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
Hi OM

Not attempting to convince anyone. I am convinced as you may see more reason in a follow up post later.

Open mind Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I've seen this before. It was interesting. While
> not a real fan of the geopolymers idea, I can
> accept this as a solid first step towards this
> investigation.
>
> With respect to the sandstone samples, it was
> interesting to see that spike in sodium in the
> monument sample as compared with all the other
> source location material. That's certainly a cool
> discovery. It was far more convincing having a
> direct comparison with all the source location
> candidate material samples. Unfortunate they
> couldn't do the same with the Andesite samples
.
> Definately would be cool to read a follow up from
> the Peruvian scientists if they ever get
> cooperation
about those source sites.

The Andesite signature's were the guano and acid signature from organic material.
The lack of cooperation refers to 1970 . There is now access as his team went to both with a Peruvian Geologist.

>
> But at the end when he held up those pucks of
> stone material he said they made in their lab with
> those recipes they derived, it was odd he didn't
> say anything about the hardness they got. I have
> to assume it wasn't anywhere near comparable. If
> not, then I didn't see the point of that part.

Modern 'fake' geopolymer stone achieves similar hardness.

However I do think it is shame they did not take the source material and reconstruct from that.
>
> But as for the Andesite "H's", while they do have
> that crisp edging and smooth surface which does
> make one think geopolymers, what it didn't have to
> really land that presumption was the similarity
> sufficient to demonstrate that they were made with
> the same mold, OR, another mold built as close as
> possible in measurements. They're all unique from
> what I recall in past discussions or stuff I've
> watched, and from what I can see on the various
> videos I think.

Point taken, however obviously many blocks are missing or broken so no real way of matching exact replicas and perhaps modifying mould slightly was to increase the illusion of stone cutting?
>
> This means they had to make different molds for
> each one and if they were at last attempting to
> duplicate those shapes, which it appears they
> were, then when making the molds, you might expect
> each piece they made, to have been duplicated at
> that time as the same size, since they were making
> multiples. But the final shapes don't
> substantiate that.
>
> Also, as the shapes all have pretty good 90 degree
> angles, it demonstrates that they didn't build in
> relief angles to make mold release easier, and
> that means the molds were extremely complex as
> multiple parts that had to be disassembled to be
> removed from the sculpture after it had hardened.
> So that implies extremely complex molds with many
> parts, and this situation means it would be highly
> advantageous to make all those many complex mold
> pieces at the same time and the same size to
> simplify that process but as all the sculptures
> are different enough, it means they did these
> shapes in the most time consuming and inefficient
> way, one at a time, over and over again. To me it
> at the very least is a strong distraction away
> from a slam dunk on the geopolymer theory, at
> least when considering all those similar "H"
> shapes of Andesite.

Points taken, however obviously many blocks are missing or broken so no real way of matching exact replicas and perhaps modifying mould slightly was to increase the illusion of stone cutting? Some of the decorative inserts are very similar.
I think the project was bespoke not a commercial enterprise focused on mass manufacture for efficient profit and large scale production.
>
> And as I've brought this up many times before, if
> there was an ancient period of geopolymer casting
> in molds, it stretches credulity to consider that
> there isn't at least ONE spot where you can see
> exact duplicates of sculptural elements
> demonstrating that advantage they had. When, as a
> civilization, you figure out casting in molds, the
> very first thing you think about is the advantage
> of duplicating multiples of something. If that's
> NOT evidence against the previous existence of
> geopolymers, its certainly evidence of the most
> confounding coincidence of all time that
> absolutely none of the examples of page one of the
> mold casting period have all been lost.
>
> For some reason when humanity developed 'bricks'
> made orders of magnitude softer and more brittle
> than this hypothetical geopolymer andesite, bricks
> as a building shape really took off. Someone
> really missed the forest for the trees if it was
> in fact something as hard as andesite was
> manufactured from a wet slurry and hardend. This
> is my biggest challenge.

