Mysteries :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For serious discussion of the controversies, approaches and enigmas surrounding the origins and development of the human species and of human civilization. (NB: for more ‘out there’ posts we point you in the direction of the ‘Paranormal & Supernatural’ Message Board). 
Welcome! Log InRegister
Racho Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I may have been confused a little because
> beginning shows him entering a cave but after
> watching again, seems to connect to a larger
> opening.

I think people aren't watching enough of the vid to get the point of it. It opens with Vlad stooping to enter a cave, the opening not being large enough to walk into. She (narrator) calls this a "prehistoric" quarry. The vid switches between modern and prehistoric quarries, in order to show the difference between cut marks, cut widths and style. From the comments made I gather they are fully aware of which ones are modern. If the cave, that she calls "prehistoric", is actually modern, I have to wonder why 'modern' didn't enlarge the opening and instead went with the back breaking work of removing stones through a very small opening. Geesh even the old west miners blasted openings they could work through with donkeys, carts and shovels. I don't know that she should call the prehistoric site a "quarry". Doesn't look to be a mine as no minerals are mentioned. I lean towards it being a shelter.

> That being said, I noticed a few things
> which made me interested in the first place. As
> interpreter comments, the cuts are fairly fine -
> some sort of tool seems to be clear because of
> uniform cut width but doesn't really fit saw
> profile throughout as some cuts are curved. If
> argument is that a chisel was used...where are the
> chisel marks on the back wall (any wall for that
> matter) where the block was removed. Why would
> they go to the trouble of smoothing out all the
> walls rather than what we see in a modern quarry
> as seen in this vid?
>
> This was underground so ...anyone able to show me
> the actual machinery Stalin's group used to create
> this? I fully realize that this rock isn't all
> that hard but this underground quarry doesn't have
> the same marks as the other quarry...why quarry
> this with handheld tools when it's so much easier
> to open mine with large machinery that is also
> able to be moved/carried with machinery?

Much easier to have an open pit mine/quarry, if the depth isn't too great. Does anyone know of an underground quarry where the stone is at such a depth it can only be reached by tunnels/shafts?

> It struck me last night, after
> watching this vid:
> [www.youtube.com] (of if
> want to listen to an expert on same...this vid:
> [www.youtube.com] ...
> that there really isn't an explanation for how the
> Serapeum boxes were moved into those confined
> tunnels and then lowered into place. I realize is
> a change of subject but it's probably the best
> example of a truly perplexing mystery.

Guess we have to fall back on the old 'they did it because they're there' explanation. That way we don't have to think very hard and we can remain within established Egyptian history. No boats rocked.

> Yes, I watched the vid about rocks being alive or
> 'mushrooms'...don't agree with the narrator on
> conclusion with that vid but doesn't mean that we
> then throw out everything seen beforehand.

Mushrooms are totally beside the point. I have to hand it to these Russians, they are open minded and putting out videos and photos we've never seen before. Mushrooms or not, their work is appreciated.

