually responsible.

I could not agree more. But, as I have stated before, I do not believe the two are necessarily mutually exclusive.

Yes ancient humans were responsible for remarkable independent achievements. Undoubtedly.

I just don't believe that because that is true that it is therefore impossible for other achievements to have been assisted... especially when those achievements demonstrate an ability and knowledge that ancient man showed no evidence of possessing.

You say there is no proof of the existence of aliens.
I say there is no proof that ancient man knew the accurate dimensions, measurments of this planet, or could accurately have calculated its land-mass center (as the builders of the pyramid of Giza must have). If anything, there is an abundance of evidence that ancient man could not possibly have possessed this knowledge independently based on the fact that they were incapable to mapping / traversing this entire planet.

[Brazoo]

I don't think darklord is taking this personal - I really appreciate that he's putting some time into explaining his point of view.

I'm completely fascinated with this subject and can't wait to go through everything - I got really busy today with work, but I can't wait to go through everything he posted!

[darklord1967]

I don't think darklord is taking this personal - I really appreciate that he's putting some time into explaining his point of view.

I'm completely fascinated with this subject and can't wait to go through everything - I got really busy today with work, but I can't wait to go through everything he posted!

Thanks pal. I do hope you enjoy going through the stuff I posted. I'll be the first to admit that not all of it is easy to take. But try to be open-minded, and it might be eye-opening for you.

[Werewolf]

I don't think darklord is taking this personal

My mistake. The tone of his last post came off that way to me. I apologize.

I'm completely fascinated with this subject and can't wait to go through everything

I find conspiracy theories interesting, to a certain degree, from a psychological perspective. It becomes like a pseudo religion of sorts for some people. The mind set behind them can actually be much more interesting than the constantly debunked conspiracy theories themselves.

[jwyblejr]

If it wasn't for conspiracy theories,I wouldn't watch the TV specials debunking them. So I thank them for that.

[Brazoo]

darkloard1967 - sorry about that, the last few days have just been crazy.

I'm still going through this material, but I do want to mention a few things and probably ask a few questions. Thanks again for posting this stuff, I really do find it fascinating and I hope that you don't find my criticisms offensive - I'm not intending to be offensive in any way.

I'm actually very much on point with Werewolf in terms of how we think. I'm just not capable of accepting information, especially with regards to scientific theories, that can't stand up to testing using the scientific method.

Critical thinking is not about being closed minded, I'm very open to a lot of experiences and knowledge, but when it comes down to weighing what's truth and fiction I really do believe that testing using the scientific method is the only reasonable way to measure what makes sense. Unfortunately all of our human senses and methods of perception are flawed. So I simply can't accept theories, or even evidence, if scientific method isn't applied.

I'm also not claiming to be an expert on any of these subjects, I'm just trying to explain my problems believing the theories you're presenting.

Here's why some of your theories don't stand up for me:

Materials:
There is a fundamental difference in the way we both think about the materials and effort used to build the Great Pyramids. You have a problem believing the time and effort that it would take to build and excavate the materials wouldn't be done if they were just monuments. I don't. In fact I don't think that a powerful empire would build monuments out of common materials in an easy way - what would be the point? Why would they use all their wealth and power to build something unimpressive?

it doesn't seem as though there is a singular consensus about exactly what materials were used to create the pyramids. This is an interesting article examining the theory that at least some of the materials used might have been concrete made from limestone as oppose to just cutting slabs: Discovery Channel :: News - Animals :: Were the Pyramids Made With Concrete?

In any case, here's what wikipedia has to say about some of the minerals you've brought up:

"Limestone is very common in architecture"

"Granite is a common and widely occurring type of intrusive, felsic, igneous rock"

"Quartz is the second most abundant mineral in the Earth's continental crust, after feldspar."

"Calcium Carbonate...a common substance found in rock in all parts of the world"

Again, we have a fundamental difference in opinion about these minerals. Because these minerals are so common it seems as though it would be impossible to build the pyramids with out them. If the theories you're presenting made sense, and the minerals found in pyramids were there for reasons other than just holding the structure together, these theorists need to propose alternatives. Substances that were available, usable and didn't contain limestone, granite, quartz or calcium carbonate. Does that make sense? Maybe there are theories about this that I'm just unaware of.

