Graycap23 said:

Lianachan said:

How do we know how much we don't know?

How?

It seems that every other week we declare that some belief that we thought was true and accurate..........isn't.

.

http://www.davidpbillington.net/sphinx8.html.

.

there was a conference about the age of the sphinx and even so no resolution of the question was achieved even then with a team at work.

.

all the participants are accredited and dedicated (and sometimes quick to question the others' authority ) but each presented a convincing yet different point of view.

.

i guess the lesson i take from this is that members of the scientific community itself cannot arrive at a definitive answer so there are merely competing schools of thought on the subject.

.

given that the sites at gobekli tepe, puma punku, and other submerged locations seem to relate to human culture dating back to 12,000 or so ago that we have no record of - i'd say it's safe to assume there is a lot we don't know about our history and origins.

.

i'd also say we'll have to change our mindsets along the way as we find out even more in years to come....

XxAxX said:

Graycap23 said:

How?

It seems that every other week we declare that some belief that we thought was true and accurate..........isn't.

.

http://www.davidpbillington.net/sphinx8.html.

.

there was a conference about the age of the sphinx and even so no resolution of the question was achieved even then with a team at work.

.

all the participants are accredited and dedicated (and sometimes quick to question the others' authority ) but each presented a convincing yet different point of view.

.

i guess the lesson i take from this is that members of the scientific community itself cannot arrive at a definitive answer so there are merely competing schools of thought on the subject.

.

given that the sites at gobekli tepe, puma punku, and other submerged locations seem to relate to human culture dating back to 12,000 or so ago that we have no record of - i'd say it's safe to assume there is a lot we don't know about our history and origins.

.

i'd also say we'll have to change our mindsets along the way as we find out even more in years to come....

Did you read the link you posted? The first section ends by saying:

The gathering would have been the first to bring together principals on the alternative side in a debate with academic scholars critical of their work. Unfortunately, the events of September 11, 2001, forced cancellation of the conference, which was not rescheduled.

Lianachan said:

XxAxX said:

.

http://www.davidpbillington.net/sphinx8.html.

.

there was a conference about the age of the sphinx and even so no resolution of the question was achieved even then with a team at work.

.

all the participants are accredited and dedicated (and sometimes quick to question the others' authority ) but each presented a convincing yet different point of view.

.

i guess the lesson i take from this is that members of the scientific community itself cannot arrive at a definitive answer so there are merely competing schools of thought on the subject.

.

given that the sites at gobekli tepe, puma punku, and other submerged locations seem to relate to human culture dating back to 12,000 or so ago that we have no record of - i'd say it's safe to assume there is a lot we don't know about our history and origins.

.

i'd also say we'll have to change our mindsets along the way as we find out even more in years to come....

Did you read the link you posted? The first section ends by saying:

The gathering would have been the first to bring together principals on the alternative side in a debate with academic scholars critical of their work. Unfortunately, the events of September 11, 2001, forced cancellation of the conference, which was not rescheduled.

.

dude, [I don't like] your obsessive, nit-picky narrow minded ignorant [stuff].

.

the evidence is presented at the link, which links to other bits. the point i made in my response to GRAYCAP (which you overlook as usual) is the presentation of differing theories by well-respected scientists.

.

please, could you [not waste our time]? you appear to be determined to convince everyone else here to see things your way.

.

i know we are supposed to criticize ideas not people, but you really do seem a bit [tired] to me.

.

i say this because i already told you above i dislike interacting with you. this is still true. the fact that you continue to try to FORCE me to interact with you, after my prior request, is twisted.

.

[Edits by RenHoek ~ Mod Extraordinaire]

Lianachan said:

Graycap23 said:

How do we know?

When we stop killing each other over nonsense.

No other species on this planet demonstrate the destructive behavior that humans do.

It appears that we don't know very much at all. Couple that with the flat out lies contained in history books...............there is a ton of truth 2 be learned from the so called lies passed down as facts.

I don't see what killing each other over nonsense or humans being the most destructive species has to do with it, although I don't for one moment disagree that both of those things are true.

There are definitely things in history books which are contradicted by archaeological evidence -

Th mere fact that a source that should be relied upon as factual turns out 2 be anything but puts the whole thing at risk. When u can't trust the source.........u have a problem.

