Too bad, no one has found any (really) advanced tools in those places. Not even a sonic or water drill/saw, sonic screw driver or teleport machines left over from the construction - anywhere on this planet....
as a moderator thoes comments are really not needed at all and dont contribute to the topic very unprofessional "the last part of the reply"
Poppycock. His comments were spot on and to the point. Moreover, they lacked the arrogant and condescending tone that I, the actual moderator of this subforum, will show below. kmguru simply pointed out that there is no evidence for the silly as shit speculation that there is any reason the inhabitants of the region couldn't have built the site.as a moderator thoes comments are really not needed at all and dont contribute to the topic very unprofessional "the last part of the reply"
Why not. What are the data and experimental archaeology used to arrive at this conclusion. Your failure to cite it will be taken as concession of the claim.the ruins were made on a hard surface but not a rock foundation rocky ground but not a foundation so that "man that can move everything" use a small rock under the block. that wont work in this situation
Ah... you "dont [sic] believe" therefore it must be so. Clearly you're taking an ethnocentric point of view in assuming that because they were in a "stone age" the people living there must also be stupid or less intelligent. If we are to evaluate your own spelling mistakes in this post, perhaps we can arrive at the conclusion that your are projecting your own limited intelligence on the people who lived and dedicated their lives to the construction of their temples so long ago. But such an evaluation and subsequent conclusion would be too condescending even for me.another thing is that i dont believe that a line that smal and that percise cannot be made by a chisle and blunt force its the exact same depth the whole way across..
There was no need to invoke the "greatest stoneworkers." Such feats were conducted via experimental archaeology in several sites all over the world where stone was quarried -nearly always in the original quarries. For every question of "how," an archaeologist has experimented in an effort to duplicate the results and determine not "if" it could be done (very clearly it could be since it was) but what methods were the most likely used by those that created monumental architecture and, more importantly, what is it we can learn about how these people lived their day-to-day lives by understanding how they quarried stone among many other, far more interesting things like how they prepared meals and organized themselves socially. But, more to your fantasy's about "the ancients," the stone work present in places like Tiwanaku are very much within the means of those working the stone and the work has been duplicated time and again (e.g. Aston, Harrell, and Shaw 2006).i want to see the greatest of stoneworkers using primitive tools recreate the same they cant use metal or any machine fabricated stone tools. remember it cant be diamond tiped.
Why wouldn't they have drills? Certainly not the drills envisioned in your ethnocentric (temporal-centric?) imagination, but drills nonetheless. Not only is there artifactual evidence of them in many cultures around the world that shows once monumental architecture began, experimental archaeology has shown precisely how such drills would work -without any diamond.something everyone is over looking even if the above was true. lets assume it was done.. explain how the perfect circular holes were cut i say cut because they didnt have a drill.
Anyone who makes the claim that "we couldnt [sic] even recreate that percision [sic] today" is not qualified to comment on the topic. We (archaeologists) already have recreated many if not all of the techniques used by early stone-working craftsmen. It was done without modern tools and a level of precision was obtained that is equal to that found in the archaeological record.after all that its down to opinion but having qualified people saying that we couldnt even recreate that percision today says something..
What are you willing to "gaurentee [sic]?"i can gaurentee you we couldnt do it without using modern tools
do i believe in life outside ours? yes imo its crazy not to think there is no single celled organism in the universe. which is incomprehendably massive..
Easy. They don't. And only the undereducated and ignorant would think so.and someone please tell me how ancient sumarians have glyphs dipicting humans with "gasmasks" on them and "rocket ships" that errily resemble todays' just some food for thought.
You haven't even tried to follow this thread have you?id put almost anything on it.. i wanna se a new age stone worker take a piece of dyrite or less hard rock and make theos carvings and thoes holes.. please show me.. cut blocks that percice and "puzzle like" using primitve tools, even if they could cut a line that small that long and exactly that depth how do you drill a hole in dyrite even with another piece of dyrite with no machining.. show me i have proof that its there now i just need the proof to show how it was all done there are a few facts here..
1 dyrite can only be cut by dyrite or harder "diamond"
2 experts have stated we today with our technology couldnt recreate puma punku
3 there is no other architechture anywhere else around the world
4 its at a very high altitude and crops wouldnt grow, how do you support the workforce it would be needed to create that for extended periods of time
5 to my knowledge there is no dyrite around the place. soo question must be asked how did they take 500,000 pound blocks up to that elevation
if im wrong i stand corrected
This point has been addressed exhaustively (see Post #30 and Post #39), and you're wrong. Corrundum (and potentially quartz) is harder than Diorite also (note the correct spelling of the word).1 dyrite can only be cut by dyrite or harder "diamond"
Cite just one.2 experts have stated we today with our technology couldnt recreate puma punku
An unprovable claim.3 there is no other architechture anywhere else around the world
And yet, crops do go, because there are a number of villages around the lake. Hmmm. I wonder if the members of those villages could possibly provide a workforce...4 its at a very high altitude and crops wouldnt grow, how do you support the workforce it would be needed to create that for extended periods of time
Your knowledge is wrong. I'm 90% certain that there has been an article linked to in this thread that describes an experiment that was carried out transporting a large piece of diorite, comparable to those used in the structure at Puma Punku. Do you understand what that means? There is a source of Diorite within the general vicinity of Puma-punku, that is accessable by water and diorite blocks of that size can be moved by boats made from reeds readily available around the shoreline of that lake.5 to my knowledge there is no dyrite around the place. soo question must be asked how did they take 500,000 pound blocks up to that elevation
Did you read anything I linked to in my last post?i stand corrected then.. you still havent told me how a hole was drilled.. the percisions of the cuts that couldnt be hand made.. even if some forms of quarts was harder show me proof anythign that someone could make cuts like that percise with blunt force or a chisiling action you cant because its not possible some will chip here and there, there is proof of machining in the pieces,
Umnmm... No.as for citing jsut watch ancient aliens.
