# Sloppy research & deliberate shill subversion of SH narratives?



## mifletzet (Sep 27, 2020)

A Russian fellow "Global Vision" in this youtube asserts with total confidence  *that there are no photos *or records of the construction of the 1912 Hardinge Bridge in Bangladesh, that no one knows who built it, and that it must be much older


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImkTlRh0S5U&t=10s_


Yet a quick search *finds dozens of convincing photos *of it under construction according to the conventional narrative!

https://www.flickr.com/photos/smu_cul_digitalcollections/albums/72157659942451535/page1
Although "Stolen History" narratives seems to bring up genuine unexplained anomalies on many levels, one could probably find that fully 50% of them are readily dismissable. There is a lot of wishful, fantastical claims, concocted theses,  and unwarranted speculations due to sloppy research, simple failure to google, and even deliberate 'shill' subversion trying to make a mockery of SH!


----------



## Timeshifter (Sep 27, 2020)

The trouble with photographic evidence, is that it can be from anywhen. So although we have some photo evidence of something being built, in what could be Bangladesh, we cannot be sure if they are from the time of its suposed construction.

Poor research is everywhere, more often than not in mainstream academia. 

I agree with you however, poor research, statements and assumptions only weaken our arguments of a hidden history and these will be used against other genuine excellent SH research, such as what we have in the main here. 

Who knows however, is this simply poor research, a desperate desire to find more, or more sinister such as deliberately attempting to make a mockery of the whole SH topic?

We have to make sure our own research is 100% honest.


----------



## JimDuyer (Sep 27, 2020)

Who are you going to believe - what the scholars tell you or your own lying eyes?  
(Ha ha)


----------



## Forrest (Sep 27, 2020)

All of the tech, flags, people, clothes, in the pictures fit together with each other for this time period, 1910's. The motorboat, the winch, the shore crane, the riveted trusses.


----------



## JimDuyer (Sep 27, 2020)

Looking at time 0.57 and after you can clearly see that this is a backward part of the country. So really, anything goes. It could even have been a "used" bridge that was dismantled and rebuilt on that location.  We have a bridge over a river here in Costa Rica that seems very old. I stopped one day to take a look at its plate that is welded to the front.  It says Bailey Bridge Works, 1903, so obviously it was originally only a temporary or bailey bridge, that was allowed to remain for that long. No funds to replace it, and it very well could have been used when purchased.


----------



## Citezenship (Sep 27, 2020)

Jim Duyer said:


> Who are you going to believe - what the scholars tell you or your own lying eyes?
> (Ha ha)


One's own confirmation bias can be a real struggle to spot, a real sheep in wolfs clothing!


----------



## Forrest (Sep 27, 2020)

It looks like new construction. The girders may have been made in England and shipped up the river, then unloaded with the shore crane. This particular design of riveted truss work was only in use for a few decades. I'm not sure when it started, no more than 1850s, maybe only since 1870's (?) when high-enough tensile steel became available in quantity Forth Bridge - Wikipedia

This type of construction fell out of use somewhere between 1917 and 1958. I guess that from the construction of the I-5 bridge Interstate Bridge - Infogalactic: the planetary knowledge core The two spans are different, the 1917 span is much like the OP, the 1958 span is welded. The 1910 Hawthorne Bridge - Wikipedia Portland, is similar, though smaller and less elaborate. I'd say the OP bridge is slightly more advanced than the Hawthorne judging by details like this- _View: https://www.flickr.com/photos/smu_cul_digitalcollections/22828445110/in/album-72157659942451535/_


----------



## Citezenship (Sep 27, 2020)

Jim Duyer said:


> Looking at time 0.57 and after you can clearly see that this is a backward part of the country. So really, anything goes. It could even have been a "used" bridge that was dismantled and rebuilt on that location.  We have a bridge over a river here in Costa Rica that seems very old. I stopped one day to take a look at its plate that is welded to the front.  It says Bailey Bridge Works, 1903, so obviously it was originally only a temporary or bailey bridge, that was allowed to remain for that long. No funds to replace it, and it very well could have been used when purchased.


