> "I think you will find that Barbelo's point was
> that the conjecture offered is nonsensical! ????
> I see. I have a hard time figuring out what
> Barbelo is saying. So far, I'm getting the
> impression his theory is that the stones are alive
> and grown? But I can't tell.
> I watched the first 4 webinars, (skimmed 2 and 3
> though). There is alot of interesting stuff
> there, and its challenging my opinion from what I
> have believed up to this point, to see this high
> end material scientist proceeding with seeming
> absolute confidence about this. But even with
> his chemical analysis confidence, I still struggle
> to comprehend why we're left with what we have.
> Rough blocks on the pyramids, with seam joints
> that support your idea, but no evidence of
> molding, or even soft clay manual working. So
> much pillow shaped polygonal walls around the
> world. That is clear and common, so it has to
> point to something about the different states of
> the material, (seems highly unlikely it was ever
> in a viscus liquid state from what I can see - May
> never be convinced of those bosses being fill
> Biggest disappointment was the magnetic analysis
> part. Nowhere near enough samples to make the
> conclusion he was attempting to support, and his
> explanation of it made it worse. That magnetic
> direction idea is definitely something I'd be very
> interested in seeing done again with maybe 20
> samples from each wall of the GP, (Not including
> 'steps' carved into the bedrock - why they
> bothered to use up any of their samples to check
> those is dumbfounding). That would be convincing
> for 'magic stone softening tech' as well as
> Biggest take away though for me was the geopolymer
> limestone samples that they made in the lab which
> they sent to the two geology labs for analysis.
> If geology doesn't go beyond microscope depth of
> visual evaluation, and they can't see the
> difference, then it undermines my assumed
> confidence that geologists are qualified to
> understand what they are looking at.
> Very important part of this investigation to my
Yes, Barbelo can be very obtuse and cryptic ( DELETED)
Don't expect an answer, I don't. (even a PM)
Tarrot cards abounded (didn't understand, still don't) . But REGARDLESS and immaterial inconsequential , he/she has been subjected to so much unqualified , unresearched, ridicule, over a long time.
Then , I know, Barbelo's support/comment can only expected to be cryptic.
Well done, if you watched all that boring shit! Serious GOLD STAR award.
Again, say it lots of times the experts say, it is about (in ancient sites) trying to find a natural source replicating the whole composite. In Peru / Bolivia, no single site can replicate the exact match , nor even close, of samples taken. NONE!
Hang in there , it takes years of contemplation to get clarity.
Edit for obvious privacy reasons
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08-Jan-20 06:52 by Corpuscles.