Chariots of the Gods

[flabio]

To think that humans are the only intelligent life forms in the universe, is not only ridiculous, I find it quite arrogant. In our galaxy alone, one would think that out of billions of stars, that least one other one would sport some kind of intelligent life.

But...

One thing i have really grown tired of is how people blame every thing on aliens. It's like "Duh', we can't explain it. So aliens must be responsible!!!"

Like really. If one stops to think about it, a pyramid is about the easiest form of structure that one could possibly build. It's basic physics. If you want to layer a bunch of stones on top of one another, it only stands to reason that if you reduce the number of stones in every layer that the chances that the higher you go, the less likely they are to topple. I would be far more impressed if the ancient cultures had erected huge cubes. Now that would have been an amazing accomplishment.

Now think, and ask your self. If these pyramid structures in Egypt and other continents were constructed by aliens, or some other non-earthly higher power, would they not be symbols of perfection? Well then, what up with this?



What? Did the aliens bring their retarded cousin to Earth, and so he didn't feel left out they let him build a little monument in the sand? Or is it that even the most powerful of earthly tyrants reek of imperfection.

We are people. We are capable of great feats. We have never been perfect, and never will be. Deal with it.

[jonesthecurl]

Agreed, flabio. The notion that aliens had anything to do with pyramids is one of the sillyest.
Especially as we can easily see (in Egypt at least) a number of them from a long period of time, gradually improving with practice.

[TheProwler]

I don't remember anything about planet "X". Do tell.

I am just saying that a lot of the questions and ideas presented in "Chariots of the Gods" tie in nicely with the theory of Planet X.

Regarding the idea of the pyramids being built by aliens....I don't think anyone thinks they were built by aliens. The idea is that they might have been built by humans under the direction of "gods" who were indeed aliens. And maybe not.

But the questions are still there. Why were they built? Why so big? Why were they built out in the open? Could it be so they are more easily visible from very high in the sky? Why were they aligned with our North and South poles?

Oh, and regarding the erosion shown in flabio's picture:

From americanscientist.org

http://www.americanscientist.org/issues ... -pyramid/2

"For the first 3,000 years or so of its history, the Great Pyramid was encased in brilliant polished limestone—about 22 acres of it. The slabs were up to 2.5 meters thick and were fitted together with joints so fine they could scarcely be seen, according to Herodotus, who visited in 440 B.C. This must have been a dazzling sight in the Egyptian sun! Unfortunately, the covering was stripped in medieval times to build palaces and mosques in Cairo, and now we can only see the rough building blocks."

So...thousands of years after they were built....they were still brilliant. And what did people do when they wanted the same kind of polished limestone that was used on the pyramid? Assumably, they couldn't duplicate it, so they just scavenged it. Thousands of years later!! Could it be that without the direction of the "gods", we lost much of our abilities?

But stop for a second. Before this turns into a debate focused on one or two arguable points, keep in mind that there was a lot of information presented in "Chariots of the Gods". The work should be looked at as a whole. And nothing can be proven true or false. It's a matter of looking at all the facts and all the evidence and keeping an open mind and eventually formulating an opinion. There is no need to jump to conclusions so quickly.

[MeDeFe]

Or maybe people thought "there's a fucking big pile of rocks right over there, why should we go to the trouble of transporting it over long distances when it's much easier to take what's already there?".

[jonesthecurl]

...in the same way as people have re-used building materials ever since.

Archaeologists have a phrase for sites where all the building materials from a structure have been re-used. They say the foundations have been "robbed out".

[Neoteny]

Pseudoscience, Ho!

[TheProwler]

Or maybe people thought "there's a fucking big pile of rocks right over there, why should we go to the trouble of transporting it over long distances when it's much easier to take what's already there?".

...in the same way as people have re-used building materials ever since.

Archaeologists have a phrase for sites where all the building materials from a structure have been re-used. They say the foundations have been "robbed out".

