|
Coincidentiaoppositorum
deep psychedelic


Registered: 10/27/14
Posts: 1,965
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
unexplained ancient artifacts
#22195993 - 09/06/15 07:31 AM (8 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
www.youtube.com/watch?v=78SM_X3Xti8
·The Baigong Pipes ·Stone spheres of Costa Rica ·Roman dodecahedron ·Gold "air-planes of south America ·The London Hammer
-E. Borodin
|
Coincidentiaoppositorum
deep psychedelic


Registered: 10/27/14
Posts: 1,965
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
|
The Roman dodecahedrons really caught my attention, what possible function could these things have?
Plutarch, the Greek historian claimed they were an astronomical device, but I still fail to understand how they would be used.
They said these things were often found with treasure and valuables, though I don't think they were purely decorative, I think they must have had some function...
http://www.messagetoeagle.com/dodecah.php#.VexOAeDnbmw There's some interesting thoughts in the link above...
-E. Borodin
|
Shroomslip
Architekt



Registered: 11/25/12
Posts: 23,651
Last seen: 1 hour, 50 minutes
|
|
People often underestimate our ancestors. Every time we gain some new technology and it becomes basic to virtually everyone, everyone looks back on those who didn't have it and sees them as being primitive. Cars replaced horses, horses replaced walking. Gun replaced bow, bow replaced spear. You'll see it over and over again. Because their technology didn't hold up to ours, we automatically assume that they were as undavanced in every facet.
--------------------
With my face against the floor I can’t see who knocked me out of the way. I don’t want to get back up but I have to so it might as well be today. Nothing appeals to me no one feels like me, I’m too busy being calm to disappear. I’m in no shape to be alone contrary to the shit that you might hear. You can't wake up, this is not a dream. You're part of a machine, you are not a human being With your face all made up, living on a screen. Low on self esteem, so you run on gasoline
|
Coincidentiaoppositorum
deep psychedelic


Registered: 10/27/14
Posts: 1,965
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
Re: unexplained ancient artifacts [Re: Shroomslip]
#22196274 - 09/06/15 09:13 AM (8 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shroomslip said: People often underestimate our ancestors. Every time we gain some new technology and it becomes basic to virtually everyone, everyone looks back on those who didn't have it and sees them as being primitive. Cars replaced horses, horses replaced walking. Gun replaced bow, bow replaced spear. You'll see it over and over again. Because their technology didn't hold up to ours, we automatically assume that they were as undavanced in every facet.
And this is a mistake as well.
Another issue I see is academics holding onto the accepted dogma even when we find a site like gobekli tepe...the site shows evidence of ritual use dating back to the 10th-8th millennium BCE, and includes massive stone structures with intricate raised carvings of animals.
We accept history as being fairly accurate, when in reality it's fairly filled with uncertainties, unknowns, and inaccuracies.
The London Hammer was interesting as well, though there may be other explanations in that case...
-E. Borodin
Edited by Coincidentiaoppositorum (09/06/15 09:15 AM)
|
koraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,672
|
|
Quote:
Coincidentiaoppositorum said: We accept history as being fairly accurate, when in reality it's fairly filled with uncertainties, unknowns, and inaccuracies.
Well, that's hardly disputed among historians, isn't it? I don't really see how the things you brought to the fore point at widespread scientific dogma; could you elaborate?
|
nicechrisman
Interdimensional space wizard



Registered: 11/07/03
Posts: 33,241
Last seen: 4 years, 6 months
|
|
There's some interesting shit that happened back in the day that we may never understand. If the library of Alexandria hadn't been destroyed we might know about some of this stuff. I suspect the church was involved.
-------------------- "Cosmic Love is absolutelely ruthless and highly indifferent: it teaches its lessons whether you like/dislike them or not." John C. Lily
|
Coincidentiaoppositorum
deep psychedelic


