• Update Success: Forum is back up after a huge content injection of recovered threads and replies: Details here.

Some Criticisms and Questions I Have Regarding Alternative History Theories/Theorists

Whitewave

Active member
Trusted Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2020
Messages
74
Reaction score
174
I spent years of my life recovering technology for the Army Security Agency, we spent millions of dollars on each mission, some of the missions ended in firefights with other countries that had arrived to claim the artifacts for themselves
Sounds like a terrific thread (or movie plot).
Perhaps the powers that be have an Erasure Institute - designed to remove any history that
unseats them from power.
Yes, it's called the Smithsonian Institute. See the thread Smithsonian: Suppressed Archaeological Finds
 

Horstmatt

Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2020
Messages
26
Reaction score
32
My Army career started at seventeen years of age. I joined the paratroops for adventure. One year later my butt was in Indochina with the 101st Screaming Eagles, Ist battalion 327 Airborne Infantry, Long Range Recon Patrol. know as Tiger Force 1966.

I witnessed many men split open by motor fire and after working inside another mans body to help him live, the complexity of the human body overwhelmed me. No way evolution is real.

A super advanced civilization did it exist, Yes. There is some room for definition of what that means but, I spent years of my life recovering technology for the Army Security Agency, we spent millions of dollars on each mission, some of the missions ended in firefights with other countries that had arrived to claim the artifacts for themselves.. The knowledge you may have gained access to , school,is slightly bent to prevent discovery of the true extent of what is happening world wide.

The community will help you with understanding but you never will grasp what we know because you weren't there and my kind does not trust easily.
If true, your what you're saying would be absolutely groundbreaking. What kind of technology? And what is your definition of super advanced? Are these artifacts from known civilizations, or from unknown civilizations?

This is the first time i've hear of someone actually claiming to have taken part in state-run artifact gathering for the purposes of hiding the truth. And it's very interesting. I have family that served in Indochina (for the French), and i've heard of the horror of the war there.
 

_harris

Member
Trusted Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2020
Messages
46
Reaction score
59
I'm not closed to possibilities, i'm just annoyed that people seem to underestimate the abilities of ancient peoples, when you put it the way you did "copper tools and banging a rock" you are diminishing the complexity of what can be acheived with such tools.
pretty certain we're all pro advanced ancient knowledge and abilities on this forum.
it's easy to doubt the "agreed upon" narrative of how these places were made, when we're told they could cut megalithic granite blocks with a copper saw, and cut out giant obelisks by bashing with rocks... (yes that is a mainstream theory. sounds silly right?)
not saying it's aliens... it probably wasn't.
but there's plenty of evidential ancient sites (which you seem to have some awareness of), which show a highly advanced level of stonework, by what must be previous civilisations, prior to even our oldest writings... who did them, if not a lost civilisation?
unless an alternative true history has been obfuscated or hidden?!?
Post automatically merged:

also, @Horstmatt it almost seems that you're arguing both sides here!?

you're saying an ancient advanced civilisation is not proven, yet admitting the ancient people who built these megalithic (and some monolithic) sites were advanced enough to build them.. :unsure:

surely that is precisely an ancient civilsation, with advanced stone cutting/moving/placing/carving technology?
 
Last edited:

Whitewave

Active member
Trusted Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2020
Messages
74
Reaction score
174
"unless an alternative true history has been obfuscated or hidden?!?"

Or lost and forgotten? Any global cataclysm would have the survivors just trying to survive and rebuild. Survival mode could have lasted a long time depending on what kind of cataclysm they endured.
Just considering more possibilities.
 

Horstmatt

Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2020
Messages
26
Reaction score
32
but there's plenty of evidential ancient sites (which you seem to have some awareness of), which show a highly advanced level of stonework, by what must be previous civilisations, prior to even our oldest writings... who did them, if not a lost civilisation?
unless an alternative true history has been obfuscated or hidden?!?
Post automatically merged:

also, @Horstmatt it almost seems that you're arguing both sides here!?

you're saying an ancient advanced civilisation is not proven, yet admitting the ancient people who built these megalithic (and some monolithic) sites were advanced enough to build them.. :unsure:

surely that is precisely an ancient civilsation, with advanced stone cutting/moving/placing/carving technology?
The thing is that the advanced nature of some stonework is overestimated, and the versatility of the "primitive tools" is underestimated. As experimental archaeology has shown, much can be achieved with such tools and a good knowledge of mathematics and things like friction.