Having been to india a few times i can say the more backward you go the more technologically advanced it becomes, or at least seems to be.

Ever heard of the million dollor door??

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jimdob...covered-at-indias-sree-padmanabhaswam-temple/





I have been up close to this place and all i could think was how it resembles an engine block, cam timing chain on the top, exhaust and inlet ports on the side, did not get to go inside though!


----------



## Skydog (Sep 27, 2020)

Try doing a Google image search of the Singer building in New York under construction. A ton of photos come up. Case closed! But wait! Are all the ones of it going up fake and / or all the real ones of it when it was being purposely taken down / demolished?


----------



## Forrest (Sep 28, 2020)

A bit more on the history of steel bridges. Truss work bridges were made of wood, then iron, then steel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truss_bridge "Truss bridges became a common type of bridge built from the 1870s through the 1930s... As metal slowly started to replace timber, wrought iron bridges in the US started being built on a large scale in the 1870s... with the Wrought Iron Bridge Company in the lead. As the 1880s and 1890s progressed, steel began to replace wrought iron as the preferred material."

Steel is stronger and tougher than iron; bridges made of steel can span longer distances without risk of fracturing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steel_Bridge"The bridge was completed in 1912 and replaced the Steel Bridge that was built in 1888 as a double-deck swing-span bridge. The 1888 structure was the first railroad bridge across the Willamette River in Portland. Its name originated because steel, instead of wrought iron, was used in its construction, which was very unusual for the time.[2] When the current Steel Bridge opened, it was simply given its predecessor's name."


----------



## trismegistus (Sep 28, 2020)

Forrest said:


> A bit more on the history of steel bridges. Truss work bridges were made of wood, then iron, then steel.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truss_bridge"Truss bridges became a common type of bridge built from the 1870s through the 1930s... As metal slowly started to replace timber, wrought iron bridges in the US started being built on a large scale in the 1870s... with the Wrought Iron Bridge Company in the lead. As the 1880s and 1890s progressed, steel began to replace wrought iron as the preferred material."
> 
> ...



While what you say may or may not be true, using Wikipedia to prove a standard model point is not generally what the spirit of Stolen History is about. Have you considered finding sources outside of Wikipedia to back up your claims?


----------



## Forrest (Sep 28, 2020)

trismegistus said:


> Forrest said:
> 
> 
> > A bit more on the history of steel bridges. Truss work bridges were made of wood, then iron, then steel.
> ...



Yes, I know about the Wiki provisio. Just because it's a garbage dump doesn't mean everything in it is garbage. This is fairly recent history; I therefore cringed only a little bit as I pasted in the Wiki links, hoping no one would notice.

The information quoted about the bridges matches with what I already know or was told by my parents and others, what I've already researched in decades past, etc. I grew up in Portland. I've bicycled over and ~studied all of the old bridges except St. Johns since the 1960's. Some of my ancestors helped found it (Oregon Independent Colony). We have grave sites and unbroken family records of that going back to the second wagon train of the second year of the great migration, 1844. Oregon Trail - Infogalactic: the planetary knowledge core

Because Wiki is a cesspool, I, along with many others, helped fund Infogalactic, which we expect will replace Wiki. It is a 'complete' fork of Wiki, still under development. Any of you, please consider joining as an editor- you will find a ~welcoming environment there. There's tons of threads on SH that are practically copy/paste as Infogalactic articles.

	Post automatically merged: Sep 28, 2020

The Interstate Bridge is interesting because it is two different bridges, built in two different eras, that appear at first to be nearly identical. They show a technological progression in construction technique with very little design difference. The NB I-5 bridge was built in 1917 (supposedly) with the same tech as the Hardinge OP bridge, of about the same time. It has riveted straps joining the box beams that make up the trusses.