Registered: 10/27/14
Posts: 1,965
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
|
I was interested in an artifact from far more recent times as well(early 15th century), the The Voynich manuscript.
I first heard of the Voynich manuscript from terence mckenna, but what interested me more than his speculations on its origins was the unknown writing system in which it was composed. Several people have tried to decode, I think some one at Yale ran it through cryptography software and still could not decode it.
It may have been translated in recent times, I'm not sure, but as far as I know, it still has yet to be deciphered.
...there is a bizzare history behind it as well, but the facts are disputed and unclear.
The Antikythera mechanism interest me as well:
The Antikythera mechanism (/ˌæntɨkɨˈθɪərə/ ant-i-ki-theer-ə or /ˌæntɨˈkɪθərə/ ant-i-kith-ə-rə) is an ancient analog computer[1][2][3][4] designed to predict astronomical positions and eclipses for calendrical and astrological purposes,[5][6][7] as well as the Olympiads, the cycles of the ancient Olympic Games.
...the instrument has been dated either between 150 and 100 BCE,[5] or, according to a more recent view, at 205 BCE-Wikipedia
That's an incredibly complex piece of technology, yet history would tell you people of that time would have only been able to produce much more primitive devices, this thing has cogs and gears that are as intricate as most fine modern watches.
Some things out there may be hoaxes, but there's plenty of mystery in several of these confirmed objects and sites as well.
Our picture of human history seems to be vastly distorted, yet nobody is concerned about correcting this.
The Solutrean hypothesis suggest that when the ice sheet was around central Spain that these people could have followed the ice sheet into north America, possibly meeting and mixing with those who crossed the Bering land bridge, forming the Clovis culture. There is some stone tool comparisons and other archeological evidence to support this theory, though none of it conformational.
If we want to truly understand history we are going to have to rewrite it if the evidence suggests that our current views were incorrect, and there's a lot of backlash and hostility towards trying to revise the accepted notions regarding humans on this planet living during far distant past time periods...
-E. Borodin
|
Shroomslip
Architekt



Registered: 11/25/12
Posts: 23,651
Last seen: 1 hour, 50 minutes
|
|
The vonyich is one of the things I want answers to the most. Possible it was just some fantasy novel type shit, but it's intriguing anyways.
--------------------
With my face against the floor I can’t see who knocked me out of the way. I don’t want to get back up but I have to so it might as well be today. Nothing appeals to me no one feels like me, I’m too busy being calm to disappear. I’m in no shape to be alone contrary to the shit that you might hear. You can't wake up, this is not a dream. You're part of a machine, you are not a human being With your face all made up, living on a screen. Low on self esteem, so you run on gasoline
|
Coincidentiaoppositorum
deep psychedelic


Registered: 10/27/14
Posts: 1,965
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
Re: unexplained ancient artifacts [Re: koraks]
#22196738 - 09/06/15 11:13 AM (8 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koraks said:
Quote:
Coincidentiaoppositorum said: We accept history as being fairly accurate, when in reality it's fairly filled with uncertainties, unknowns, and inaccuracies.
Well, that's hardly disputed among historians, isn't it? I don't really see how the things you brought to the fore point at widespread scientific dogma; could you elaborate?
I suppose ideas such as Neolithic era people were incapable of advanced stone work and construction, they were supposed to be Hunter gatherers at that point...but then look at gobekli tepe.
They say the first to make it to america did so by the Bering land bridge around 16,500–13,000 years ago, while there is building evidence to suggest that that several others may have been there first .
I elaborated some in my last post, but it seems like dogma when they are holding onto these beliefs in face of contradictory evidence...
I mean there are many other examples, but you get the idea of what I'm trying to say.
-E. Borodin
Edited by Coincidentiaoppositorum (09/06/15 11:14 AM)
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
|
You haven't explained the rest of those, we are supposed to google them ourselves? The dode is probably a symbol, perhaps religious.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Coincidentiaoppositorum
deep psychedelic