Yeah, maybe...but the point is still valid that the pyramids would have lasted better over the years if their protective covering was not removed...but this is exactly what I mean about focusing on one thing. By getting so wound-up on one little point, the big picture seems to be missed.

I agree that examining a point in detail is advantageous. But going back and forth with "Maybe this" and "Maybe that" is not productive.

I want to mentioning that I corrected a misconception about the erosion of the pyramids. The erosion was presented as a valid argument against the idea of alien visitors (I could argue that if it were true, it would still not be a valid argument). It was supported as a valid argument by another user. I did quick research and presented the findings and demonstrated that the point is moot because the pyramids were altered by thousands of years after they were built. Not only that, but I presented evidence that they actually did last very well and were still stunning before they were scavenged. If it was a valid point that they did not weather well, and I showed that they actually did weather well, then it must be validation to the theory of possible alien visitation. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

MeDeFe, I said "Maybe". It would be fair to ask you to do some research and demonstrate if the Egyptians thousands of years later were indeed capable of the same accomplishments of their ancestors. Respectfully, if you have some interest in the subject, then offer a bit of your time and do some research to add some useful content. If you think it is actually an important point....

Has anyone commented on anything other than the pyramids of Egypt? Because that was a small portion of what was presented...

[The Neon Peon]

I just took the time to watch the whole video from the start to the end, and I will make a few comments.

The video itself was very biased, yet still enjoyable; they presented a lot of good points nonetheless.

Some of the images they presented such as at the end of the movie, the painting discovered in Russia which actually portrayed someone wearing a suit and actually had a space ship, along with all the other models of ships presented at the end were convincing. What really threw me off was when they pointed to a circle on the wall with some lines going out of the top and said: "clearly an astronaut wearing a helmet and an oxygen mask." Seriously? I see a circle, with another for a mouth, and 2 freaking lines going out of the sides of the head. While, yes some of the images were clear and to the point where you could see the resemblance clearly, presenting a head without eyes or nose and calling the mouth an oxygen mask does not do much to convince me.

They did some good work pointing out the advanced masonry used to make the rocks touch each other so precisely there was no room in between them. The movie also did some nice work on the Egyptians in pointing out that one massive rock is hard to move, however if there is a giant rock just lying there, you can make a statue out of it without moving it. There are plenty of places in the world where you will find one humongous boulder and far away from all types of rock. This can't be used for many of the constructions, but in my opinion it is still the probably explanation for some of the stand-alone statues and monuments they find in the desert. Not all rocks have to come from mines.

Overall, convincing, but some of the evidence was shaky and should have been left out.

[jonesthecurl]

The way that you get rocks to fit tightly (Note: I haven't seen the video, I don't have sound, but I'm assuming they're talking about various South American constructins here) is to wiggle them back and forth until they grind smooth. it takes a lot of time, and is dull, hard work. That is what they had slaves for. No mystery.

[TheProwler]

The way that you get rocks to fit tightly (Note: I haven't seen the video, I don't have sound, but I'm assuming they're talking about various South American constructins here) is to wiggle them back and forth until they grind smooth. it takes a lot of time, and is dull, hard work. That is what they had slaves for. No mystery.

I have to wonder if this is really a feasible explanation.

Lets say we have a rock that is about 10 feet cubed and weighs 90 tons (using round numbers from figures below). Lets say it take 10 people to push a ton...remember, not rolling a stone, sliding or grinding a stone. So how do you get 900 people to push on a 10x10x10 foot rock? And do so long enough to grind it together with the other rock to get a perfect fit...seems kinda far fetched.

We have to remember the sheer weight of stone. This is not concrete. It is much heavier. I did a quick search and found this number (I haven't verified it, but I am assuming it is correct). Limestone, solid - 2611 kg/m³. Think about that for a few seconds. How small that is, and how heavy that is.