And of course you can cite proof that Puma Punku is that old?and it can be proven that no other work like puma punku is around JUST LOOK something that masive survived for 14 to 17,000 years anything around that time that massive would still be around.. and theres not anything later than that... it would still be around.. there are may prymids around so we know that type of construction is all over but none like puma punku.. which makes great prymids look like childs play
One can only assume you mean "diorite" (please, for the sake of intelligent discussion, get a spell checker or at least take your time and review your work). This is, of course, a false statement. Diorite can, and has been demonstrated to, be cut by methods completely available to the residents of the Titicaca Basin (where Tiwanaku, Pumapunka, etc. is). Copper tubes have been shown to be very effective along with various saws used in conjunction with wet/dry, quartz sand techniques (Stocks 2003, esp. pp. 113-138). Moreover, the stones used in sites like Pumapunka were largely sandstone, a very easy to cut and shape stone, though andesite was used. Andesite is an extrusive form of diorite, but this is the stone type you probably mean to refer to.1 dyrite can only be cut by dyrite or harder "diamond"
No, they haven't. No genuine professional archaeologist has been cited to say this. Please cite the peer reviewed journal where this has been discussed.2 experts have stated we today with our technology couldnt recreate puma punku
There are many instances of architecture around the world at various periods of time. This sentence makes very little sense. If you're attempting to say that there is "no other [architecture] like it anywhere else in the world," then you are partially correct and partially wrong. The Andeans had their own architectural style, just as the Egyptians, Mayans, Sumerians, etc did. However, they used many of the same methods and features to shape stone and even transport it.3 there is no other architechture anywhere else around the world
They had considerable access to agriculture through the use of raised field agriculture, which was shown through experimental archaeological tests to be very effective and productive (Alenderfer 2008; Janusek 2004; Janusek and Kolata 2004). This agricultural system was extensive and under the control of the Tiwanaku leadership during the periods of occupation.4 its at a very high altitude and crops wouldnt grow, how do you support the workforce it would be needed to create that for extended periods of time
The heaviest stones at the site were on the order of 100-150 tons (less than 300,000 pounds, so 500,000 pounds is an exaggeration) and the average weight of stones imported to the site was far, far less (Protzen and Nair 2000; Vranich 2006). There were no A thin layer of crushed andesite found along the lakeshore in the southeast on the Taraco Peninsula provides evidence that the inhabitants were not only importing but also working large andesite blocks which were imported via a port there (Janusek 2004; Isabell and Burkholder 2002). The evidence points to lacustrine transportation and experimental archaeology has born this hypothesis out as viable (Harmon 2002).5 to my knowledge there is no dyrite around the place. soo question must be asked how did they take 500,000 pound blocks up to that elevation
if im wrong i stand corrected
I wonder if there was any type of semi-advanced civilization between each periods such as Archean , Proterozoic Eons, orbefore the Phanerozoic period...fossil records are pretty much oxidized and gone...
One can only assume you mean "diorite" (please, for the sake of intelligent discussion, get a spell checker or at least take your time and review your work). This is, of course, a false statement. Diorite can, and has been demonstrated to, be cut by methods completely available to the residents of the Titicaca Basin (where Tiwanaku, Pumapunka, etc. is). Copper tubes have been shown to be very effective along with various saws used in conjunction with wet/dry, quartz sand techniques (Stocks 2003, esp. pp. 113-138). Moreover, the stones used in sites like Pumapunka were largely sandstone, a very easy to cut and shape stone, though andesite was used. Andesite is an extrusive form of diorite, but this is the stone type you probably mean to refer to.
The heaviest stones at the site were on the order of 100-150 tons (less than 300,000 pounds, so 500,000 pounds is an exaggeration) and the average weight of stones imported to the site was far, far less (Protzen and Nair 2000; Vranich 2006). There were no A thin layer of crushed andesite found along the lakeshore in the southeast on the Taraco Peninsula provides evidence that the inhabitants were not only importing but also working large andesite blocks which were imported via a port there (Janusek 2004; Isabell and Burkholder 2002). The evidence points to lacustrine transportation and experimental archaeology has born this hypothesis out as viable (Harmon 2002).