Yes, an advanced civilization is not proven, but my point is that these megalithic sites did not necessitate particularly advanced tools to create, it is more the way in which those tools were used that is the mystery, which is why we have experimental archeology, to try and help fill in the holes where no records exist (Though it is not remotely reliable enough to be the sole basis of a conclusion). My point is that the contradiction of MSH as you described it where megalithic structures are very advanced, but the people that are thought to have built them were not is not a contradiction at all, and is based on an exageration in pop-culture of both of these traits. The structures, while incredible marvels of architecture and engineering, especially for their time, are not impossibly advanced, and the people who built them, though limited in the materials they had available to them, were far less limited in the way they used those materials (they weren't just hitting things with copper and stone tools).

People say that mainstream hsitorians underestimate ancient peoples, but they are the ones underestimating the mainstream estimation of the abilities of ancient peoples.

Edit: I'd like to add that i'm not denying the possibility of undiscovered civilizations, it's incredibly likely that there are. Just that they were super-advanced mega-civilizations is very unlikely.
 
Last edited:

Jetsam

Member
Trusted Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2020
Messages
21
Reaction score
68
Location
Earth
I guess you're saying that its impossible that these folks, our folks, had tech or otherwise that we don't know about. I don't think we're underestimating their abilities. I think we're saying they had abilities that we aren't being told about, which isn't just logical, it's also obvious. We want to know, therefore, why the lies? Are you legitimately looking for education here or are you just trying to make noise?
 

asatiger1966

Member
Trusted Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2020
Messages
7
Reaction score
39
I spent years of my life recovering technology for the Army Security Agency, we spent millions of dollars on each mission, some of the missions ended in firefights with other countries that had arrived to claim the artifacts for themselves
Sounds like a terrific thread (or movie plot).
Perhaps the powers that be have an Erasure Institute - designed to remove any history that
unseats them from power.
Without a doubt they have a device that will block your memory. Navel Intelligence used it during their debriefings.
Post automatically merged:

My Army career started at seventeen years of age. I joined the paratroops for adventure. One year later my butt was in Indochina with the 101st Screaming Eagles, Ist battalion 327 Airborne Infantry, Long Range Recon Patrol. know as Tiger Force 1966.

I witnessed many men split open by motor fire and after working inside another mans body to help him live, the complexity of the human body overwhelmed me. No way evolution is real.

A super advanced civilization did it exist, Yes. There is some room for definition of what that means but, I spent years of my life recovering technology for the Army Security Agency, we spent millions of dollars on each mission, some of the missions ended in firefights with other countries that had arrived to claim the artifacts for themselves.. The knowledge you may have gained access to , school,is slightly bent to prevent discovery of the true extent of what is happening world wide.

The community will help you with understanding but you never will grasp what we know because you weren't there and my kind does not trust easily.
If true, your what you're saying would be absolutely groundbreaking. What kind of technology? And what is your definition of super advanced? Are these artifacts from known civilizations, or from unknown civilizations?

This is the first time i've hear of someone actually claiming to have taken part in state-run artifact gathering for the purposes of hiding the truth. And it's very interesting. I have family that served in Indochina (for the French), and i've heard of the horror of the war there.

Learn to listen and observe your surroundings. learn to breath from your lower abdomen, slow your heart rate down. Try to walk on the earth often. Everything on this marvelous planet is connected by communication with each other.

Go live in solitude for a time and learn to see and hear.

I was witness to many events that you would say are not real, and knowledge of many more. The time frame of advanced people is difficult at best, my opinion says that the conquering people erased their history.

My experience says that the older tools are not mechanical in nature, but a combination of minerals and sound frequencies.
Also one must consider that our planet is based on iron, what if it was silicon based a million years ago.