Let me ask a question. There were these huge rocks moved and positioned and that is clear because they are still standing. And we know from science that, in many cases, these rocks had to be moved great distances. Now, if they were dragged along the Earth, they would have left marks - giant "scratches" in the Earth's crust. Heck, after thousands of years, many of the hand carvings in the caves are still visible. The massive scratches in the Earth's crust would surely still be visible. But they are not there. So the idea is that some type of mechanism was used. So my question is, where is the evidence of these mechanisms?

They must have been marvels of engineering. They must have been very strong and durable in order to move hundreds of thousands of tons of stones - yet they disappeared without a trace? There are writings from these people about the gods from the sky in these times, but nobody thought "Hey, lets write about this brilliant feat of engineering that moves 50,000 ton stones." Again, I am just seeking a logical explanation. On one hand, we are supposed to believe these people were intelligent and creative and inventive. But when they write about gods from the sky, we dismiss them as primitive and superstitious. It really seems to me that a lot of people don't want to face the facts and admit that it is possible that we had outside help.

[b.k. barunt]

I don't want to be mean, but you can't possibly be as stoopid as that can you? "Giant scratches on the earth"? * * Takes a couple minutes to recover from convulsive laughter * *
That's how you would have done it? Never mind, rhetorical question.

Listen, take a look at some of the hieroglyphics from the pyramids themselves - they'll help you understand - you know, like a picture book. You get one of these big blocks of stone up on a couple big logs - yeah i know they were heavy, but they had a few thousand slaves - then you put a couple more logs in front, and as you move forward you take the logs that you've rolled over and move them to the front again. You repeat this process until you get the big blocks of stone where you want them. This is why the wheel was invented - so that you could move things without having to drag them and leave big giant scratches on the earth's crust. It also saves a ton of money, cause you don't have to pay the aliens to move things for you with their flying saucers, and believe me - they're not cheap.


Honibaz

[e_i_pi]

Von Daniken's bubble was burst decades ago.

I disagree.

Many people are, for one reason or another, unwilling and/or unable to keep an open mind on this subject.

I do agree that some of what he presented was fake and on some issues he "jumps to conclusions". But you can't discount everything because he was wrong about a few things...

Of course you can jump to this conclusion, it's an internet forum. You, for instance Prowler, posted a lot in the now dead Flame Wars. Therefore your opinion and intelligence is moot. In the case on Von Daniken, well his name has 'Von' in it, which sounds German, therefore he must be a Nazi, and Nazi's are always wrong.

Man I should go get my Masters in Dialectics

[PLAYER57832]

That is what they had slaves for. No mystery.

First, this is a misconception. In fact, anthropologists/archeologists now think that most Egyptian labor was from free people who took these positions either on a kind of rotating basis or as career "choices". (remember, the options open to even the "freest" non-leader back then were limited).

Let me ask a question. There were these huge rocks moved and positioned and that is clear because they are still standing. And we know from science that, in many cases, these rocks had to be moved great distances. Now, if they were dragged along the Earth, they would have left marks - giant "scratches" in the Earth's crust. Heck, after thousands of years, many of the hand carvings in the caves are still visible. The massive scratches in the Earth's crust would surely still be visible. But they are not there. So the idea is that some type of mechanism was used. So my question is, where is the evidence of these mechanisms?

Sorry, but its obvious you have never moved much rock, built walls or done trails.

I, alone, a small petite woman, can easily move a boulder bigger than myself with only a few tools... a strong pry bar and lever (I.e. another rock or better, piece of wood because the rock will often shatter), OR a couple of rollers and some rope or pry bars ... etc.

After working trails for a few seasons, I FIRMLY believe that the pyramids were built entirely by hand.

As for the "scratches" .. you are partially correct. There would often be traces, except those traces ARE there. They are ramps, etc. Scratches .. no, because generally they would be on rollers.

They must have been marvels of engineering.

TRUE .. so are the ancient cathedrals, so is the Great Wall, so were the giant Buddha status .. BUT "marval" does not mean "had to be aliens". People were a lot smarter, knew a lot more back then than modern people wish to credit.