Registered: 10/27/14
Posts: 1,965
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
Re: unexplained ancient artifacts [Re: nicechrisman]
#22196785 - 09/06/15 11:24 AM (8 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
nicechrisman said: There's some interesting shit that happened back in the day that we may never understand. If the library of Alexandria hadn't been destroyed we might know about some of this stuff. I suspect the church was involved.
Do you think if our internet were somehow destroyed it would be analogous to the destruction of the library at alexandria?
I attempt to make metaphors so I may better understand how these events may have felt to these people or impacted them.
Also had barbarians not laid waste to the pelloponesian peninsula and shortly after the Roman empire causing the dark ages, from about 500 A.D to 1300 ad (though the actual dates are disputed), 8 hundred years where very little was accomplished and the prior knowledge had become lost...we may have been 800 years more advance had that not happened.
-E. Borodin
|
koraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,672
|
|
Again, that doesn't make for scientific dogma. The things you mention are absolutely fascinating and obviously, they aren't fully understood - that's what makes them so interesting. Sure, the Antikythera mechanism is exceptional in both its purpose (whatever it exactly is) and its manufacturing. But no serious historian or archaeologist would call ancient Greek civilization 'primitive'. The concept that people in ancient societies would somehow be unintelligent or incapable of dealing with complex concepts is really not a part of mainstream science and it hasn't been for decades. I always get the feeling that people who blame scientists for being dogmatic are really raging against a prejudice rather than reality.
Quote:
Some things out there may be hoaxes, but there's plenty of mystery in several of these confirmed objects and sites as well.
I think many, if not most, of these tantalizing artifacts are certainly not hoaxes. However, many of the explanations that have been connected with them are extremely disputable. It seems inherent to human imagination that in the lack of an overwhelmingly obvious and well-founded explanation, some people manage to come up with the most fantastic stories and the proceed to claim that these explanations are as good as any other - even if they involve assumptions that are at odds with other, well-established and well-supported theories. But a lack of clarity on the purpose, history or context of mysterious artifacts doesn't mean that all of our knowledge about human history is doubtful.
These artifacts serve as a reminder that the boundary of knowledge is still there to be pushed, and even though some things are well within those boundaries, there will always be things close to it that we want to understand better. It doesn't mean we need to rewrite our knowledge of human history in its entirety. It just signifies the incremental nature of scientific analysis and the undisputed fact that this also involves revising aspects that were disputed or speculative in the first place.
|
Coincidentiaoppositorum
deep psychedelic


Registered: 10/27/14
Posts: 1,965
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
Re: unexplained ancient artifacts [Re: Stonehenge]
#22196796 - 09/06/15 11:28 AM (8 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said: You haven't explained the rest of those, we are supposed to google them ourselves? The dode is probably a symbol, perhaps religious.
I figured some would already know what these things were, and it would be review and waste of space for me to go into detail on every object, but I'll gladly write something up if you think it would improve the thread.
-E. Borodin
|
koraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,672
|
|
Quote:
Coincidentiaoppositorum said: I suppose ideas such as Neolithic era people were incapable of advanced stone work and construction, they were supposed to be Hunter gatherers at that point...but then look at gobekli tepe.
But who says that the established view is that hunter-gatherers would be stupid or incapable of performing complex tasks? The interesting thing about gobeleki is that it seems to be at the very dawn of the more complex forms of organization that we associate with an agricultural lifestyle, excess food production (freeing up manpower for essentially non-food producing work) and the associated practice of division of labor. It's at the edge of our current understanding of the transition of a hunter-gatherer society to a farmer society. It doesn't undermine our concept of that transition, but offers food for thought and evidence of how that transition may have taken place. In fact, it seems perfectly in line with how we imagine society may have evolved, and it gives us the opportunity to refine that image.
Quote:
I mean there are many other examples, but you get the idea of what I'm trying to say.
I do, but I think the dogma you blame scientists for having is really a misunderstanding on your (and others) part of how science builds knowledge. Proposing ideas and the falsifying them is essential to this process, so some degree of rigidity is essential in building reliable knowledge. This isn't dogma, it's carefully managed progress.
|
Coincidentiaoppositorum
deep psychedelic