Groundbreaking, no. Tens of thousands have this knowledge.

This area of research is vast, so pardon my wandering

Old memories
 
Last edited:

Armouro

New member
Joined
Sep 25, 2020
Messages
12
Reaction score
18
Your topic is broad. In fact, it is all-encompassing. This is and will be a problem; because the breadth of our past is too large to encompass a single argument, point-by-point.

You have a solid arguable stance, when you say (approximately) that mainstream history is ignored, and that is a problem.
I agree.

Mainstream history has a lot to teach all of us, as does alternative history. Imagine the first human to take a sharp stone and decide that instead of using it for killing animals for food; it could be used to carve a pretty face into a surface.

This idea is at the core of all histories. There is more than one way to view an object, a purpose, a significance; and even an occurrence.

The import of alternative history, is that while there is an established and accepted explanation; other explanations do exist, can be found, and have been brought to light.

There is no piece of history that is unflawed in the retelling. There is no tall tale free of embellishment.

The idea of alternative history is, in part, to re-analyse those tales and embellishments.



For singular examples and proper dialogue, however; this needs to (yet again) be reformatted with a narrow example. From there we may go point-for-point on it's merits and iniquities.

Mainstream or no, curiousity is what binds us.

Let's see where that leads.
 

_harris

Member
Trusted Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2020
Messages
46
Reaction score
59
@Horstmatt it sure seems like you're agreeing with me but trying to disagree. i don't think you understand the point.

mainstream actually tells us they used stone to bash other stone, and copper to finish it.
they didn't have technology like we do, but they definitely had some more advanced stone working/moving knowledge (and therefore technology to do so) that either we don't have, or we aren't allowed to have... technology doesn't just mean electricity and computers and power tools
DICTIONARY said:
TECHNOLOGY
-the branch of knowledge that deals with the creation and use of technical means and their interrelation with life, society, and the environment, drawing upon such subjects as industrial arts, -engineering, applied science, and pure science.
-the application of this knowledge for practical ends.
-the terminology of an art, science, etc.; technical nomenclature.
-a scientific or industrial process, invention, method, or the like.
-the sum of the ways in which social groups provide themselves with the material objects of their civilization.
so if we can't recreate how they made something, does that not make their technology in that field, more advanced than ours?
unless an alternative true history has been obfuscated or hidden?!?
Or lost and forgotten?
who did them, if not a lost civilisation?
unless an alternative true history has been obfuscated or hidden?!?
;) hehe
 
Last edited:

Horstmatt

Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2020
Messages
26
Reaction score
32
I guess you're saying that its impossible that these folks, our folks, had tech or otherwise that we don't know about. I don't think we're underestimating their abilities. I think we're saying they had abilities that we aren't being told about, which isn't just logical, it's also obvious. We want to know, therefore, why the lies? Are you legitimately looking for education here or are you just trying to make noise?
No, i'm saying that it's very unlikely that these folks had tech that we don't know about yet. Because many of the structures do not necessarily reuire advanced tech, but advanced understandings of maths and (at least certain concepts of) physics. I don't think advanced tech is a logical or obvious conclusion to come to, but that's just a matter of opinion. I find it interesting that you seem to think that i only have two options here, to be educated on the truth or to "make noise", which is basically another way of saying that i'm either here to agree with you or i'm a troll.
 

Horstmatt

Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2020
Messages
26
Reaction score
32
@Horstmatt it sure seems like you're agreeing with me but trying to disagree. i don't think you understand the point.