They must have been very strong and durable in order to move hundreds of thousands of tons of stones - yet they disappeared without a trace?

uh-- look around you .. I see plenty of people and yes, people today could rebuild the pyramids by hand. The problem is not ability, its money and willingness. We just don't have the incentive of giving immortality to our supreme leader/almost god.

There are writings from these people about the gods from the sky in these times, but nobody thought "Hey, lets write about this brilliant feat of engineering that moves 50,000 ton stones." Again, I am just seeking a logical explanation. On one hand, we are supposed to believe these people were intelligent and creative and inventive. But when they write about gods from the sky, we dismiss them as primitive and superstitious. It really seems to me that a lot of people don't want to face the facts and admit that it is possible that we had outside help.

There is a big difference between "primitive" and "don't have our current modern understanding" and stupid or unable to accomplish anything. Ancient people WERE superstitious, DID see "gods" where we currently do not (and some where we still do), but they were also quite capable of building pyramids, performing surgery, etc.

[jonesthecurl]

On the question of slaves (and the incredibly precise fit) I was thinking of American pyramids.

[PLAYER57832]

On the question of slaves (and the incredibly precise fit) I was thinking of American pyramids.

I don't know much about south American civilizations, except that they had intense knowledge of practical agriculture and the like.

But the rest of what I said pretty much applies to either situation.

[jonesthecurl]

Von D came up with his, um, "questions" about forty years ago.
They made a huge impact because they were interesting, and suggested some spectacular and fun things if some of his speculations were correct.
Historians and archaeologists were not impressed. Some laughed, some ignored him, some reviled him. Some took the time to explain why he was full of crap. His meanderings have been available ever since, along with various imitators, but the established view hasn't changed. Forty years is long enough for two generations to rexamine the evidence, agree with him, gradually change "establihsment" views, and move on into a new exciting world where history contains spacemen and interstellar travel. Instead, he has been marginalised and largely forgotten.
Last year, when someone was banging on about some unlikely nonsense (possibly the moon-landing "hoax"), I mocked them by saying "I expect you believe in Von Daniken too", or words to that effect. Nobody seemed to know who I meant. Becuase he's been washed up and forgotten except for a few diehard fans (who, incidentally, in the opening sequence of their film call Von D's work "novels" - whereas he'd always claimed they were nonfiction). "Hurrah," I thought,"that's one battle that finally seems to have been won." Apparently I was wrong.
Seriously folks, get hold of The Space Gods Revealed, and its sequel whose name I forget - I didn't bring them to the US with me as I thought the matter settled, so I can't dip in them for the answer to every little thing that is beyond Von D's understanding.

And I'm sorry Prowler that you find the fitting-rocks-by-grinding idea "unlikely". Obviously you are much better postioned to have an opinion on the subject than the world's archaeology professors. I mean, you've read a book (or did you just watch the video?)

[PLAYER57832]

And I'm sorry Prowler that you find the fitting-rocks-by-grinding idea "unlikely". Obviously you are much better postioned to have an opinion on the subject than the world's archaeology professors. I mean, you've read a book (or did you just watch the video?)

Skip the archeologists .. just try talking to any common masonary worker!

Anyway, if evidence and reasoning were enough to dissuade conspiracy theorists , we would never have heard 90% of these theories.

[TheProwler]

I don't want to be mean, but you can't possibly be as stoopid as that can you? "Giant scratches on the earth"? * * Takes a couple minutes to recover from convulsive laughter * *
That's how you would have done it? Never mind, rhetorical question.

Excellent example of someone unable to comprehend that what I am doing is not arguing, but hypothesizing. Relax BK, I know it is hard to teach an old dogs new tricks, but try to be civil.

Let's look what I actually said:

Now, if they were dragged along the Earth, they would have left marks - giant "scratches" in the Earth's crust. Heck, after thousands of years, many of the hand carvings in the caves are still visible. The massive scratches in the Earth's crust would surely still be visible. But they are not there. So the idea is that some type of mechanism was used. So my question is, where is the evidence of these mechanisms?

