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 1453 Racho 11-Nov-17 21:39
sorry to all...but at the 21 min mark and a few minutes after 274 Racho 11-Nov-17 22:08
Re: No other explanation ...high tech 348 D-Archer 12-Nov-17 08:57
Re: No other explanation ...high tech 305 Thanos5150 12-Nov-17 17:31
Not megalithic 369 Racho 14-Nov-17 06:40
Re: Not megalithic 217 Audrey 14-Nov-17 18:08
Re: Not megalithic 232 Jon Ellison 14-Nov-17 20:33
Re: Not megalithic 143 Audrey 14-Nov-17 21:56
Re: Not megalithic 173 Jon Ellison 14-Nov-17 22:23
Re: Not megalithic 170 Audrey 14-Nov-17 22:49
Re: Not megalithic 140 Jon Ellison 14-Nov-17 23:33
Re: Not megalithic 216 Audrey 15-Nov-17 01:49
Re: Not megalithic 319 Jon Ellison 15-Nov-17 07:35
Re: Not megalithic 159 Audrey 15-Nov-17 22:23
Re: Not megalithic 216 Racho 27-Nov-17 01:46
Re: Not megalithic 195 Corpuscles 27-Nov-17 02:28
Re: Not megalithic 227 Racho 27-Nov-17 02:52
Stone Spheres Are Natural Formations 110 Barbelo 27-Nov-17 05:37
I think the point is proven 142 Racho 27-Nov-17 06:04
Re: I think the point is proven ; 176 Barbelo 27-Nov-17 11:02
dismissive 95 Racho 27-Nov-17 16:48
Re: I think the point is proven 106 Origyptian 27-Nov-17 15:36
Let's learn about the science/realities associated with cutting stone 136 Racho 27-Nov-17 06:41
Re: Not megalithic 115 Origyptian 27-Nov-17 06:50
I Second That 196 Barbelo 27-Nov-17 20:52
wow...talk about being unhinged/triggered 147 Racho 27-Nov-17 23:26
Re: wow...talk about being unhinged/triggered 149 Corpuscles 27-Nov-17 23:46
Re: wow...talk about being unhinged/triggered 178 Barbelo 28-Nov-17 00:00
you start... 202 Racho 28-Nov-17 03:53
Re: you start... 200 Barbelo 28-Nov-17 05:15
Re: I Second That 210 Audrey 28-Nov-17 01:43
Wacko or Crackpot? 209 Barbelo 28-Nov-17 02:30
Re: Wacko or Crackpot? 162 Corpuscles 28-Nov-17 02:49
Re: Wacko or Crackpot? 182 Audrey 28-Nov-17 03:38
Re: Wacko or Crackpot? 251 Barbelo 28-Nov-17 05:23
Re: Not megalithic 119 Corpuscles 27-Nov-17 20:03
Re: Not megalithic 200 Audrey 28-Nov-17 00:11
Re: Not megalithic 219 Corpuscles 28-Nov-17 00:55
Re: Not megalithic 177 Audrey 28-Nov-17 02:02
Re: Not megalithic 264 Warwick 29-Nov-17 21:08
Re: Not megalithic 177 Origyptian 15-Nov-17 22:38
Re: Not megalithic 148 Jon Ellison 15-Nov-17 23:10
Re: Not megalithic 142 Jon Ellison 15-Nov-17 23:32
Re: Not megalithic 247 Origyptian 16-Nov-17 02:47
Re: Not megalithic 161 Origyptian 16-Nov-17 02:43
Re: Not megalithic 244 Origyptian 14-Nov-17 21:58
Re: Not megalithic 208 Jon Ellison 14-Nov-17 22:14
Re: Not megalithic 178 Origyptian 14-Nov-17 22:38
Re: Not megalithic 154 Thanos5150 14-Nov-17 22:55
Re: Not megalithic 216 Thanos5150 14-Nov-17 23:02
Re: Not megalithic 133 Audrey 14-Nov-17 23:46
Re: Not megalithic 202 Corpuscles 15-Nov-17 00:09
Re: Not megalithic 212 Audrey 15-Nov-17 01:15
Re: Not megalithic 227 Thanos5150 15-Nov-17 00:26
Re: Not megalithic 197 Corpuscles 14-Nov-17 22:47
Re: Not megalithic 195 Warwick 15-Nov-17 02:47
Re: Not megalithic 230 Audrey 15-Nov-17 04:06
Re: Not megalithic 148 Warwick 18-Nov-17 00:59
Re: Not megalithic 204 Racho 15-Nov-17 06:26
Re: Not megalithic 235 Warwick 18-Nov-17 01:01
Re: No other explanation ...high tech 302 Origyptian 12-Nov-17 14:37
Re: No other explanation ...high tech 315 Corpuscles 12-Nov-17 17:48
There Has Never Been Solid Ground 260 cladking 12-Nov-17 19:10
Re: There Has Never Been Solid Ground 228 Corpuscles 12-Nov-17 20:06
Re: There Has Never Been Solid Ground 231 cladking 12-Nov-17 20:55
Re: There Has Never Been Solid Ground!!!!!!!!!!! 225 Corpuscles 12-Nov-17 21:26
Re: There Has Never Been Solid Ground!!!!!!!!!!! 255 cladking 12-Nov-17 21:42
Facinating 227 Warwick 14-Nov-17 20:23
Re: Facinating 199 cladking 14-Nov-17 21:33
Re: Facinating 222 Warwick 15-Nov-17 02:51


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.