I enjoyed the fact that the unanswered questions in particular the exact method of acidic dissolution was not specifically mentioned however Davidovits reckons the source material for the 'concrete' was volcanic tuff not hard stone (or as you will se later likely a combination?).
Like Pompeii which was ash from pyroclastic flow , that has now (LATER) hardened to appear as if solid rock.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 22-Dec-19 21:34 by Corpuscles.

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 1584 Corpuscles 21-Dec-19 17:24
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 217 Open mind 22-Dec-19 02:28
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 183 Hanslune 22-Dec-19 05:58
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 156 Corpuscles 22-Dec-19 21:06
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 113 thinkitover 23-Dec-19 10:05
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 191 ocka 22-Dec-19 09:32
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 148 Hanslune 22-Dec-19 18:01
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 147 Thanos5150 23-Dec-19 16:53
Re: Tiahuanaco architect named 111 molder 23-Dec-19 22:16
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 111 Hanslune 23-Dec-19 23:44
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 111 Thanos5150 24-Dec-19 16:47
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 93 Hanslune 25-Dec-19 01:32
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 141 Thanos5150 25-Dec-19 02:43
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 105 Hanslune 27-Dec-19 23:09
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 100 Thanos5150 28-Dec-19 17:22
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 110 Corpuscles 29-Dec-19 06:33
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 95 Merrell 29-Dec-19 14:38
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 93 Corpuscles 29-Dec-19 20:31
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 95 Merrell 29-Dec-19 23:54
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 81 Corpuscles 01-Jan-20 00:03
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 79 Merrell 01-Jan-20 10:45
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 72 Corpuscles 01-Jan-20 18:32
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 89 Open mind 31-Dec-19 19:33
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 72 Merrell 31-Dec-19 23:06
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 86 Corpuscles 01-Jan-20 00:29
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 74 Open mind 01-Jan-20 03:02
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 117 Thanos5150 01-Jan-20 04:08
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 82 Corpuscles 01-Jan-20 05:51
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 99 Thanos5150 01-Jan-20 06:59
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 92 Corpuscles 01-Jan-20 19:40
Basalt Pavers 85 Barbelo 01-Jan-20 21:33
Re: Basalt Pavers 84 Corpuscles 01-Jan-20 23:01
Re: Basalt Pavers 73 Barbelo 02-Jan-20 03:36
Re: Basalt Pavers 89 Corpuscles 02-Jan-20 05:42
Re: Basalt Pavers 76 Barbelo 02-Jan-20 06:41
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 91 Thanos5150 02-Jan-20 02:17
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 104 Corpuscles 02-Jan-20 05:03
Basalt Pillar 98 Barbelo 02-Jan-20 07:15