I discounted the idea of just dragging. And from that you concluded that's how I would have done it. Really, it seems that you are not intelligent enough to follow simple logic. And it appears that your reading comprehension skills are on par with a mentally retarded child. Did you just have a bad day?

Listen, take a look at some of the hieroglyphics from the pyramids themselves - they'll help you understand - you know, like a picture book. You get one of these big blocks of stone up on a couple big logs - yeah i know they were heavy, but they had a few thousand slaves - then you put a couple more logs in front, and as you move forward you take the logs that you've rolled over and move them to the front again. You repeat this process until you get the big blocks of stone where you want them. This is why the wheel was invented - so that you could move things without having to drag them and leave big giant scratches on the earth's crust. It also saves a ton of money, cause you don't have to pay the aliens to move things for you with their flying saucers, and believe me - they're not cheap.

You speak of the hieroglyphics - can you show them? This is all a part of discussing things. I asked for evidence; if you have it, show it. I did not say there was not evidence. I just haven't seen it. Didn’t your parents ever teach you to share?

Also, you are very focused on the pyramids of Egypt and pyramids in general. There is much more to discuss....

[TheProwler]

That is what they had slaves for. No mystery.

First, this is a misconception. In fact, anthropologists/archeologists now think that most Egyptian labor was from free people who took these positions either on a kind of rotating basis or as career "choices". (remember, the options open to even the "freest" non-leader back then were limited).

Haha, people tend to try to satisfy their gods, right?

As for the "scratches" .. you are partially correct. There would often be traces, except those traces ARE there. They are ramps, etc. Scratches .. no, because generally they would be on rollers.

Similar to BK, you are talking about traces...ramps, in this case....but you are not providing any documentation. Are you saying that the ramps still exist? Again, this is information gathering people - share you information with documentation. Otherwise, it is hard to tell if it is just your opinion or if it actually fact.

There is a big difference between "primitive" and "don't have our current modern understanding" and stupid or unable to accomplish anything. Ancient people WERE superstitious, DID see "gods" where we currently do not (and some where we still do), but they were also quite capable of building pyramids, performing surgery, etc.

To just say “They were superstitious” is not a proper explanation of why they "DID see “gods”". You are calling them superstitious because you are dismissing the possibility that they actually lived among “gods” who were possibly aliens. Heck, they talked about the gods coming from the sky. What makes you more knowledgeable about their situation than them? 4000 years later, you are concluding that their “gods” couldn’t have been aliens - based on what? You weren’t there. They were. What causes you to not believe them?

[TheProwler]

Von D came up with his, um, "questions" about forty years ago.
They made a huge impact because they were interesting, and suggested some spectacular and fun things if some of his speculations were correct.
Historians and archaeologists were not impressed. Some laughed, some ignored him, some reviled him. Some took the time to explain why he was full of crap. His meanderings have been available ever since, along with various imitators, but the established view hasn't changed. Forty years is long enough for two generations to rexamine the evidence, agree with him, gradually change "establihsment" views, and move on into a new exciting world where history contains spacemen and interstellar travel. Instead, he has been marginalised and largely forgotten.
Last year, when someone was banging on about some unlikely nonsense (possibly the moon-landing "hoax"), I mocked them by saying "I expect you believe in Von Daniken too", or words to that effect. Nobody seemed to know who I meant. Becuase he's been washed up and forgotten except for a few diehard fans (who, incidentally, in the opening sequence of their film call Von D's work "novels" - whereas he'd always claimed they were nonfiction). "Hurrah," I thought,"that's one battle that finally seems to have been won." Apparently I was wrong.
Seriously folks, get hold of The Space Gods Revealed, and its sequel whose name I forget - I didn't bring them to the US with me as I thought the matter settled, so I can't dip in them for the answer to every little thing that is beyond Von D's understanding.

Dude, if you read The Space Gods Revealed, why don't you just recite some of what it said? You seem to take great pride in your extensive readings, but if you can't understand and retain what you learn, it is useless.