mainstream actually tells us they used stone to bash other stone, and copper to finish it.
they didn't have technology like we do, but they definitely had some more advanced stone working/moving knowledge (and therefore technology to do so) that either we don't have, or we aren't allowed to have... technology doesn't just mean electricity and computers and power tools
DICTIONARY said:
TECHNOLOGY
-the branch of knowledge that deals with the creation and use of technical means and their interrelation with life, society, and the environment, drawing upon such subjects as industrial arts, -engineering, applied science, and pure science.
-the application of this knowledge for practical ends.
-the terminology of an art, science, etc.; technical nomenclature.
-a scientific or industrial process, invention, method, or the like.
-the sum of the ways in which social groups provide themselves with the material objects of their civilization.
so if we can't recreate how they made something, does that not make their technology in that field, more advanced than ours?
Well then you're almost agreeing with the mainstream here, because i don't deny that if you're refering to unknown methods with known resources, then it's almost a given that there are unknown technologies of that sort (unless you're talking about starforts being frequency driven power cells or something). What i disagree with you on is the forbidden aspect that you seem to assign to this hypothetical technology, but that's more of a political issue in my opinion.
Do you have any examples of things we can't reproduce with modern technology (this isn't rhetorical I'm legitimately curious of what examples you might have)? Sometimes there is confusion between things that we can't do and things that we don't do because there is no incentive to.
Because in that case by all definitions you would be right, they would be more advanced than ours.

p.s. I appreciate the good faith in your arguments.
Post automatically merged:

Your topic is broad. In fact, it is all-encompassing. This is and will be a problem; because the breadth of our past is too large to encompass a single argument, point-by-point.

You have a solid arguable stance, when you say (approximately) that mainstream history is ignored, and that is a problem.
I agree.

Mainstream history has a lot to teach all of us, as does alternative history. Imagine the first human to take a sharp stone and decide that instead of using it for killing animals for food; it could be used to carve a pretty face into a surface.

This idea is at the core of all histories. There is more than one way to view an object, a purpose, a significance; and even an occurrence.

The import of alternative history, is that while there is an established and accepted explanation; other explanations do exist, can be found, and have been brought to light.

There is no piece of history that is unflawed in the retelling. There is no tall tale free of embellishment.

The idea of alternative history is, in part, to re-analyse those tales and embellishments.



For singular examples and proper dialogue, however; this needs to (yet again) be reformatted with a narrow example. From there we may go point-for-point on it's merits and iniquities.

Mainstream or no, curiousity is what binds us.

Let's see where that leads.
I agree, but the intent of this thread is to discuss methodology and perspective rather then specific examples. As this is my first threat on this forum, my intent was to create a small list of what i perceive to be flawed argumentative methods and bad faith approaches. This way i can refer back to this post if I find that these are being used against me in discussions regarding more specific alternative history topics.

I am currently working on a response to the KD post about Pompeii as it was suggested to me on this thread.
 
Last edited:

JWW427

Well-known member
Trusted Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2020
Messages
202
Reaction score
505
Location
Wash. DC.
The largest ship building crane in the world––Big Blue–– at Newport News naval shipyard in VA has a maximum lift capacity of 1100 tons.
The pregnant woman stone at Baalbek is 1400 tons, and the unfinished stone next to it is an estimated 1600 tons.
Do the math.

crane.jpeg stone.jpeg

Stone is crystal. The bigger it is the more piezoelectric / telluric energy it can store.
Thats why the ancients probably went to such lengths to keep it massively megalithic.
Otherwise the Trilithon (Temple of Jupiter) makes no sense. Many smaller stones would have sufficed.

 
Last edited:

_harris

Member
Trusted Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2020
Messages
46
Reaction score
59
Well then you're almost agreeing with the mainstream here, because i don't deny that if you're refering to unknown methods with known resources, then it's almost a given that there are unknown technologies of that sort
only almost, because we're looking at the same places
certainly unknown methods... given that we don't even know what the people who built a lot of really ancient places looked like, what language they spoke, when they existed, or what they were building for.. but when any dating is done that is not agreeable to the mainstream guesswork (it's all educated guesswork on both sides), it is considered false... it's why there's such a divide between mainstream and fringe, though the balance seems to be shifting as some of what were "fringe" ideas now have the scientific backup to qualify in the eyes of mainstream.
Do you have any examples of things we can't reproduce with modern technology (this isn't rhetorical I'm legitimately curious of what examples you might have)? Sometimes there is confusion between things that we can't do and things that we don't do because there is no incentive to.
well, there's definitely no incentive to build megalithic structures, or monoliths... and 100% a difference between can't and don't
the people who do have the resources to do so have no interest in leaving any sort of legacy for us, should there be global destruction
BUT - up until very recently, humans (as we know) didn't even have any sort of technology remotely capable of creating the sort of megalithic masonry we see all over the world
the really ancient unknown stuff is really unfeasible to have been built using simple tools. (youtube user vlad9vt has many picture slide show vids of global megalithic sites)
p.s. I appreciate the good faith in your arguments.
you're welcome! :)
 

