Home of the The Hall of Ma'at on the Internet
Home
Discussion Forums
Papers
Authors
Web Links

May 3, 2024, 8:52 am UTC    
September 27, 2010 10:36AM
cladking Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I believe that most of the megalithic building
> sites employed water used as ballast. This goes
> twice over at those sites where great amounts of
> material were lifted to great height. It's
> improbable many of these employed cold water
> geysers because these events are relatively rare.
> But in most cases they had presasurized water by
> some mechanism. Even today at Machu Pichu there
> is a stream that originates near the top of the
> mountain. Evidence suggests the flow was much
> greater in the past. Central American pyramids
> are always associated with cenotes. I really
> haven't studied any other sites or situations but
> even the Sumerian writing refer constantly to
> water coming out of the ground.
>
> Do I know of anyone confirmed to have used CO2
> geysers? No, of course not. Though if you compare
> what we know to what exists you'll find that
> little of it is really explicable in terms of what
> we know, or what we believe they knew or were
> capable of. We don't really have a clue and that
> might be because we've been barking up the wrong
> trees. We might really misunderstand all the
> ancient people and it might even be related to
> something so incredible as the story of the Tower
> of Babel. Perhaps it was more than the language
> that became confused. The story itself is written
> in the old style so we misapprehend it as well.
>
> I refuse to discount the ancients especially when
> their words even cross civilizations. It is our
> duty to prove them crazy if they were. It is not
> fair to simply dismiss it all as the ravings of
> lunatics. Asking me for proof is about as
> productive and meaningful as seeking the ancient
> writings of a child or a scientific treatise on
> the flow rates of artesian wells relative to top
> pressure. This is a very simple thing to prove or
> disprove but if it could be proven from where I
> sit it would long ago have become accepted fact.
>
>
> I would remind you that there is simply no
> compelling reason to attempt to harness such
> energy today. But before the invention of
> internal combustion engines and electric motors
> the only energy available was from harnessable
> natural processes. Falling water would certainly
> attract people even before anyone thought of using
> its weight to do work.
>
> ____________
> Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.


"I refuse to discount the ancients especially when their words even cross civilizations."

who are "the ancients"?

do you mean anyone who lived before you and who died before you were born??

are you referring to a master race or lost civilisation?

even when it's obvious you are referring to the Egyptians it's still not obvious who you are referring to

do you mean those who came before the pyramid builders..or the pyramid builders themselves?

" It is our duty to prove them crazy if they were. It is not fair to simply dismiss it all as the ravings of lunatics"

I know of noone who refers to 'them' as lunatics.

Tho you have suggested that they might have been.





Warwick







" I have always found that the main obstacle to free
association on these boards is the broad
misconception that what we do not know is more
significant than what we do know."

Warwick L Nixon, March 8, 2019



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/27/2010 10:37AM by Warwick L Nixon.
Subject Author Posted

CK Geysers, lets look at probability math...

Jammer September 24, 2010 11:51AM

Re: CK Geysers, lets look at probability math...

Rick Baudé September 24, 2010 11:59AM

Re: CK Geysers, lets look at probability math...

cladking September 24, 2010 01:39PM

Re: CK Geysers, lets look at probability math...

Tommi Huhtamaki September 24, 2010 02:49PM

Re: CK Geysers, lets look at probability math...

cladking September 27, 2010 11:43AM

Re: CK Geysers, lets look at probability math...

Anthony September 24, 2010 04:44PM

Re: CK Geysers, lets look at probability math...

Rick Baudé September 24, 2010 04:54PM

Re: CK Geysers, lets look at probability math...

Anthony September 24, 2010 08:00PM

Re: CK Geysers, lets look at probability math...

cladking September 27, 2010 11:47AM

Re: CK Geysers, lets look at probability math...

Warwick L Nixon September 27, 2010 12:24PM

Re: CK Geysers, lets look at probability math...

Byrd September 25, 2010 07:01PM

Re: CK Geysers, lets look at probability math...

Khazar-khum September 25, 2010 09:26PM

Re: CK Geysers, lets look at probability math...

Pistol September 25, 2010 09:45PM

Question for CK

Khazar-khum September 26, 2010 08:18PM

Re: Question for CK

cladking September 26, 2010 08:55PM

Translation

Anthony September 27, 2010 03:52AM

Re: Question for CK

Warwick L Nixon September 27, 2010 10:36AM

Re: Question for CK

cladking September 27, 2010 11:12AM

Re: Question for CK

Warwick L Nixon September 27, 2010 12:05PM

Re: CK Geysers, lets look at probability math...

cladking September 27, 2010 12:23PM

Re: CK Geysers, lets look at probability math...

Warwick L Nixon September 27, 2010 12:27PM

Re: CK Geysers, lets look at probability math...

cladking September 27, 2010 12:20PM

Re: CK Geysers, lets look at probability math...

cladking September 27, 2010 12:11PM

Re: CK Geysers, lets look at probability math...

Warwick L Nixon September 27, 2010 12:17PM

Re: CK Geysers, lets look at probability math...

cladking September 27, 2010 12:37PM

I'll approach just one paragraph

Warwick L Nixon September 27, 2010 10:21AM

**Thread closure**

Hermione September 27, 2010 12:45PM



Sorry, you can't reply to this topic. It has been closed.