And I'm sorry Prowler that you find the fitting-rocks-by-grinding idea "unlikely". Obviously you are much better postioned to have an opinion on the subject than the world's archaeology professors. I mean, you've read a book (or did you just watch the video?)

See above. I’d just like to see documentation from “the world's archaeology professors”...or even one or two of them. Childish insults about reading...nice work. Very constructive. If you were trying to ask if I’ve read the book “Chariots of the Gods”, the answer is “No, I didn’t read the book.” You must have....did it vary from the video that much?

[TheProwler]

And I'm sorry Prowler that you find the fitting-rocks-by-grinding idea "unlikely". Obviously you are much better postioned to have an opinion on the subject than the world's archaeology professors. I mean, you've read a book (or did you just watch the video?)

Skip the archeologists .. just try talking to any common masonary worker!

Anyway, if evidence and reasoning were enough to dissuade conspiracy theorists , we would never have heard 90% of these theories.

Haha! Yeah, because any common masonary worker has a lot of experience with 180000 pound stones. What a ridiculous thing to say.

You talk about evidence? Really, the amount of evidence provided so far is extremely disappointing. And it is almost impossible to sort out speculation and opinion from facts, because nobody has presented anything much more than hearsay.

Like I said a week ago: “I keep an open mind. That doesn't mean I believe anything other than I believe in the possibility of several theories being accurate.”

Really, do you people understand simple English? Show me where I said that I believe aliens inhabited the Earth. Somebody. Anybody?

It is a discussion people. I was kinda hoping that the people here could exchange information and maybe research a little and come up with some references to facts. But juvenile insults outnumber any points made with supporting documentation.

I also said this a week ago: “I have criticized the people in this forum in the past for taking a hard stance for or against a certain point of view very early in a discussion, and not being able to keep an open mind or admit there is information that they were not aware. To remain flexible in your thoughts and opinions shows intelligence, maturity, and even self esteem. This is not a structured debate in which a person must choose a side and argue it to the bitter end. That is counter-productive in my opinion.

Maybe I'm just expecting too much.”

Obviously I was right.

The people who have posted in this thread have clearly demonstrated that they are close-minded and, evidently, weak-minded people. Has anyone, other than myself, been able to pry their thoughts away from the building of the pyramids? Anyone addressed cave drawings, continents apart, depicting space travelers in a similar fashion? Anyone discussed the similarities of the Bible to earlier Sumerian beliefs and stories? No, no, and no.

This has been yet another example of the people of this forum being unable to comprehend the very clear posts of other individuals. Most of the users that posted in this thread thought they were arguing with me...even though I have yet to say what I believe. Not that it is even important to the discussion. Just like what they believe is not important to the discussion. The idea is to present facts and theories without jumping to conclusions. Conclusions come at the end of discussions.

This is how it works here though: “The ancient Egyptians could roll stones on the big trees that grew in desert, so there weren’t any aliens.” Hahaha! Yeah, I’m dealing with brilliant scientists here...haha!! Even saying that, I know most people reading this will not realize that I am referring to an incomplete proof, in general terms. They’ll be thinking “Desert....big trees....must prove right....ugg ugg.”

You’ve jumped to conclusions. You’ve jumped on the bandwagon. You’ve made incorrect assumptions. You’ve refused to try to understand any new ideas or different perspectives. You’ve misunderstood.

Ignorance is bliss.

[PLAYER57832]

That is what they had slaves for. No mystery.

First, this is a misconception. In fact, anthropologists/archeologists now think that most Egyptian labor was from free people who took these positions either on a kind of rotating basis or as career "choices". (remember, the options open to even the "freest" non-leader back then were limited).

Haha, people tend to try to satisfy their gods, right?

And sometimes its nice to have a job so you can have a house, shelter, etc. The jobs available back then were not exactly as diverse or "cushy" as those available today.