XxAxX said:

Lianachan said:

Did you read the link you posted? The first section ends by saying:

The gathering would have been the first to bring together principals on the alternative side in a debate with academic scholars critical of their work. Unfortunately, the events of September 11, 2001, forced cancellation of the conference, which was not rescheduled.

.

dude, [I don't like] your obsessive, nit-picky narrow minded ignorant [stuff].

.

the evidence is presented at the link, which links to other bits. the point i made in my response to GRAYCAP (which you overlook as usual) is the presentation of differing theories by well-respected scientists.

.

please, could you [not waste our time]? you appear to be determined to convince everyone else here to see things your way.

.

i know we are supposed to criticize ideas not people, but you really do seem a bit [tired] to me.

.

i say this because i already told you above i dislike interacting with you. this is still true. the fact that you continue to try to FORCE me to interact with you, after my prior request, is twisted.

.

[Edits by RenHoek ~ Mod Extraordinaire]

Leaving aside the issue that you, once again, are being abusive - in your post you described events at a conference that didn't actually happen. You told me that I don't address issues, that I just rubbish people. So, in this thread, I've addressed the issues. So I get abuse for that? Respond properly to the points I'm making, if you're trying to engage in a proper discussion about the Sphinx, etc. I'm not trying to convince anybody of anything. I just thought that perhaps there could be a civilised debate, but I see you have nothing to contribute to that and are incapable of it.

Graycap23 said:

Lianachan said:

I don't see what killing each other over nonsense or humans being the most destructive species has to do with it, although I don't for one moment disagree that both of those things are true.

There are definitely things in history books which are contradicted by archaeological evidence -

Th mere fact that a source that should be relied upon as factual turns out 2 be anything but puts the whole thing at risk. When u can't trust the source.........u have a problem.

It's not quite as black and white as that. Sure, there are some things in the historical record that are turning out to be nonsense, but that doesn't mean that all of it is. Some parts of it are very well understood.

XxAxX said:

Graycap23 said:

How?

It seems that every other week we declare that some belief that we thought was true and accurate..........isn't.

.

http://www.davidpbillington.net/sphinx8.html.

.

there was a conference about the age of the sphinx and even so no resolution of the question was achieved even then with a team at work.

.

all the participants are accredited and dedicated (and sometimes quick to question the others' authority ) but each presented a convincing yet different point of view.

.

i guess the lesson i take from this is that members of the scientific community itself cannot arrive at a definitive answer so there are merely competing schools of thought on the subject.

.

given that the sites at gobekli tepe, puma punku, and other submerged locations seem to relate to human culture dating back to 12,000 or so ago that we have no record of - i'd say it's safe to assume there is a lot we don't know about our history and origins.

.

i'd also say we'll have to change our mindsets along the way as we find out even more in years to come....

No doubt.

Thanks 4 the links.

Lianachan said:

Graycap23 said:

Th mere fact that a source that should be relied upon as factual turns out 2 be anything but puts the whole thing at risk. When u can't trust the source.........u have a problem.

It's not quite as black and white as that. Sure, there are some things in the historical record that are turning out to be nonsense, but that doesn't mean that all of it is. Some parts of it are very well understood.

The general public is not well educated on basic facts about history.

Columbus "discovering" America?

The Systematic destruction of 100 M Indians

The true nature of Slavery

How white supramecy impacts the legal, social and economic lives on a daily basis.

How the media actually works..........and it's impact on your though process.

I could go on 4 days not even scrath the surface.

These things are no well understood on ant level beyond those who created and utilized it.

Lianachan said:

XxAxX said:

.

dude, [I don't like] your obsessive, nit-picky narrow minded ignorant [stuff].

.

the evidence is presented at the link, which links to other bits. the point i made in my response to GRAYCAP (which you overlook as usual) is the presentation of differing theories by well-respected scientists.

.

please, could you [not waste our time]? you appear to be determined to convince everyone else here to see things your way.

.

i know we are supposed to criticize ideas not people, but you really do seem a bit [tired] to me.

.

i say this because i already told you above i dislike interacting with you. this is still true. the fact that you continue to try to FORCE me to interact with you, after my prior request, is twisted.

.

