Hey PRC. I wrote a thread on ATS I wanted to share with you. Hope you like it. I'm trying to get it enough air time that it'll draw the attention of Mr. White and Dr. Heiser, the guys who made the video, ANCIENT ALIENS DEBUNKED.
log in there if you can, and star and flag that bad boy. ..that is, if you agree with my premise. So far it's on the front page of ATS, just need to get it closer to the top of the page.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread906276/pg1
I thought AADB was ok, until I saw this movie:-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAWf3F8_zQk
Then I realised that, like most debunking, putting it bluntly, it's just a case of materialistic atheists shooting their mouths off about things that they really don't have a clue about at all.
I think the Freemasons do have antigravity technology, which they've preserved from the ancient Egyptians. There's a big war memorial in Melbourne, called the Shrine of Remembrance, which AFAIK the Masons built. There is no way known that any crane or anything else mainstream science has, could have moved stone blocks that large today, let alone back when it was built.
So no, it's not aliens, but it's not mundane technology like AADB claims at all. Maybe some of the stuff the Egyptians knew, got sent to them by an ET group via channelling; but then again, everything the old rishis in Hinduism's history ever knew about, they got from meditating themselves. I reckon the Egyptians were just really effective meditators, and they got everything they knew from that.
Undo, on the attack!
Go get 'em sister! :D
Ill wait for updates as I personally dont care to go to that other place I dont like so many pop-ups, spyware, and ads. Also, I wont visit sites which look like a cross between a commercial and a boringly unartistic body of text. Onward though....
White is a first class skeptical debunker, who uses literary sleight of hand and wordsmithery to achieve a platform for his desires to expose things as false, but as youve shown, a perceptive viewer can expose a great deal od douchebaggery in his movie.
He also approaches it with the mindset of a fundamental Christian, which no offense to that group has absolutely no place being in the alternative science scene, even to debunk it..their agenda is as clear as a bottle of cheap gin and about as valuable to me.
As for one place in particular Im quite knowlegable about beyond the typical person..or at least Ive spent a lot of time studying it....Puma Punku.
I especially like the zeroing in on Puma Punku, as it was his grail of sorts to show that Giorgio was a "liar" and red sandstone isnt so hard.
Poor Giorgio, his hair mustve fell a foot or two when he watched this...nah..he told me it was something he expects from all angles in the work he does, and it happens every day, just not in a slickly financed video.
Giorgio, along with the rest of the cast, has actually been there and experienced PP numerous times, he has first hand knowledge of the effort it took to construct something like PP.
I doubt Mr White has ever even come within a hundred miles of any of those Pre Inca sites.....so he is a parrot like the rest of his henchmen. Repeating what he has been told.
Although AA does bend the truth a bit to make its segments flow and fit together as well as those H Blocks do, they do a fantastic job of presenting somewhat factual evidence about the sites and technological requirements involved there.
Puma Punku has been taken apart by locals for centuries and the various parts used for numerous construction projects around the region, and they do this why? Because current technology cant make stones that large, perfect, and accurate, without extreme investment.
So with 5 percent of a veritable treasure trove of human and perhaps, alien, history, Puma Punku is a shell of its former self. Where would this argument be if it were intact and the other 95 percent still in place? Yep, a much different set of viewpoints would materialize for sure!
Anyone who goes there will see for themselves it was no minor feat of engineering, and that yes, the site is a completely different style than anything at Tiwanaku or Cusco, Ollantaytambo or any of the various sites within 50 miles of it.
It was anomalous when they built Cusco and Tiwanaku to those builders, as it is to us today.
Using Diorite and andecite is not an easy task for modern stone workers either. It might be red sandstone, but those cuts are so precise they would be difficult for ancient stone workers to achieve, even with modern tools and drills.
My personal opinion is that it existed when the Incas and Pre Incas decided to start building their monumental works there, and either the Pre Incas successfully battled the occupants of Puma Punku for supremacy in that region, or it was already abandoned.
For the best info on the Peruvian sites, check this youtube channel from an acquaintance of mine named Brien Foerster..hes a well versed and clear headed researcher who has made his life's work in the area.
http://www.youtube.com/user/brienfoerster?feature=watch
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4veXYJElBs
Then read this, an article from another person I sometimes correspond with, Philip Coppens.
http://www.philipcoppens.com/aaq_art5.html
Both of these guys are on our side Undo...great workers in the search for the truth instead of reasons to follow the mainstream sheep which seem to want to hide this knowledge from the world.