As for the "scratches" .. you are partially correct. There would often be traces, except those traces ARE there. They are ramps, etc. Scratches .. no, because generally they would be on rollers.

Similar to BK, you are talking about traces...ramps, in this case....but you are not providing any documentation. Are you saying that the ramps still exist? Again, this is information gathering people - share you information with documentation. Otherwise, it is hard to tell if it is just your opinion or if it actually fact.

Frankly, I did provide you wish some evidence... namely I talked about my work in moving rocks, etc. I realize it might be a foreign concept .. to actually go out and TEST theories as opposed to just looking on the internet, but, hey ... . its the way things are done even now.

As for the rest, my evidence comes from personal conversations with one of the first people go down, study the ruins and incidentally, work on translating the mayan symbols. And yes, I am old enough when we actually thought that a PhD who had just returned from a dig might be a bit more knowledgeable than the latest internet site. Again, its a little foible of those of us over 20.

That was a few years ago, when the internet was not around, but I am sure its there on wikki, etc.

There is a big difference between "primitive" and "don't have our current modern understanding" and stupid or unable to accomplish anything. Ancient people WERE superstitious, DID see "gods" where we currently do not (and some where we still do), but they were also quite capable of building pyramids, performing surgery, etc.

To just say “They were superstitious” is not a proper explanation of why they "DID see “gods”". You are calling them superstitious because you are dismissing the possibility that they actually lived among “gods” who were possibly aliens. Heck, they talked about the gods coming from the sky. What makes you more knowledgeable about their situation than them? 4000 years later, you are concluding that their “gods” couldn’t have been aliens - based on what? You weren’t there. They were. What causes you to not believe them?[/quote]
If you reread what I wrote, You will see that you have gotten the wrong impression.
I am dismissing nothing... merely saying that these beliefs did not necessarily mean they were stupid.

As for me being more knowledgeable... I never said I was more knowledgeable than them .. quite the opposite. I said that my personal knowledge goes a long way to convince me that they DID know a lot more than they are given credit for.

[PLAYER57832]

This might have been brought up before, but if so, I missed it.

Some people want to look at "similarities" between the Mayan ruins and the Egyptian ones as evidence of kinship. However, the two types of structures are actually quite different in how they are built and even used. It just happens that a pyramid (like a dome and a box) is a pretty basic structure. When my 2 year old builds block towers, he will often make a pyramid. I don't see that as evidence he is somehow embued with the spirit of Egyptian kings.

[TheProwler]

This might have been brought up before, but if so, I missed it.

Some people want to look at "similarities" between the Mayan ruins and the Egyptian ones as evidence of kinship. However, the two types of structures are actually quite different in how they are built and even used. It just happens that a pyramid (like a dome and a box) is a pretty basic structure. When my 2 year old builds block towers, he will often make a pyramid. I don't see that as evidence he is somehow embued with the spirit of Egyptian kings.

Agreed, the existence of pyramids in different areas of the world is not compelling evidence of outside influence.

Why do you make stupid references to your 2-year old? You were doing so well for a few sentences...

I did a Google and came across this site...http://hubpages.com/hub/Mayan-Science-- ... t-Evidence

He presents some good arguments against some of your theories.

This page makes a bunch of references to the Mayan's belief of gods: https://www.courses.psu.edu/anth/anth00 ... 9/pyr.html

Anyways, back to your simple point: The pyramids in Egypt and the pyramids in South America are quite different and their existence is not evidence of kinship.

I think we can all agree on that. Very good work.

While it was not a departure from the whole "pyramid fixation", it actually presented thoughts on something other than "This is how they could move those rocks." There's hope for you yet.

[jonesthecurl]

It's twenty years or more since I read the Ronald Story book, more since I read any Von D.
I've read 2-3,000 books since, sorry I can't quote them all.
I didn't watch the video, I don't have sound (broken computer) - but it does start by saying it's based on Von D's "novels", so there's probably just less detail, and perhaps some of the more ludicrous suggestins would be dropped.