The 1957 bridge uses welded box beams with cut out lightening holes in place of the straps.







https://www.oldoregonphotos.com/pub...3c5560b27eacfa53338351dc5c2/i/p/ip066zdet.jpg

	Post automatically merged: Sep 28, 2020

That appears to be the river ferry behind the first bridge.





Both bridges were built by the same company.
I remember this story from a long time ago-
https://www.historylink.org/File/20952"The bridge's official opening was on February 14, 1917, a festive occasion attended by thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, who were lucky to have a good-weather day in the middle of February. A ceremony was held on the bridge's lift span, where two girls -- 10-year-old Eleanor Holman (daughter of Multnomah County Commissioner Rufus Holman) and 7-year-old Mary Helen Kiggins of Vancouver (daughter of Clark County Commissioner John Kiggins), formally opened the bridge by pulling apart a ribbon holding a rope that symbolically marked the border between Oregon and Washington.
...The second bridge met its scheduled completion date, and on July 1, 1958, there was an opening ceremony that was far smaller than the one in 1917. The two young girls -- now middle-aged women -- who had pulled the ceremonial ribbon at the opening of the 1917 bridge were back to repeat the ceremony. 
...The tolls lasted until 1966, when they were formally ended in a ceremony where, once again, Eleanor Holman Burkitt and Mary Helen Kiggins McAleer were on hand to untie the ceremonial ribbon."

	Post automatically merged: Sep 28, 2020

This plaque is probably a later addition.





So the Hardinge Bridge is probably about the same age as the first Interstate Bridge, because they are very similar tech and design. 40 years later the tech had advanced. The Hardinge Bridge has bigger and wider footings. This may be due to a less secure anchoring and slower current. The Columbia River bottom here is scoured down to hard bedrock with a layer of gravel on top, pretty sure, due to Missoula Floods. The river itself is swift and deep.


----------



## luddite (Sep 28, 2020)

Forrest said:


> Because Wiki is a cesspool, I, along with many others, helped fund Infogalactic, which we expect will replace Wiki. It is a 'complete' fork of Wiki, still under development. Any of you, please consider joining as an editor- you will find a ~welcoming environment there. There's tons of threads on SH that are practically copy/paste as Infogalactic articles.



I help fund it also and am on social galactic but i'd say it has only a tiny fraction of wiki content and is growing at a glacial pace! I salute Vox for the effort!

We all cringe on wiki links but sometimes they are useful. Not all of the content is grabbled!


----------



## JWW427 (Sep 28, 2020)

_Sigh..._
I wonder if we all may have gone too far off the rails with some of these wild building and bridge theories.
Just because some over-the-top Roccoco and Beaux Arts buildings are suspiciously overbuilt and––perhaps––impossible for their 17-18th century time period, doesn't mean all buildings, bridges, and constructions are, especially steel and iron ones. (19th century).

An example was the KD posts on San Francisco being impossible to build that big in 1905. That's giving our industrious and talented ancestors short shrift. Gold rush money anyone? Expanding population via ship and overland train travel? Opportunities galore in sunny California?
"Go west, young man."



"Impossible" Tartarian-style State Capitol buildings? The same.
Im as guilty as anyone. (Croton Aqueduct theory).



_*"IMPOSSIBLE!"
"SCANDALOUS!"
"NO WAY IN HELL THEY BUILT THAT!"
"SOMEONE CALL AN ARCHITECT!"
"WE CANT, THEY"RE ALL WORKING FOR THE PTB!"*_


----------



## Huaqero (Sep 29, 2020)

Timeshifter said:


> The trouble with photographic evidence, is that it can be from anywhen. So although we have some photo evidence of something being built, in what could be Bangladesh, we cannot be sure if they are from the time of its suposed construction.
> 
> Poor research is everywhere, more often than not in mainstream academia.
> 
> ...