Great workers..... like yourself!
Cheers!
Undo,
Excellent, your brilliant mind shows clear!
I am so thankful for your work, in the stargate thread, and now
this! You have really helped me to understand the world in an entirely
new way... :)
Pet
Interesting I keep forgetting about the masons! Wow, they even had masons in south america, all those millenia ago.
LE
Woot. Nice vid! Can you send Giorgio a link to my thread on ATS, maybe? I think i have vindicated some of their points. I am not prepared to debate the pyramid information or the ancient nuke concept. The pyramid because there is so much information and thus too many different possible answers and the nuke because there's not enough data to look at.
Anyway thanks for the data.
BTF
thanks *hugs*
Link sent Undo..hes real secretive so he might not contact you, but rest assured he will check it out! 8)
It is a worthy cause to reveal the truth in these matters and the people responsible for trying to keep it hidden!
Cheers!
Le
Quote from: Littleenki on December 11, 2012, 06:55:59 PM
Link sent Undo..hes real secretive so he might not contact you, but rest assured he will check it out! 8)
It is a worthy cause to reveal the truth in these matters and the people responsible for trying to keep it hidden!
Cheers!
Le
what caused this entire thing was, i listen to a christian radio show every so often, that's normally nice, interesting and respectful. the last time i listened, chris white was being interviewed. they started making fun of giorgio and for some reason, that just irked me. then i noticed some of his rationale was missing stuff. i didn't know right off the bat, about his puma punku information having errors, but i did note the mahabharata references and
ezekiel 1 info, and anunnaki translation seemed
wrong. so i went and watched the video.
big mistake. they should refrain from making fun of a nice person like giorgio. he's a happy, interesting person, who really enjoys studying and researching. i realize people get irritated about his hair. his hair is great. for the same reason i get irritated with people picking on christians, i get irritated with christians picking on other people, especially just because they have a difference of opinion. his subject matter is what you find fault with, not his freckles or teeth or something. sigh.
Quote from: petrus4 on December 11, 2012, 09:04:22 AM
I think the Freemasons do have antigravity technology, which they've preserved from the ancient Egyptians. There's a big war memorial in Melbourne, called the Shrine of Remembrance, which AFAIK the Masons built. There is no way known that any crane or anything else mainstream science has, could have moved stone blocks that large today, let alone back when it was built.
Do you mean that nobody knows how the Shrine of Remembrance was built? In 1927? ???
Or am I misunderstanding your words? :)
anyway, advertising the thread again, cause i wanna get that baby to the top of the ats front page. it's on the front page, but it's not up high enough to get the real big google listing i'm after. star and flag it, if you can and agree with it, oh and post in it too, while you're at it, and say howdy
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread906276/pg1
Quote from: ArMaP on December 11, 2012, 08:41:02 PM
Do you mean that nobody knows how the Shrine of Remembrance was built? In 1927? ???
Or am I misunderstanding your words? :)
I'm saying that there might be room for more than one interpretation; just like there was at Coral Castle. ;)
Quote from: petrus4 on December 11, 2012, 09:00:03 PM
I'm saying that there might be room for more than one interpretation; just like there was at Coral Castle. ;)
i was studying puma punku listings in google and came upon a forum where they were discussing how the stones in other places in peru and bolivia may also have been made . one guy listed a reference from some famous explorer who had listed in his diary or something, a curious thing that birds were doing. they were bringing a leaf of some kind to sheer cliff faces, rubbing it around in a circle. dropping it, getting another leaf of same kind, repeating the processing and then gripping the cliff like a wood pecker, pecking a hole in the cliff face, and then making their nests in the cliff face. he saw this happen multiple times.
so a theory launched from there, that some plant had leaves that changed the solidity of rock and that maybe the inca learned that technique from the birds, thereby explaining how they managed to get rocks to become sorta like play doh. was an interesting theory till a chemist showed up and asked why the leaf didn't change the hardness of the bird's beak if it could change rock and the topic went downhill from there lol
howdy ;)
great job.
Quote from: Lunica on December 11, 2012, 09:14:09 PM
howdy ;)
great job.
yo and thanks!
i responded over yonder :D
As I suspected, there is a long article here (http://www.lodgedevotion.net/devotionnews/education-editorial-articles/anzac-day-in-Freemasonry/anzac-day-2012) about the level of Masonic association with the Shrine of Remembrance, including mention that Lord Somers, the Governor of Victoria at the time, was also the 12th Grand Master (1927-1932) of the United Grand Lodge Victoria. That article also lists the names of the Shrine's architects. It does not specifically name them as Masons; but as far as I am concerned, it does not need to.