[Edits by RenHoek ~ Mod Extraordinaire]

Leaving aside the issue that you, once again, are being abusive - in your post you described events at a conference that didn't actually happen. You told me that I don't address issues, that I just rubbish people. So, in this thread, I've addressed the issues. So I get abuse for that? Respond properly to the points I'm making, if you're trying to engage in a proper discussion about the Sphinx, etc. I'm not trying to convince anybody of anything. I just thought that perhaps there could be a civilised debate, but I see you have nothing to contribute to that and are incapable of it.

.

dude, my post was intended for Graycap, and the point of my post to Graycap was that well-respected scientists (sorry the fucking conference didn't go off as planned, i was reading their theories so didn't really notice this detail you seem to think is drop dead important) cann;t agree on who even made the sphinx, let alone how it weathered over the years.

.

had you actually paid attention to my post instead of focusing obsessively on the one thing you think you can derail me on, you would have perhaps gleaned the point of said post.

.

now remember, in no way shape or form was my post even directed at you. Graycap got it. he is friendly to my ideas and so does not feel the need to attack every single aspect of every post i make.

.

but you do.

.

and this is why i dislike your style.

XxAxX said:

Lianachan said:

Leaving aside the issue that you, once again, are being abusive - in your post you described events at a conference that didn't actually happen. You told me that I don't address issues, that I just rubbish people. So, in this thread, I've addressed the issues. So I get abuse for that? Respond properly to the points I'm making, if you're trying to engage in a proper discussion about the Sphinx, etc. I'm not trying to convince anybody of anything. I just thought that perhaps there could be a civilised debate, but I see you have nothing to contribute to that and are incapable of it.

.

dude, my post was intended for Graycap, and the point of my post to Graycap was that well-respected scientists (sorry the fucking conference didn't go off as planned, i was reading their theories so didn't really notice this detail you seem to think is drop dead important) cann;t agree on who even made the sphinx, let alone how it weathered over the years.

.

had you actually paid attention to my post instead of focusing obsessively on the one thing you think you can derail me on, you would have perhaps gleaned the point of said post.

.

now remember, in no way shape or form was my post even directed at you. Graycap got it. he is friendly to my ideas and so does not feel the need to attack every single aspect of every post i make.

.

but you do.

.

and this is why i dislike your style.

But you said:

"there was a conference about the age of the sphinx and even so no resolution of the question was achieved even then with a team at work.

.

all the participants are accredited and dedicated (and sometimes quick to question the others' authority ) but each presented a convincing yet different point of view."

The conference didn't happen! The information underneath it isn't related to the non-conference, it's just about the same subject matter. I'm not attacking every aspect of every post you make at all. The first time you decided to insult me on this thread, you said:

"i will rebut you as always with fact in order to show that your 'arguments' are neither well researched nor reasoned"

But you've not done that at all. All you have done is ignore the researched and reasoned arguments you seemed to want, and then insult me again.

Graycap23 said:

Lianachan said:

It's not quite as black and white as that. Sure, there are some things in the historical record that are turning out to be nonsense, but that doesn't mean that all of it is. Some parts of it are very well understood.

The general public is not well educated on basic facts about history.

Columbus "discovering" America?

The Systematic destruction of 100 M Indians

The true nature of Slavery

How white supramecy impacts the legal, social and economic lives on a daily basis.

How the media actually works..........and it's impact on your though process.

I could go on 4 days not even scrath the surface.

These things are no well understood on ant level beyond those who created and utilized it.

Does anybody actually think Columbus discovered America? I'm under the impression that it's very well known that the first Europeans proven to have been in North America were Norsemen from Greenland/Iceland, and that there were in any case there already people living there whose ancestors had been there for a very long time.

The destruction of Native Americans - I'm not sure how that's taught in your country, but I know that over here it's pretty well known. Less known over here is the persecution Scottish Highlanders experienced at the hands of the British, but that's another story. I know the latter isn't so much a failure of history as a failure of politics and an attempt to whitewash. I expect it's probably very similar to that for the Native American case?

Slavery - same as above, really. White supremacy, I'm afraid I know nothing about as it's not really featured in my culture. The way the media works? Absolutely! A recent example from here being the coverage of the Scottish Independence referendum, where the populace was lied to and scared by an establishment media.

But none of that, of course, means that pseudohistorical stuff is valid or true.