I remember my thread on Port Elizabeth in SH1. 0. There is a Campanile tower there which could be from the Obscured World. Someone posted a pre-construction photo evidence of the site without the tower, and I would have accepted that, however, after some cross-examining on streetview and two different web pages, I realised that the 'proof' photo was showing a different place, a few tens of meters away! The debunking was debunked. So, yes, own research is essential


----------



## irishbalt (Sep 29, 2020)

Forrest said:


> A bit more on the history of steel bridges. Truss work bridges were made of wood, then iron, then steel.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truss_bridge"Truss bridges became a common type of bridge built from the 1870s through the 1930s... As metal slowly started to replace timber, wrought iron bridges in the US started being built on a large scale in the 1870s... with the Wrought Iron Bridge Company in the lead. As the 1880s and 1890s progressed, steel began to replace wrought iron as the preferred material."
> 
> ...


I'm not sure the steel industry came about the way we are told.  That may be controversial, maybe not.  I believe the BEIC came accross texts far older than the Bible, translated them and began research.  That research was handed to trusted servants of The Crown, Carnegie being among them.


----------



## Forrest (Sep 30, 2020)

Timeshifter said:


> The trouble with photographic evidence, is that it can be from anywhen. So although we have some photo evidence of something being built, in what could be Bangladesh, we cannot be sure if they are from the time of its suposed construction.
> 
> I agree with you however, poor research, statements and assumptions only weaken our arguments of a hidden history and these will be used against other genuine excellent SH research, such as what we have in the main here.
> 
> ...



The closer it is to our time, the more linkages can be found between the photos, other similar projects, records from witnesses, technology types, designs, etc. I agree with OP, the Global Vision video looks like either a shill or poor research, and in either case that detracts from genuine historical reconstruction.

The architectural plans for any structure are also valuable. I've seen the ones for the Hawthorne Bridge; they still exist. It's also like the Hardinge Bridge, so those probably are still around as well. There are lots of bridges and other big structures that are built in this "Steel Bridge" period that use the same construction and design concepts, which btw, are reflected in the design concepts of the original Erector Sets. So the history of the Erector set is corroborating evidence.

The plans for the Titanic/Olympic/Britannic are also still around in some form, so those ships are probably placed in the correct years, regardless of which one is which.

There was a KD post about the _Great Eastern_ ship. The idea was floated that the ship's hull was a leftover from a Reset. I don't recall seeing this picture before, which supposedly shows the hull under construction. It looks legit- the hull cross-section, the double hull, the setting and furniture. A lot of detail about methods and tech can be gleaned from this image.

https://theengineer.markallengroup....under_construction_at_Millwall_4313594000.jpg


----------



## Whitewave (Oct 9, 2020)

Citezenship said:


> Having been to india a few times i can say the more backward you go the more technologically advanced it becomes, or at least seems to be.
> 
> Ever heard of the million dollor door??
> 
> ...


This sounds like the start of an interesting thread. *Hint. Hint*


----------



## Citezenship (Oct 9, 2020)

Whitewave said:


> Citezenship said:
> 
> 
> > Having been to india a few times i can say the more backward you go the more technologically advanced it becomes, or at least seems to be.
> ...


Ahh Whitewave really good to have you back, having been up close to this my intuition was screaming thats a bloody big engine block, as for the treasure behind the door i do not think it would have survived colonel times so maybe be just like the fabled Aztec gold, more based on the mainstream sources promoting it(forbes mag).

Yet the engine thing is an avenue for further thought and reading!


----------



## Whitewave (Oct 9, 2020)

Citezenship said:


> Whitewave said:
> 
> 
> > Citezenship said:
> ...