Registered: 10/27/14
Posts: 1,965
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
Re: unexplained ancient artifacts [Re: koraks]
#22196848 - 09/06/15 11:43 AM (8 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koraks said: Again, that doesn't make for scientific dogma. The things you mention are absolutely fascinating and obviously, they aren't fully understood - that's what makes them so interesting. Sure, the Antikythera mechanism is exceptional in both its purpose (whatever it exactly is) and its manufacturing. But no serious historian or archaeologist would call ancient Greek civilization 'primitive'. The concept that people in ancient societies would somehow be unintelligent or incapable of dealing with complex concepts is really not a part of mainstream science and it hasn't been for decades. I always get the feeling that people who blame scientists for being dogmatic are really raging against a prejudice rather than reality.
Quote:
Some things out there may be hoaxes, but there's plenty of mystery in several of these confirmed objects and sites as well.
I think many, if not most, of these tantalizing artifacts are certainly not hoaxes. However, many of the explanations that have been connected with them are extremely disputable. It seems inherent to human imagination that in the lack of an overwhelmingly obvious and well-founded explanation, some people manage to come up with the most fantastic stories and the proceed to claim that these explanations are as good as any other - even if they involve assumptions that are at odds with other, well-established and well-supported theories. But a lack of clarity on the purpose, history or context of mysterious artifacts doesn't mean that all of our knowledge about human history is doubtful.
These artifacts serve as a reminder that the boundary of knowledge is still there to be pushed, and even though some things are well within those boundaries, there will always be things close to it that we want to understand better. It doesn't mean we need to rewrite our knowledge of human history in its entirety. It just signifies the incremental nature of scientific analysis and the undisputed fact that this also involves revising aspects that were disputed or speculative in the first place.
Damn, that was a really good response.
I suppose I only see there being some form of dogma just due to the hostility in challenging the accepted norms, some scientists have built their careers around the their us they accept as being correct, and when a person challenges the accepted theories there is always plenty backlash.
Rewriting of human history may have been an extreme statement, perhaps "modify existing history and fill in the gaps according to the new evidence" would have more appropriately described my sentiment.
I still believe there is far more that we do not know when it comes to man's time on this planet...and pretending to have it generally figured out may be detrimental to actually understanding what really happened. If you look through the view of the accepted theories you would rather dismiss the anomalies than incorporate them into or alter your views. If you look at it through no filters at all, saying I know nothing and I assume nothing, now let's sit down and build the story based off of what is at hand, we would probably actually gain a better representation of our past...
thank you for you input, I think you made really points and arguments.
-E. Borodin
|
koraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,672
|
|
Thanks for your kind words! I think we're probably really talking about the same thing. I can see how the inherent rigidity of scientists can come across as dogma - and arguably, some people (and therefore scientists too) are dogmatic. But I don't believe science is systematically dogmatic. If scientists come across as rigid when their theories (or the ones they subscribe to) are being challenged, in my experience it's usually because they have a relatively good overview of the evidence and the methods used in collecting and interpreting that evidence, and they are cautious of new ideas that still have little evidence and/or doubtful research/analytical methods associated with them. But if these new ideas have sufficient face validity, I believe that there will always be people who will keep investigate them seriously. If that results in sufficient evidence, then these ideas will be included into the main body of knowledge. Despite what many people outside academia believe, there are no really effective ways for individual scientists or groups of scientists to systematically and definitively suppress new knowledge from being created.
|
Coincidentiaoppositorum
deep psychedelic