[Brazoo]

Bosnian Pyramids:
I checked out this link that you provided: Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun Foundation - http://www.piramidasunca.ba/en/index...-PIRAMIDA.html
I'm sure you already know that these formations/structures aren't considered to be manmade by the general scientific community. That's a whole other debate, but for now I just want to look at the experiment you posted. Truthfully I'd consider it to be pseudo-experiment, and I'll tell you what's fishy about it to me.

First I researched the doctors on their websites. Dr. Harry Oldfield doesn't list what field he's suppose to have a doctorate in and he doesn't list the institution where he earned that title even though he has a generous biography on himself. So that's weird to me. He says he won an "Alyce and Elmer Green Award for Innovation" so I looked up their site, they're a collective of practitioners and researchers in the field of "Energy Medicine", which includes Touch Therapy, Holistic Medicine, and other New Age practices that simply do not stand up to testing using the scientific method.

EDIT: In the article it says "Dr. Oldfield is a trained biologist, Honorary Doctor of Sciences, visiting professor at Grenada Unversity’s School of Medicine, and member of the Royal Society of Microscopic Research in Oxford."

So I googled "Royal Society of Microscopic Research in Oxford" funnily enough the only two things I got was the article you posted and this article debunking the article and Dr. Oldfield's credentials: [Le site dIrna] Pseudo-scientific validation

And here's another article debunking his claims: BadPsychics By Jon Donni - News

Dr. Karin Tag lists herself as a Dr. of Holistic Sciences and a Crystal Skull Researcher - so at least she's being upfront.

THEY created the theory of electromagnetic fields as proof that the Bosnian Pyramids were manmade, and THEY came up with the instruments to measure the fields. So they're asking me to accept evidence based on two different theories that THEY pioneered while measuring with instruments THEY created using data that THEY interpreted. That's just not how proper experimentation works. I mean, you have to understand how far out from my way of thinking that is. You could confirm anything you want to believe using that logic. Even if I can be willing to believe they got results from their instruments that showed there was something unusual about the "pyramids" (I can't) it's still a really long long long stretch connecting that data to the presence of extra-terrestrials.

I wanted to talk about a couple more points too - so I'll try to post more a bit later!

[Brazoo]

Now... why go through so much trouble to move collossally heavy and huge stones to a location so far away to build a structure at that specific site?

Let's take a look at that.



“The Great Pyramid is located at the center of the land mass of the earth. The east/west parallel that crosses the most land and the north/south meridian that crosses the most land intersect in two places on the earth, one in the ocean and the other at the Great Pyramid.”

http://www.crystalinks.com/gpstats.html

Okay, so I can't be amazed by how accurate the Egyptians were with the placement of the Pyramid Giza yet because I don't understand some of the terms you're using.

I can't find mention of the term "center of the land mass of the earth" outside of sites featuring information similar to the theories you're talking about.

I want to get this straight, you're saying that the the lines of latitude and longitude that crosses through the most land area on Earth meets up at the Pyramid? And that's what the "center of the land mass of Earth " is? Again, I can't find any information outside of the theory you're presenting to confirm this. Are they're any outside geographical sources to confirm this? I've looked through some of the more commonly accepted sources for info about the pyramids and couldn't find reference to this on any of those either. If that measurement can't be confirmed I can't be amazed by it.

“The sides of the pyramid are lined up almost exactly with the cardinal points of the compass. The accuracy of this alignment is extraordinary, with an average discrepancy of only about three minutes of arc in any direction or a variation of less than 0.06 percent.

I did find sites that confirmed this fact. To me it's impressive, but not impossible. As I understand it the Egyptians worshiped the sun for centuries - and I believe they had fairly accurate calendars - it follows that they'd know when to expect the longest day (the summer solstice). If they charted where the sun rose and fell on that day they'd have a very accurate idea of due East and due West. It stands to reason that that's how they calculated which way the Pyramids would face.

"The Great Pyramid functioned as an enormous sundial. Its shadow to the north, and its reflected sunlight to the south, accurately marked the annual dates of both the solstices and the equinoxes."

I don't get this one. Anything sticking out of the ground will act as a sundial - no?

I'm going to take another break now, but I did want to leave you with this interesting resource published on BPS's website for NOVA. Full of information on experiments like this, which they used to calculate man-hours for creating the pyramids:

"in a NOVA experiment we found that 12 men could pull a 1.5 ton block over a slick surface with great ease. And then you could come up with very conservative estimates as to the number of men it would take to pull an average size block the distance from the quarry, which we know, to the pyramid."

NOVA Online/PyramidsThe Inside Story