Good to be back! 
Most old architecture is too interesting (and beautiful) to dismiss. Why would a building look like an engine unless, as a temple, it was a monument to high technology of the day? 
I think at one time magic, science and worshipful things were all one category and they were all memorialized in architecture.
Same with pyramids. Tombs, my eye! There was a city of the dead for burying important people. Plus, pyramids are to be found all over the world. I'm fairly sure pharoahs were not a global phenomenon. 
Patrick Gael Flannigan (modern day Tesla) wrote Pyramid Power in which he expounds his cogent thoughts on the real purpose of pyramids. I don't happen to agree with his conclusion (I believe pyramids were communication devices) but I think he was on the right track. Not that I'm in an intellectual position to contradict the genius of Flannigan but he'll never know about it so I can be a little cocky. ?
Still, I've never heard of this building and, as greedy as the world has gotten, I'm a bit pleasantly surprised the whole thing hasn't been melted down and stored in some nations treasure vault. The way the economy is going, that may still be a possibility so now is the time to learn what we can about this unique treasure of history.


----------



## Mabzynn (Oct 9, 2020)

Citezenship said:


> Jim Duyer said:
> 
> 
> > Looking at time 0.57 and after you can clearly see that this is a backward part of the country. So really, anything goes. It could even have been a "used" bridge that was dismantled and rebuilt on that location.  We have a bridge over a river here in Costa Rica that seems very old. I stopped one day to take a look at its plate that is welded to the front.  It says Bailey Bridge Works, 1903, so obviously it was originally only a temporary or bailey bridge, that was allowed to remain for that long. No funds to replace it, and it very well could have been used when purchased.
> ...



Follow Praveen Mohan on youtube = PraveenMohan

He does a lot of incredible research on these topics.   He has gotten fairly popular so his production quality and video filming equipment has sky rocketed over the past few years.


----------



## Citezenship (Oct 9, 2020)

Whitewave said:


> Citezenship said:
> 
> 
> > Whitewave said:
> ...


Yes i feel this way to, when teotihuacan is viewed from above it looks like a load of cpu's on a modern computer motherboard, i am sure this is no mistake of the architects!

I will look into the building above as it has quite a bit of history and try to get some kind of thread together!


----------



## JimDuyer (Oct 9, 2020)

Some glitch happened and my reply disappeared. Not to worry, couldn't have been Earth shattering in importance anyway.


----------



## asatiger1966 (Jan 26, 2021)

Whitewave said:


> Citezenship said:
> 
> 
> > Whitewave said:
> ...



I read a while back on the idea, of a spiritual nature, that if an enlighten person could visualize and build, in their mind, the object or outcome  would manifest itself.


----------



## Starman (Jan 26, 2021)

asatiger1966 said:


> Whitewave said:
> 
> 
> > Citezenship said:
> ...



In the same vein, I can imagine that the builders of old didn't need written plans because they already had the plan in their heads.  They group-thinked it, or were led by a leader who orchestrated it telepathically.  

Maybe they could pre-create an architectural thought form in front of them, a mirage, a kind of ghost-like template to help them guide the physical cut stone to be of the right shape.


----------



## asatiger1966 (Jan 26, 2021)

Starman said:


> asatiger1966 said:
> 
> 
> > Whitewave said:
> ...



I agree to the concept. I was thinking of the ability to transmit to the local workers not only how to construct the object but to orchestrate the building of the devices used to create the project. Putting the workers in a state submission so shortly after completion the skills and tools would slip from their memories.


----------



## Mike Nolan (Jan 26, 2021)

asatiger1966 said:


> Starman said:
> 
> 
> > asatiger1966 said:
> ...


Wow i cant believe these last 3 comments, i been thinking the same thing lately.  The power of the collective. It would explain a lot of our hidden history.


asatiger1966 said:


> I read a while back on the idea, of a spiritual nature, that if an enlighten person could visualize and build, in their mind, the object or outcome it would manifest itself.


Can you remember where you read this ?


----------



## JWW427 (Jan 26, 2021)

I think we are group-manifesting bits of new history here on SH.


----------



## Bitbybit (Feb 12, 2021)

In 1800-early 1900s we werent dazed by social media. We were just as smart (if not smarter) than today, but we did things without computers and , and more relative man power resources could be given to constructing solid things. Without digital tools the structural margins were made to last much longer than todays plastic and glass structures made to cheapest price possible.
Its more difficult to explain the logic where some countries actually stopped building train routes, like USA.


----------