Horstmatt

Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2020
Messages
26
Reaction score
32
The largest ship building crane in the world––Big Blue–– at Newport News naval shipyard in VA has a maximum lift capacity of 1100 tons.
The pregnant woman stone at Baalbek is 1400 tons, and the unfinished stone next to it is an estimated 1600 tons.
Do the math.

View attachment 1333View attachment 1334

Stone is crystal. The bigger it is the more piezoelectric / telluric energy it can store.
Thats why the ancients went to such lengths to keep it massively megalithic.
Otherwise the Trilithon makes no sense.

Thanks! I'll look into this.
 

Forrest

Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2020
Messages
39
Reaction score
79
Do you believe that evolution is fake?
using rhetorical questions to imply their conclusions without actually having to defend them with real evidence.
My last words also on this thread, thanks!
Actually i was legitimately curious whether you did believe in evolution or not, I don't know if that's a common opinion on here so I didn't want to assume so. I was referring to questions of the style of History Channel shows like "Could it be? That the templars did bury their treasure on this Island?" If you get what i'm talking about.

Thanks for engaging with me and I hope to discuss other matters on different threads with you in the future!
Darwinian evolution, natural selection by gradual changes, doesn't hold up. Saltation Saltation (biology) - Infogalactic: the planetary knowledge core , the immediate rise of new kinds of forms, is the only type of evolution we can sometimes verify. I've identified four distinct kinds:

1. Invention of the First Kind. Ab initio, ex nihilo, absolutely mysterious. The stuff of many religions.
2. Invention of the Second Kind. Two parents make a child.
3. Invention of the Third Kind. Morphic field, for lack of a better term. Convergent evolution is the mainstream dodge.
4. Invention of the Fourth Kind. I didn't call this one out explicitly in The Pleistocene Murders, it's implied:
The mighty new iron-based horse had to charge... First we broke the grass, only then could we break the bread... Our ascended satellites watch it growing
Post automatically merged:

@Horstmatt it sure seems like you're agreeing with me but trying to disagree. i don't think you understand the point.

mainstream actually tells us they used stone to bash other stone, and copper to finish it.
they didn't have technology like we do, but they definitely had some more advanced stone working/moving knowledge (and therefore technology to do so) that either we don't have, or we aren't allowed to have... technology doesn't just mean electricity and computers and power tools
DICTIONARY said:
TECHNOLOGY
-the branch of knowledge that deals with the creation and use of technical means and their interrelation with life, society, and the environment, drawing upon such subjects as industrial arts, -engineering, applied science, and pure science.
-the application of this knowledge for practical ends.
-the terminology of an art, science, etc.; technical nomenclature.
-a scientific or industrial process, invention, method, or the like.
-the sum of the ways in which social groups provide themselves with the material objects of their civilization.
so if we can't recreate how they made something, does that not make their technology in that field, more advanced than ours?
Well then you're almost agreeing with the mainstream here, because i don't deny that if you're refering to unknown methods with known resources, then it's almost a given that there are unknown technologies of that sort (unless you're talking about starforts being frequency driven power cells or something). What i disagree with you on is the forbidden aspect that you seem to assign to this hypothetical technology, but that's more of a political issue in my opinion.
Do you have any examples of things we can't reproduce with modern technology (this isn't rhetorical I'm legitimately curious of what examples you might have)? Sometimes there is confusion between things that we can't do and things that we don't do because there is no incentive to.
Because in that case by all definitions you would be right, they would be more advanced than ours.

p.s. I appreciate the good faith in your arguments.
Post automatically merged:

Your topic is broad. In fact, it is all-encompassing. This is and will be a problem; because the breadth of our past is too large to encompass a single argument, point-by-point.