Graycap23 said:

Lianachan said:

It's not quite as black and white as that. Sure, there are some things in the historical record that are turning out to be nonsense, but that doesn't mean that all of it is. Some parts of it are very well understood.

The general public is not well educated on basic facts about history.

Columbus "discovering" America?

The Systematic destruction of 100 M Indians

The true nature of Slavery

How white supramecy impacts the legal, social and economic lives on a daily basis.

How the media actually works..........and it's impact on your though process.

I could go on 4 days not even scrath the surface.

These things are no well understood on ant level beyond those who created and utilized it.

.

i think sometimes the version of history presented as 'official' is really only one version of what happened.

.

if we ask christians what constantine did they would maybe defend him as christianity's legitimizer but if we ask their neighbors maybe he was the guy who gave orders to burn their mithraic temple to the ground. different points of view.

.

also i think sometimes deliberate falsehoods are mingled into the historical version of events for propaganda reasons too. this is a it off-topic but take for example, the *shocking* recent revelation by former president bush's staff members that he *gasp* knew about 911 in advance of when he was believed to have been informed.

.

the official version likely didn't mention that eh?

[Edited 11/16/15 9:23am]

hmm. and your criticisms come from the mind of the guy who thought it appropriate to start a thread in the PR forum about zombifying vaginal goo.

.

Lianachan said:

XxAxX said:

.

dude, my post was intended for Graycap, and the point of my post to Graycap was that well-respected scientists (sorry the fucking conference didn't go off as planned, i was reading their theories so didn't really notice this detail you seem to think is drop dead important) cann;t agree on who even made the sphinx, let alone how it weathered over the years.

.

had you actually paid attention to my post instead of focusing obsessively on the one thing you think you can derail me on, you would have perhaps gleaned the point of said post.

.

now remember, in no way shape or form was my post even directed at you. Graycap got it. he is friendly to my ideas and so does not feel the need to attack every single aspect of every post i make.

.

but you do.

.

and this is why i dislike your style.

But you said:

"there was a conference about the age of the sphinx and even so no resolution of the question was achieved even then with a team at work.

.

all the participants are accredited and dedicated (and sometimes quick to question the others' authority ) but each presented a convincing yet different point of view."

The conference didn't happen! The information underneath it isn't related to the non-conference, it's just about the same subject matter. I'm not attacking every aspect of every post you make at all. The first time you decided to insult me on this thread, you said:

"i will rebut you as always with fact in order to show that your 'arguments' are neither well researched nor reasoned"

But you've not done that at all. All you have done is ignore the researched and reasoned arguments you seemed to want, and then insult me again.

XxAxX said:

hmm. and your criticisms come from the mind of the guy who thought it appropriate to start a thread in the PR forum about zombifying vaginal goo.

.

Lianachan said:

But you said:

"there was a conference about the age of the sphinx and even so no resolution of the question was achieved even then with a team at work.

.

all the participants are accredited and dedicated (and sometimes quick to question the others' authority ) but each presented a convincing yet different point of view."

The conference didn't happen! The information underneath it isn't related to the non-conference, it's just about the same subject matter. I'm not attacking every aspect of every post you make at all. The first time you decided to insult me on this thread, you said:

"i will rebut you as always with fact in order to show that your 'arguments' are neither well researched nor reasoned"

But you've not done that at all. All you have done is ignore the researched and reasoned arguments you seemed to want, and then insult me again.

Ah, but I only did that because it's hilarious nonsense.

Lianachan said:

XxAxX said:

hmm. and your criticisms come from the mind of the guy who thought it appropriate to start a thread in the PR forum about zombifying vaginal goo.

.

Ah, but I only did that because it's hilarious nonsense.

.

now see? i didn't even get that. imo, this is one reason why we should just.. agree to disagree on threads like this. stop wasting time and energy. clearly we are coming from completely different places.

XxAxX said:

Graycap23 said:

How?

It seems that every other week we declare that some belief that we thought was true and accurate..........isn't.

.

http://www.davidpbillington.net/sphinx8.html.

.

there was a conference about the age of the sphinx and even so no resolution of the question was achieved even then with a team at work.

.

all the participants are accredited and dedicated (and sometimes quick to question the others' authority ) but each presented a convincing yet different point of view.

.

i guess the lesson i take from this is that members of the scientific community itself cannot arrive at a definitive answer so there are merely competing schools of thought on the subject.