Re: Basalt Pillar 80 Open mind 02-Jan-20 15:43
Re: Basalt Pillar 96 Corpuscles 02-Jan-20 19:06
Re: Basalt Pillar 83 Barbelo 02-Jan-20 21:13
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 109 Thanos5150 02-Jan-20 18:08
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 103 Merrell 02-Jan-20 18:58
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 139 Martin Stower 03-Jan-20 11:15
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 91 Corpuscles 03-Jan-20 20:29
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 81 Merrell 03-Jan-20 21:45
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 87 Corpuscles 03-Jan-20 23:23
Sacsayhuaman 94 Barbelo 04-Jan-20 02:22
Re: Sacsayhuaman 92 Corpuscles 04-Jan-20 03:23
Re: Sacsayhuaman 90 Thanos5150 04-Jan-20 03:28
Re: Sacsayhuaman 83 Corpuscles 04-Jan-20 05:58
Re: Sacsayhuaman 131 Barbelo 04-Jan-20 11:16
Re: Sacsayhuaman 82 Thanos5150 05-Jan-20 15:58
Re: Sacsayhuaman 84 Barbelo 05-Jan-20 20:22
Re: Sacsayhuaman 74 Thanos5150 05-Jan-20 23:55
Re: Sacsayhuaman 76 Corpuscles 05-Jan-20 21:41
Re: Sacsayhuaman 78 Barbelo 05-Jan-20 23:40
Re: Sacsayhuaman 79 Thanos5150 05-Jan-20 23:59
Re: Sacsayhuaman 72 Open mind 06-Jan-20 01:08
Re: Sacsayhuaman 70 Corpuscles 06-Jan-20 02:29
Re: Sacsayhuaman 79 Barbelo 06-Jan-20 03:50
Re: Sacsayhuaman 74 Corpuscles 06-Jan-20 04:29
Re: Sacsayhuaman 86 Thanos5150 06-Jan-20 05:10
Re: Sacsayhuaman 87 Corpuscles 06-Jan-20 05:47
Re: Sacsayhuaman 94 Thanos5150 06-Jan-20 16:53
Re: Sacsayhuaman 70 Corpuscles 06-Jan-20 19:06
The Limestone Puddle 72 Barbelo 06-Jan-20 21:27
Re: Sacsayhuaman 75 Thanos5150 06-Jan-20 21:44
Re: Sacsayhuaman 76 Corpuscles 06-Jan-20 22:28
Re: Sacsayhuaman 88 Thanos5150 07-Jan-20 17:01
Re: Sacsayhuaman 70 Corpuscles 07-Jan-20 21:48
Re: Sacsayhuaman 67 Open mind 06-Jan-20 21:07
Re: Sacsayhuaman 75 Corpuscles 06-Jan-20 21:30
Re: Sacsayhuaman 65 Open mind 07-Jan-20 20:43
Re: Sacsayhuaman 65 Open mind 06-Jan-20 13:44
Re: Sacsayhuaman 76 Barbelo 06-Jan-20 11:07
Re: Sacsayhuaman 71 Corpuscles 06-Jan-20 05:16
Re: Sacsayhuaman 71 Barbelo 06-Jan-20 10:36
Re: Sacsayhuaman 75 seasmith 06-Jan-20 14:28
Re: Sacsayhuaman 72 Barbelo 06-Jan-20 20:46
Re: Sacsayhuaman 67 Open mind 06-Jan-20 16:41
Re: Sacsayhuaman 69 Barbelo 06-Jan-20 21:12
Re: Sacsayhuaman 72 Open mind 07-Jan-20 15:05
Re: Sacsayhuaman 83 Corpuscles 07-Jan-20 21:25
Nonsensical or Unnecessary? 69 Barbelo 07-Jan-20 23:51
Re: Nonsensical or Unnecessary? 81 Corpuscles 08-Jan-20 01:23
Re: Sacsayhuaman 71 Open mind 08-Jan-20 00:36
Re: Sacsayhuaman 71 Corpuscles 08-Jan-20 00:58
Re: Sacsayhuaman 72 Barbelo 08-Jan-20 01:12
Re: Sacsayhuaman 65 Open mind 08-Jan-20 02:06
Re: Sacsayhuaman 71 Barbelo 08-Jan-20 03:20
Re: Sacsayhuaman 91 Corpuscles 08-Jan-20 07:05
Re: Sacsayhuaman 67 Barbelo 08-Jan-20 12:01
Re: Sacsayhuaman 67 Open mind 08-Jan-20 16:42
Re: Sacsayhuaman 70 Corpuscles 08-Jan-20 18:24
Re: Sacsayhuaman 61 Open mind 08-Jan-20 20:23
Re: Sacsayhuaman 70 Corpuscles 08-Jan-20 21:44
LImestone vs Limestone 65 Barbelo 08-Jan-20 22:40
Re: LImestone vs Limestone 79 Corpuscles 08-Jan-20 23:47
Re: LImestone vs Limestone 72 Barbelo 09-Jan-20 01:57
Re: LImestone vs Limestone 78 Corpuscles 09-Jan-20 03:09
Re: Limestone vs Limestone 79 Barbelo 09-Jan-20 04:07
Re: Limestone vs Limestone 65 Open mind 09-Jan-20 16:06
Re: Limestone vs Limestone 67 Barbelo 09-Jan-20 20:49
Re: Limestone vs Limestone 65 Open mind 09-Jan-20 20:58