To bring this back to relevance to your thread, Undo; no, I don't think there were Masons at the time of Puma Punku necessarily, or probably not as they exist today. The central point, however, is that I think there is a particular technology that enables its' users to nullify gravity within a localised area, which thus prevents the huge weight of the stone being used in the construction from being a problem. As I've already mentioned, I don't believe that this tech was necessarily ET in origin; it's entirely possible that humans could have received it via revelation. I believe the Egyptians used this to build the largest pyramids, and I also think the Masons have managed to preserve knowledge of the technique, and that they occasionally still use it (under cover of great secrecy, mind you, as did Ed Leedskalnin at Coral Castle) to construct modern stone buildings.
The other thing about this technology, is that apparently it required knowledge of the ley lines, or energy lines of the planet in order to work. Supposedly it used the intersection between two or more of them as a power source.
Leedskalnin and the Masons both buried their descriptions of the technology in plain sight. I am inclined to believe, however, that the extensive mention of the prime numbers and such, is actually more a form of cryptography, which utilises the hermetic principle of Correspondence, as I wrote about here (http://www.thelivingmoon.com/forum/index.php?topic=3241.msg45607#msg45607), as a cypher. The Kybalion refers to its' teachings as a "Master Key," and apparently this is true on a quite literal basis.
I am fairly certain that "The Masons" do not have anti-gravity technology. However, they do have a levitation technology. One of the technological "secrets" regarding this, which "The Masons" are in possession of, is likely that of Sonic Levitation.
I am not a Mason, although I do enjoy a good dinner now and then. I know this because certain groups, one of which I have been associated with do possess the secret of Sonic Levitation. Considering that it is likely that these groups inherited knowledge from the same sources as Freemasonry, I imagine some Masons are also aware of this knowledge.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94KzmB2bI7s
The take home message of this post is that it is NOT anti-gravity which is being kept secret. ;)
Quote from: Pimander on December 11, 2012, 09:39:46 PM
I am fairly certain that "The Masons" do not have anti-gravity technology. However, they do have a levitation technology. One of the technological "secrets" regarding this, which "The Masons" are in possession of, is likely that of Sonic Levitation.
I am not a Mason, although I do enjoy a good dinner now and then. I know this because certain groups, one of which I have been associated with do possess the secret of Sonic Levitation. Considering that it is likely that these groups inherited knowledge from the same sources as Freemasonry, I imagine some Masons are also aware of this knowledge.
rosicrucians?
Quote from: Pimander on December 11, 2012, 09:39:46 PM
The take home message of this post is that it is NOT anti-gravity which is being kept secret. ;)
For me, the take-home message here was also more confirmation that this was what could have been used to build these ancient structures; or at least part of it.
hey folks, if you post on another forum besides this one, can you link my ats thread up so this baby can go viral? mwahaha. :D
Quote from: undo11 on December 11, 2012, 09:46:13 PM
rosicrucians?
The inner order are closely tied to Rosicrucianism with some differences.
Quote from: undo11 on December 11, 2012, 09:46:13 PM
rosicrucians?
Either them, or some other sinister, robed cabal bent on (or already participating in) world domination anyway, undo. ;)
Quote from: petrus4 on December 11, 2012, 09:54:08 PM
Either them, or some other sinister, robed cabal bent on (or already participating in) world domination anyway, undo. ;)
If I was involved with world domination you can guarantee I'd be earning a lot more.
SONIC -> Ma-SONIC
Regarding that sonic/acoustic levitation may have been used in building many mysterious monuments, even without achieving levitation, I worked out a way very early that sound makes moving stone far easier.
What makes a stone difficult to drag along? Even on sledges?
Quote from: Pimander on December 11, 2012, 09:59:52 PM
If I was involved with world domination you can guarantee I'd be earning a lot more.
SONIC -> Ma-SONIC
Regarding that sonic/acoustic levitation may have been used in building many mysterious monuments, even without achieving levitation, I worked out a way very early that sound makes moving stone far easier.
What makes a stone difficult to drag along? Even on sledges?
gravity/mass.
Quote from: undo11 on December 11, 2012, 10:02:44 PM
gravity/mass.
Mass is related, because high density objects have a lot of, specifically
friction. Where the object touches the ground, friction resists the dragging of the large stone.