Registered: 10/27/14
Posts: 1,965
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
Re: unexplained ancient artifacts [Re: koraks]
#22196902 - 09/06/15 11:56 AM (8 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koraks said:
Quote:
Coincidentiaoppositorum said: I suppose ideas such as Neolithic era people were incapable of advanced stone work and construction, they were supposed to be Hunter gatherers at that point...but then look at gobekli tepe.
But who says that the established view is that hunter-gatherers would be stupid or incapable of performing complex tasks? The interesting thing about gobeleki is that it seems to be at the very dawn of the more complex forms of organization that we associate with an agricultural lifestyle, excess food production (freeing up manpower for essentially non-food producing work) and the associated practice of division of labor. It's at the edge of our current understanding of the transition of a hunter-gatherer society to a farmer society. It doesn't undermine our concept of that transition, but offers food for thought and evidence of how that transition may have taken place. In fact, it seems perfectly in line with how we imagine society may have evolved, and it gives us the opportunity to refine that image.
Quote:
I mean there are many other examples, but you get the idea of what I'm trying to say.
I do, but I think the dogma you blame scientists for having is really a misunderstanding on your (and others) part of how science builds knowledge. Proposing ideas and the falsifying them is essential to this process, so some degree of rigidity is essential in building reliable knowledge. This isn't dogma, it's carefully managed progress.
Gobekli tepe also was not a living center, a town or a city, it was a temple built in the middle of nowhere essentially, a gathering point for several cultures, as the stone animal reliefs depict animals not native to the region, perhaps it does symbolize the point when Neolithic transitioned to agriculture, but at the same time the accepted theories say these people were not in possession of the tools necessary to build a gobekli tepe at that time, so something must be altered.
Your correct on what the scientific theory is supposed to be, but science is full of humans, interested in further their careers, obtaining grants and funds as well as recognition and credit. A good deal of scientists are money hungry grab-tailing weasels, but I think I'm starting to let too much of my subjectivity alter my view, I wish the scientists would catch themselves when they do the same. The scientific method as you described is great, but as I said before, some of these guys have built their entire careers on these theories, and will fight tooth and nail to preserve the incorrect views as well as their position as an "expert" in the community...the humans are flawed not the science.
-E. Borodin
|
Coincidentiaoppositorum
deep psychedelic


Registered: 10/27/14
Posts: 1,965
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
Re: unexplained ancient artifacts [Re: koraks]
#22196916 - 09/06/15 11:59 AM (8 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koraks said: Thanks for your kind words! I think we're probably really talking about the same thing. I can see how the inherent rigidity of scientists can come across as dogma - and arguably, some people (and therefore scientists too) are dogmatic. But I don't believe science is systematically dogmatic. If scientists come across as rigid when their theories (or the ones they subscribe to) are being challenged, in my experience it's usually because they have a relatively good overview of the evidence and the methods used in collecting and interpreting that evidence, and they are cautious of new ideas that still have little evidence and/or doubtful research/analytical methods associated with them. But if these new ideas have sufficient face validity, I believe that there will always be people who will keep investigate them seriously. If that results in sufficient evidence, then these ideas will be included into the main body of knowledge. Despite what many people outside academia believe, there are no really effective ways for individual scientists or groups of scientists to systematically and definitively suppress new knowledge from being created.
I suppose my last post was unnecessary, I should have read this before I posted it.
Koraks said: there are no really effective ways for individual scientists or groups of scientists to systematically and definitively suppress new knowledge from being created
Again good point, I can't argue with you there, because there will be backlash, but ultimately the evidence will counter it.
Thanks again for your input!
-E. Borodin
|
Coincidentiaoppositorum
deep psychedelic


Registered: 10/27/14
Posts: 1,965
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
Re: unexplained ancient artifacts [Re: Stonehenge]
#22196986 - 09/06/15 12:16 PM (8 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said: You haven't explained the rest of those, we are supposed to google them ourselves? The dode is probably a symbol, perhaps religious.
The YouTube link at the top of the initial post is a seven minute video describing every object listed in great detail, that's where I generated the list from, I figured people would watch the video than discuss the objects, but maybe I'm overestimating some people.
-E. Borodin
|
koraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,672
|
|
You're right, science is a human affair and therefore subject to human flaws. Let's hope the method itself and the many scientists with an ambition to actually do the right thing will help to keep it on track.
|
|