You have a solid arguable stance, when you say (approximately) that mainstream history is ignored, and that is a problem.
I agree.

Mainstream history has a lot to teach all of us, as does alternative history. Imagine the first human to take a sharp stone and decide that instead of using it for killing animals for food; it could be used to carve a pretty face into a surface.

This idea is at the core of all histories. There is more than one way to view an object, a purpose, a significance; and even an occurrence.

The import of alternative history, is that while there is an established and accepted explanation; other explanations do exist, can be found, and have been brought to light.

There is no piece of history that is unflawed in the retelling. There is no tall tale free of embellishment.

The idea of alternative history is, in part, to re-analyse those tales and embellishments.



For singular examples and proper dialogue, however; this needs to (yet again) be reformatted with a narrow example. From there we may go point-for-point on it's merits and iniquities.

Mainstream or no, curiousity is what binds us.

Let's see where that leads.
I agree, but the intent of this thread is to discuss methodology and perspective rather then specific examples. As this is my first threat on this forum, my intent was to create a small list of what i perceive to be flawed argumentative methods and bad faith approaches. This way i can refer back to this post if I find that these are being used against me in discussions regarding more specific alternative history topics.

I am currently working on a response to the KD post about Pompeii as it was suggested to me on this thread.
"Do you have any examples of things we can't reproduce with modern technology...?"

Yes. I put these in two classes, one for things we might be able to produce with great effort and relatively high tech, and then the absolute stumpers that we can't reproduce at all. A few examples:

The maybes-

Saqqara Boxs. Chris Dunn shopped this one around to stone fabricators, nobody could do it in a single piece. We could build special machines with diamond-grit drills, grinders, lasers, etc- and hope we don't shatter the work piece in the process.

Diorite vases. Needs a special lathe tool, sort of like a cylinder hone, that can expand to carve out the inside.

Aswan Quarry. The tool marks on the walls do not resemble anything we have, but might be replicable... with big iron and big motor.

Facing stones of the Great Pyramid. Due to the size, accuracy, and quantity (20,000-50,000 pieces) required, this would cost billions of dollars to reproduce, and machines the size of houses to get it done in a reasonable amount of time

The absolute stumpers-

Circular, thin, Egyptian schist doo dads. Or maybe these were molded?

Random cuts in hard rock in the Andes. Some sort of man-portable tool, like a side grinder with a diamond-tooth blade?

Core drilling granite. Etc.

The pre-Incan, Egyptian, Easter Is., etc. polygonal stonework.
 
Last edited:

JWW427

Well-known member
Trusted Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2020
Messages
202
Reaction score
505
Location
Wash. DC.
Don't forget the foundation stones of the 3 great pyramids at Giza.
Pretty massive in themselves.

fs.jpeg

 

Whitewave

Active member
Trusted Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2020
Messages
74
Reaction score
174
The antikythera machine is another bit of ancient tech that took us way too long to even figure out what it was or what it did. How did an illiterate, backwards, unsophisticated people who, (we're told) believed in a flat, earth-centric universe ever come up with an astronomical computer-like model of a heliocentric, predictive globe model? How did they make the many intricate parts? How did they have the advanced math skills to figure out such a high degree of accuracy?

There are many, many examples of previous advanced societies that had to have had an technology rivaling our own (if not exceeding it). Architecture is the most enduring but ooparts abound to challenge our historical narrative claiming a linear progression of technological advance culminating in our current iteration as the pinnacle of all that has preceded us.
 

JWW427

Well-known member
Trusted Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2020
Messages
202
Reaction score
505
Location
Wash. DC.
am.jpeg
antikythera machine

My thinking on "Ooparts" such as this one is that someone in power (blackmailed and disgruntled) may have decided to hand out some clues to our genuine historical narrative. A balance of power move.
They could have easily destroyed this one or put it in an archive somewhere.
 
Last edited:
Top