(http://eonlinetutors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Untitled-5_391.jpg)
Does anyone see where I am going here?
Quote from: Pimander on December 11, 2012, 10:07:42 PM
Mass is related, because high density objects have a lot of, specifically friction. Where the object touches the ground, friction resists the dragging of the large stone.
(http://eonlinetutors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Untitled-5_391.jpg)
Does anyone see where I am going here?
i don't know that much about how sound propagates, so no, i don't see it cause i'm just a dumb old lady :D
p.s. i'd like to file a formal complaint to the mutating factors that made it so some humans are born with mathematical ability and some are not. i find this incredibly debilitating in a mathematical world, that i have just the bare minimum of maths ability.
59 stars
43 flags
7th place on the front page. not bad. wonder if that'll be enough to get the attention of mr. white and dr. heiser. if it ranks well on google, that'll probably do it.
*hugs going out to everyone who posted/starred/flagged my ats thread*
ahh, what the heck, hugs all around :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsRYIGFG9hc
If I hit a tuning fork tuned to the note E, in the same room as a guitar, then the two E strings on the guitar will vibrate in sympathetic resonance with the tuning fork. The other strings will not vibrate. If there is another tuning fork tuned to E that will vibrate too. However a fork tuned to C will not vibrate.
So basically, if the sound from say a drum or large trumpet like device is tuned to the stone, then it makes the stone vibrate. So what?
(http://eonlinetutors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Untitled-5_391.jpg)
If we go back to this diagram, then we will see that if the stone is vibrating then it is not touching the ground all of the time. When it is not touching the ground then there is little friction and the stone is easy to pull.
So, drums may not have just been to keep the workers pulling in rhythm. Acoustic/sonic technology, may well have been used to assist in the movement of stone.
If we look for hints of musical instruments in association with construction in Egypt, perhaps in their artwork, my guess is that we will find some.
AH! yes, that makes sense! So why don't they do that today? i know i know, so they can sell machines lol
Quote from: Pimander on December 11, 2012, 09:59:52 PM
If I was involved with world domination you can guarantee I'd be earning a lot more.
SONIC -> Ma-SONIC
Regarding that sonic/acoustic levitation may have been used in building many mysterious monuments, even without achieving levitation, I worked out a way very early that sound makes moving stone far easier.
What makes a stone difficult to drag along? Even on sledges?
Indeed, Pimander, you dont need to lift the stone, just vibrate it into place along a defined path..then up a ramp covered with sand.
Sonic shifting of stones. Not impossible..but how did they cut them so precisely, thats the conundrum...
Quote from: undo11 on December 11, 2012, 10:12:55 PM
p.s. i'd like to file a formal complaint to the mutating factors that made it so some humans are born with mathematical ability and some are not. i find this incredibly debilitating in a mathematical world.
You do NOT lack mathematical ability. None of us do. You've been taught the wrong system of mathematics; which we all are. As I've said in another thread, one of my biggest grievances with the Masons and other groups like them, is that I basically believe that, after having a full and complete knowledge of universal law, they worked diligently to make sure that what the public were taught, was the exact opposite, while they kept the proverbial good stuff for themselves. They did so for reasons largely described in the below song.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8u84d7nY8pQ
So we didn't learn about Phi or the Fibonacci sequence at school. I
was taught about Pi, briefly; but by then my eyes were so glazed over after already having been drowned in irrelevant fecal matter, that I can barely remember it in hindsight. Remember that Einstein was considered mentally retarded while he was at school; it was only after he left that he was likely able to learn what mathematics is
really about. The school system doesn't
want us to know.
Here's my thread (http://www.thelivingmoon.com/forum/index.php?topic=2343.0) on Egyptian Mathematics, undo. Read it, and start practicing that, if you're willing. I've become a lot more effective mathematically since I started using that system; it is a lot easier than what I was taught at school.
The Sutras of Vedic Mathematics (http://vedicmaths.org/Free%20Resources/Articles/SutrasVM/sutras_of_vedic_mathematics.asp) - This will also help you.
My thread on the law of Correspondence (http://www.thelivingmoon.com/forum/index.php?topic=3241.msg45607#msg45607), which mentions the other principles from the Kybalion as well.
Quote from: undo11 on December 11, 2012, 10:24:34 PM
AH! yes, that makes sense! So why don't they do that today? i know i know, so they can sell machines lol
We have hydraulics and materials to make stronger wheels now as well - which we can sell. :P
I suspect that the ancients developed far more sophisticated sonic technologies than the one I describe. But that gives an idea how easy it is to stumble on the idea of sound being potentially useful in a building project. It is just a matter of experimenting after that to refine the technology. I think Hathor was associated with music for example.