He who knows all the answers has not been asked all the questions - Confucius

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
No other explanation ...high tech 1574 Racho 11-Nov-17 21:39
sorry to all...but at the 21 min mark and a few minutes after 323 Racho 11-Nov-17 22:08
Re: No other explanation ...high tech 389 D-Archer 12-Nov-17 08:57
Re: No other explanation ...high tech 350 Thanos5150 12-Nov-17 17:31
Not megalithic 432 Racho 14-Nov-17 06:40
Re: Not megalithic 262 Audrey 14-Nov-17 18:08
Re: Not megalithic 282 Jon Ellison 14-Nov-17 20:33
Re: Not megalithic 186 Audrey 14-Nov-17 21:56
Re: Not megalithic 204 Jon Ellison 14-Nov-17 22:23
Re: Not megalithic 210 Audrey 14-Nov-17 22:49
Re: Not megalithic 177 Jon Ellison 14-Nov-17 23:33
Re: Not megalithic 263 Audrey 15-Nov-17 01:49
Re: Not megalithic 370 Jon Ellison 15-Nov-17 07:35
Re: Not megalithic 196 Audrey 15-Nov-17 22:23
Re: Not megalithic 260 Racho 27-Nov-17 01:46
Re: Not megalithic 238 Corpuscles 27-Nov-17 02:28
Re: Not megalithic 274 Racho 27-Nov-17 02:52
Stone Spheres Are Natural Formations 151 Barbelo 27-Nov-17 05:37
I think the point is proven 195 Racho 27-Nov-17 06:04
Re: I think the point is proven ; 220 Barbelo 27-Nov-17 11:02
dismissive 125 Racho 27-Nov-17 16:48
Re: I think the point is proven 146 Origyptian 27-Nov-17 15:36
Let's learn about the science/realities associated with cutting stone 176 Racho 27-Nov-17 06:41
Re: Not megalithic 151 Origyptian 27-Nov-17 06:50
I Second That 233 Barbelo 27-Nov-17 20:52
wow...talk about being unhinged/triggered 179 Racho 27-Nov-17 23:26
Re: wow...talk about being unhinged/triggered 185 Corpuscles 27-Nov-17 23:46
Re: wow...talk about being unhinged/triggered 225 Barbelo 28-Nov-17 00:00
you start... 247 Racho 28-Nov-17 03:53
Re: you start... 241 Barbelo 28-Nov-17 05:15
Re: I Second That 266 Audrey 28-Nov-17 01:43
Wacko or Crackpot? 279 Barbelo 28-Nov-17 02:30
Re: Wacko or Crackpot? 210 Corpuscles 28-Nov-17 02:49
Re: Wacko or Crackpot? 238 Audrey 28-Nov-17 03:38
Re: Wacko or Crackpot? 312 Barbelo 28-Nov-17 05:23
Re: Not megalithic 160 Corpuscles 27-Nov-17 20:03
Re: Not megalithic 255 Audrey 28-Nov-17 00:11
Re: Not megalithic 295 Corpuscles 28-Nov-17 00:55
Re: Not megalithic 218 Audrey 28-Nov-17 02:02
Re: Not megalithic 326 Warwick 29-Nov-17 21:08
Re: Not megalithic 226 Origyptian 15-Nov-17 22:38
Re: Not megalithic 195 Jon Ellison 15-Nov-17 23:10
Re: Not megalithic 184 Jon Ellison 15-Nov-17 23:32
Re: Not megalithic 292 Origyptian 16-Nov-17 02:47
Re: Not megalithic 230 Origyptian 16-Nov-17 02:43
Re: Not megalithic 298 Origyptian 14-Nov-17 21:58
Re: Not megalithic 248 Jon Ellison 14-Nov-17 22:14
Re: Not megalithic 215 Origyptian 14-Nov-17 22:38
Re: Not megalithic 199 Thanos5150 14-Nov-17 22:55
Re: Not megalithic 260 Thanos5150 14-Nov-17 23:02
Re: Not megalithic 175 Audrey 14-Nov-17 23:46
Re: Not megalithic 261 Corpuscles 15-Nov-17 00:09
Re: Not megalithic 264 Audrey 15-Nov-17 01:15
Re: Not megalithic 285 Thanos5150 15-Nov-17 00:26
Re: Not megalithic 236 Corpuscles 14-Nov-17 22:47
Re: Not megalithic 247 Warwick 15-Nov-17 02:47
Re: Not megalithic 269 Audrey 15-Nov-17 04:06
Re: Not megalithic 191 Warwick 18-Nov-17 00:59
Re: Not megalithic 268 Racho 15-Nov-17 06:26
Re: Not megalithic 291 Warwick 18-Nov-17 01:01
Re: No other explanation ...high tech 339 Origyptian 12-Nov-17 14:37
Re: No other explanation ...high tech 368 Corpuscles 12-Nov-17 17:48
There Has Never Been Solid Ground 299 cladking 12-Nov-17 19:10
Re: There Has Never Been Solid Ground 269 Corpuscles 12-Nov-17 20:06
Re: There Has Never Been Solid Ground 281 cladking 12-Nov-17 20:55
Re: There Has Never Been Solid Ground!!!!!!!!!!! 258 Corpuscles 12-Nov-17 21:26
Re: There Has Never Been Solid Ground!!!!!!!!!!! 300 cladking 12-Nov-17 21:42
Facinating 270 Warwick 14-Nov-17 20:23
Re: Facinating 239 cladking 14-Nov-17 21:33
Re: Facinating 266 Warwick 15-Nov-17 02:51


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.