Re: Limestone vs Limestone 82 Barbelo 09-Jan-20 21:20
Re: Limestone vs Limestone 64 Open mind 10-Jan-20 15:12
Re: Limestone vs Limestone 76 Corpuscles 09-Jan-20 17:15
Re: LImestone vs Limestone 68 Open mind 09-Jan-20 15:25
Re:Sacsayhuaman 61 Corpuscles 10-Jan-20 07:00
Re: Re:Sacsayhuaman 61 Open mind 10-Jan-20 13:15
Re: Re:Sacsayhuaman 83 Corpuscles 10-Jan-20 14:34
Re: Re:Sacsayhuaman 60 Open mind 10-Jan-20 15:47
Re: Re:Sacsayhuaman 68 Open mind 10-Jan-20 15:58
Re: Re:Sacsayhuaman 66 Corpuscles 10-Jan-20 21:07
Re: Re:Sacsayhuaman 60 Corpuscles 10-Jan-20 21:00
Re: LImestone vs Limestone 83 Thanos5150 09-Jan-20 01:44
Tombomachay 79 Corpuscles 10-Jan-20 06:25
Re: Limestone vs Limestone 74 Barbelo 10-Jan-20 07:30
Re: Limestone vs Limestone 136 Corpuscles 10-Jan-20 11:41
Re: Limestone vs Limestone 83 Barbelo 11-Jan-20 05:25
Re: Limestone vs Limestone 76 Corpuscles 12-Jan-20 01:24
Now All You Have To Do Is Prove It 77 Barbelo 12-Jan-20 12:11
Re: Now All You Have To Do Is Prove It 88 Corpuscles 12-Jan-20 20:56
Re: Now All You Have To Do Is Prove It 93 Open mind 13-Jan-20 16:19
Re: Sacsayhuaman 64 Open mind 08-Jan-20 23:22
Re: Sacsayhuaman 71 Open mind 08-Jan-20 14:23
Re: Sacsayhuaman 61 Merrell 08-Jan-20 17:57
On the fence... 73 Racho 08-Jan-20 04:51
Re: On the fence... 67 Open mind 08-Jan-20 15:24
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 84 Merrell 04-Jan-20 09:04
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 81 Corpuscles 05-Jan-20 09:22
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 86 Martin Stower 03-Jan-20 23:28
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 77 Corpuscles 04-Jan-20 00:34
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 64 Open mind 05-Jan-20 16:19
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 77 Open mind 02-Jan-20 03:37
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 83 Merrell 01-Jan-20 14:10
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 76 Corpuscles 01-Jan-20 18:41
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 117 Corpuscles 22-Dec-19 21:13
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 105 Corpuscles 22-Dec-19 21:30
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 97 Open mind 22-Dec-19 22:12
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 102 WVK 23-Dec-19 15:21
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 91 Corpuscles 23-Dec-19 21:22
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 85 Open mind 23-Dec-19 23:22
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 110 Hanslune 22-Dec-19 22:58
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 105 seasmith 23-Dec-19 03:04
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 100 Hanslune 23-Dec-19 07:20
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 100 Corpuscles 23-Dec-19 09:43
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 89 Hanslune 23-Dec-19 23:28
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 113 Thanos5150 24-Dec-19 16:53
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 104 Hanslune 24-Dec-19 22:35
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 164 Thanos5150 23-Dec-19 19:29
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 167 Corpuscles 23-Dec-19 21:19
Re: Tiwanaku / Pumapunku Megaliths are Artificial Geopolymers 149 Enigcom 02-Jan-20 17:29


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.