There are stories somewhere about Tibetans lifting stones up a hundred foot cliff using wind instruments. I think some early explorers mentioned witnessing it in their travel logs/journals.
Enki,
Sonic drills and sonic planes? 8)
QuoteI think Hathor was associated with music for example.
hrm, and i followed a trail from an ancient stone depiction of hathor that i thought was an attempt at depicting gate technology.
QuoteEnki,
Sonic drills and sonic planes? 8)
Precisely!
8) x 2
(http://images.amazon.com/images/G/01/th/detail-page/B000U8S3QA-1-lg.jpg)
Quote from: undo11 on December 11, 2012, 10:40:58 PM
hrm, and i followed a trail from an ancient stone depiction of hathor that i thought was an attempt at depicting gate technology.
Sympathetic resonance must work at all levels of matter. Sound is one we can see and hear the effects of. There are vibrations at many more "subtle" levels.
If the material world we see is basically this way because of a fundamental field - for the sake of argument I will call it the akashic or A-field - then a technology based on frequencies which resonate with the A-field would literally alter reality. For such a technology, creating a wormhole or portal may not require the vast amounts of energy our theoretical physics predicts.
It can only be the A-field that makes things like remote viewing and other phenomena a reality.
Quote from: Pimander on December 11, 2012, 10:57:00 PM
Sympathetic resonance must work at all levels of matter. Sound is one we can see and hear the effects of. There are vibrations at many more "subtle" levels.
If the material world we see is basically this way because of a fundamental field - for the sake of argument I will call it the akashic or A-field - then a technology based on frequencies which resonate with the A-field would literally alter reality. For such a technology, creating a wormhole or portal may not require the vast amounts of energy our theoretical physics predicts.
It can only be the A-field that makes things like remote viewing and other phenomena a reality.
Those wascally Egyptians; who knows what else they got up to? ;)
oh my gosh, somewhat off topic but i just realized what ezekiel 1 meant when it said that the "throne" of the being that had the "likeness of jehovah" was sitting on a something that looked like a "firmament of awesome ice"
the wheels within wheels are the gate and gate addresses, the firmament of awesome ice is the event horizon that forms, holy toledo batman.............
here it is.
the text says that the sky opens. it doesn't say HEAVEN opened, it says THE HEAVENS were opened. they can't wriggle out of that by saying it's just talking about a spiritual experience. omygosh. smokin' hot freakin' gun! they are likening god/jehovah to a pyramid (that's the throne!).
first that happens, the wormhole forms. the cherubim come out of the wormhole (these guys are a metaphor for the gate address. the gate address is based on 4 constellations in the ecliptic, during taurus (feet of bull). the gate (represented by the parts that make up the address) begins to dial. you see the wheels with eyes now. these are the gate.
then you see lightning flashing between the parts of the gate addresses. this is the gate getting ready to deliver a passenger.
then suddenly, there's something that looks like a firmament of awesome ice, (they show it rectangular. i bet it's circular!) and above that firmament, is the sapphire colored throne (blue crystalline pyramid). that's the vehicle hovering over the event horizon (firmament of awesome ice).
good grief charlie brown! good heavens to mergatroid! the movie and tv show are...........i'm stunned. i knew they were on to something but this, this takes the cake.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ET7WXK4D_g
look at this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjfhWxZ0xUI
sorry but i'm just so, well, 5 years of studying this topic has just paid off. wowzers.
I don't normally bother quoting the Bible, for "religious reasons". However, I think I need to show you how the Hebrews saw their God. This ties in with vibration, sound and power.
QuoteThe voice of Jehovah is upon the waters:
The God of glory thundereth,
Even Jehovah upon many 4 waters.
[4] The voice of Jehovah is powerful;
The voice of Jehovah is full of majesty.
[5] The voice of Jehovah breaketh the cedars;
Yea, Jehovah breaketh in pieces the cedars of Lebanon.
[6] He maketh them also to skip like a calf;
Lebanon and Sirion like a young wild-ox.
[7] The voice of Jehovah cleaveth the flames of fire. {Or, heweth, out flames of fire?}
[8] The voice of Jehovah shaketh the wilderness;
Jehovah shaketh the wilderness of Kadesh.