.

given that the sites at gobekli tepe, puma punku, and other submerged locations seem to relate to human culture dating back to 12,000 or so ago that we have no record of - i'd say it's safe to assume there is a lot we don't know about our history and origins.

.

i'd also say we'll have to change our mindsets along the way as we find out even more in years to come....

When the so called experts can't agree................how is the non expert supposed 2 deal with this subject matter?

Graycap23 said:

Lianachan said:

Graycap23 said:

When the so called experts can't agree................how is the non expert supposed 2 deal with this subject matter?

It was one set of experts, and others who could at best be called fringe. Anyway, the conference didn't happen. Dont fall into the trap of the balance fallacy! There is a consensus among experts, not down to exact dating but firmly against the idea that the Sphinx is orders of magnitude older than the evidence suggests.

It really isn't about falling into anything. I'm making a point about what we "think" we know.

If experts can't agree..........what we "know" is in question.

Graycap23 said:

XxAxX said:

.

http://www.davidpbillington.net/sphinx8.html.

.

there was a conference about the age of the sphinx and even so no resolution of the question was achieved even then with a team at work.

.

all the participants are accredited and dedicated (and sometimes quick to question the others' authority ) but each presented a convincing yet different point of view.

.

i guess the lesson i take from this is that members of the scientific community itself cannot arrive at a definitive answer so there are merely competing schools of thought on the subject.

.

given that the sites at gobekli tepe, puma punku, and other submerged locations seem to relate to human culture dating back to 12,000 or so ago that we have no record of - i'd say it's safe to assume there is a lot we don't know about our history and origins.

.

i'd also say we'll have to change our mindsets along the way as we find out even more in years to come....

When the so called experts can't agree................how is the non expert supposed 2 deal with this subject matter?

.

i really don't know. it's important to have an answer too, imo.

.

for instance with respect to current events which was true? the new york times story about exactly how osama bin laden's capture occurred versus the *official* version?

.

or the events of 9/11 which we were told happened a certain way and now we find out that as a matter of fact whoops, we were told wrong?

.

and this is current events. maybe we'll never know what happened with the sphinx.

[Edited 11/16/15 9:59am]

XxAxX said:

Graycap23 said:

When the so called experts can't agree................how is the non expert supposed 2 deal with this subject matter?

.

i really don't know. it's important to have an answer too, imo.

.

for instance with respect to current events which was true? the new york times story about exactly how osama bin laden's capture occurred versus the *official* version?

.

or the events of 9/11 which we were told happened a certain way and now we find out that as a matter of fact whoops, we were told wrong?

.

and this is current events. maybe we'll never know what happened with the sphinx.

[Edited 11/16/15 9:59am]

We probably won't.

Humans can't even figure out how the Pyramids were build.

U would think that the engineers of the world would see this as a straight forward process.

Maybe there is a reason that "modern" man is so uniformed about the past.

Graycap23 said:

Lianachan said:

Graycap23 said:

It really isn't about falling into anything. I'm making a point about what we "think" we know.

If experts can't agree..........what we "know" is in question.

But the experts DO agree. Those dissenting voices are not experts, and to allow their views equal value is more or less an exact definition of the balance fallacy.

lol...........experst have agenda's in a lot of cases.

Some put funding and politics above facts.

Graycap23 said:

XxAxX said:

.

i really don't know. it's important to have an answer too, imo.

.

for instance with respect to current events which was true? the new york times story about exactly how osama bin laden's capture occurred versus the *official* version?

.

or the events of 9/11 which we were told happened a certain way and now we find out that as a matter of fact whoops, we were told wrong?

.

and this is current events. maybe we'll never know what happened with the sphinx.

[Edited 11/16/15 9:59am]

We probably won't.

Humans can't even figure out how the Pyramids were build.

U would think that the engineers of the world would see this as a straight forward process.

Maybe there is a reason that "modern" man is so uniformed about the past.

.

what reason? i'd much rather know what was going on in terms of civilization around the world 15,000 years ago. we know SOMEthing was happening because there are a lot of other ruined cities around that age sporting monolithic structures which seem to have been created using some form of alternate technology but the records are just.. gone.

[Edited 11/16/15 10:57am]

Graycap23 said:

XxAxX said:

Lianachan said:

Graycap23 said:

lol...........experst have agenda's in a lot of cases.

Some put funding and politics above facts.

There's no need to invoke conspiracy theories for this.

There certainly isn't.

Fact is stranger than fiction.

wild. i was checking out news feeds (EWAO is the source of this article, like the one about the sphinx) didn't think i'd stumble across someone else claiming to have found evidence for human civilization/wandering about 800,000 years ago. it turns out a group of scientists claim to have discovered human footprints in the UK that they've dated back 800,000 years*.

.

from: http://www.ewao.com/a/800...rewritten/

800,000 year old footprin... rewritten

.

Nov. 15, 2015

.

According to a group of archaeologists, a series of footprints discovered in the United Kingdom over year ago are evidence of human beings living on Earth much earlier than what mainstream scholars suggest. The mysterious footprints are believed to have been left by a group of adults and children nearly a million years ago.

.

The incredible footprints were actually recorded for the first time two years ago in Norfolk, England. “At first we weren’t sure what we were seeing, but as we removed any remaining beach sand and sponged off the seawater, it was clear that the hollows resembled prints, perhaps human footprints,” said Dr Nick Ashton of the British Museum.

.

With the aid of a technique called photogrammetry (which is the use of photography in surveying and mapping ascertain measurements between objects), researchers were able to record the surface where the footprints were found before the sea eroded them away. Posterior analysis demonstrated that the elongated hollows identified on the surface were in face those of ancient human beings which walked across the region 800,000 years ago.

.

Experts were able to confirm that the prints belonged to a group of up to five individuals.

“In some cases we could accurately measure the length and width of the footprints and estimate the height of the individuals who made them. In most populations today and in the past foot length is approximately 15 percent of height,” explained co-author Dr Isabelle De Groote of Liverpool John Moores University.

.

“We can therefore estimate that the heights varied from about 0.9 m to over 1.7 m. This height range suggests a mix of adults and children with the largest print possibly being a male.”

According to statements, several sites in the vicinity have yielded stone tools and fossil bones which date back 800,000 years and the latest discovery of the mysterious footprints is believed to be from the same deposits.

.

“Although we knew that the sediments were old, we had to be certain that the hollows were also ancient and hadn’t been created recently,” said co-author Dr Simon Lewis from Queen Mary University of London.

.

“There are no known erosional processes that create that pattern. In addition, the sediments are too compacted for the hollows to have been made recently.”

.

But just how did researchers come up with an age of 800,000 years? Well, the age of the site is based on the geological position located beneath the glacial deposits that make up the cliffs, and are also associated with extinct animals. At the site, experts have found the remains of plants, beetles, shells and other species which has allowed them to accurately reconstruct the ancient landscape of the site. During that period in history, Britain was linked by land to Europe.

.

more at link..

.

*DISCLAIMER: this is prince.org, a website dedicated to a popular musician. this website is not scientific america, nor is it a journal of professional anything. this website and its participants are not here to live up to, represent, espouse or promulgate scientific standards any more than purpose of this post is to scientifically *prove* one theory or another. the purpose of this post is simply to further dialogue about an intriguing factoid/event/work of art in the interests of discovering more about the world around us. in no way, shape or form is this post to be taken or treated as a direct challenge to any person, place or thing. this post is intended to express the views and opinions of its creator, no more no less.

[Edited 11/17/15 3:41am]

That's not evidence for human civilisation at all. The footprints are very cool, but the website does kind of create a false impression about them (unsurprisingly, as it's a woo site). They were not created by modern humans, or even our species. The paper which the archaeologists published about the find says:

Happisburgh has the earliest evidence of hominin footprints outside Africa, dating to between ca. 1 and 0.78 My with estimated body dimensions that fall within the range of the evidence from Homo antecessor fossils.

Lianachan said:

RodeoSchro said:

I'm not saying anything until Dr. Ben Carson weighs in.

Perhaps the Sphinx was built to keep mice away from all of the grain?

I've been meaning to get this.



It does seem completely plausible to think that there could have been an advanced civilization in ancient times that has been lost to time.

There was an account by an ancient Greek figure whose name escapes me at this time, who stated that when the Great Library at Alexandria burned down, humanity lost 3,000 years of history. Can you imagine what information was in those scrolls???