[9] The voice of Jehovah maketh the hinds to calve,
And strippeth the forests bare:
And in his temple everything saith, Glory
A Psalm of David (http://www.bartleby.com/44/3/29.html)
I hope that helps. :)
interesting. i need to paint a picture of what i think this scene actually looked like.
Quote from: undo11 on December 11, 2012, 09:06:05 PM
i was studying puma punku listings in google and came upon a forum where they were discussing how the stones in other places in peru and bolivia may also have been made . one guy listed a reference from some famous explorer who had listed in his diary or something, a curious thing that birds were doing. they were bringing a leaf of some kind to sheer cliff faces, rubbing it around in a circle. dropping it, getting another leaf of same kind, repeating the processing and then gripping the cliff like a wood pecker, pecking a hole in the cliff face, and then making their nests in the cliff face. he saw this happen multiple times.
so a theory launched from there, that some plant had leaves that changed the solidity of rock and that maybe the inca learned that technique from the birds, thereby explaining how they managed to get rocks to become sorta like play doh. was an interesting theory till a chemist showed up and asked why the leaf didn't change the hardness of the bird's beak if it could change rock and the topic went downhill from there lol
I read that book, the explorer was Colonel Percy Harrison Fawcett, a British explorer that mapped several areas of south America, mostly the borders between Brazil and neighbouring countries.
In that story someone had been crossing through a field full of some kind of flower and when they exited that field the Mexican style spoors he was using had disappeared, so some local told him about the birds that used the leaves from those plants to make nests in the rocks.
PS: birds' beaks are not made of rock. :)
Quote from: Pimander on December 11, 2012, 10:21:41 PM
If we go back to this diagram, then we will see that if the stone is vibrating then it is not touching the ground all of the time. When it is not touching the ground then there is little friction and the stone is easy to pull.
Only if it's vibrating up and down. :)
A tuning fork or a guitar string do not vibrate on all axis, does a rock vibrate on all axis?
Quote from: ArMaP on December 12, 2012, 12:17:00 AM
Only if it's vibrating up and down. :)
A tuning fork or a guitar string do not vibrate on all axis, does a rock vibrate on all axis?
But a guitar string does vibrate up and down even if the tuning fork is horizontal (if the guitar is the right way). That means some energy from the compression wave (sound) in the air must be turned into kinetic energy in an up and down motion.
I also know that it is easier to vibrate a rock up and down than vibrate it from side to side. There is too much friction from side to side, especially if the rock is flat like a building block. Drums vibrate up and down.....
Quote from: Pimander on December 12, 2012, 12:33:31 AM
But a guitar string does vibrate up and down even if the tuning fork is horizontal (if the guitar is the right way). That means some energy from the compression wave (sound) in the air must be turned into kinetic energy in an up and down motion.
The way things vibrate is related to their shape and/or way they are fixed onto other things. That's why a guitar string vibrates along two axis but not along the third (it's fixed at both ends, it cannot vibrate along that axis).
Based on that, I think that sound would make some heavy object vibrate more along the horizontal axis than along the vertical, as for that it would need to lift the object, something harder to do than to vibrate it from side to side and front to back.
But I may be wrong, obviously. :)
Quote from: ArMaP on December 12, 2012, 01:06:15 AM
The way things vibrate is related to their shape and/or way they are fixed onto other things. That's why a guitar string vibrates along two axis but not along the third (it's fixed at both ends, it cannot vibrate along that axis).
Quite right.
Quote from: ArMaP on December 12, 2012, 01:06:15 AMBased on that, I think that sound would make some heavy object vibrate more along the horizontal axis than along the vertical, as for that it would need to lift the object, something harder to do than to vibrate it from side to side and front to back.
I agree that more side to side vibration (horizontal kinetic) is likely due to the weight. However, providing some/enough is transferred vertically, the stone will temporarily lift for fractions of a second and make it easier to move the stone.
You can actually demonstrate this using an elastic band. Fix one end of an elastic band to an object and the other to something that can't move. Pull the elastic out and allow it to pull the object as far as it can back. There will still be some potential energy in the elastic band (it will have some tightness still providing the object is heavy enough to give some friction with the surface. Now hit a drum near to the object and the elastic band will pull it some more. This proves that the vibration reduces the friction.
You may need to try drums tuned to different frequencies until it works.
Quote from: ArMaP on December 12, 2012, 01:06:15 AM
But I may be wrong, obviously. :)
You are on this occasion. :P
k i sent it to your gmail addy.
can you post it in this thread? or give me instructions how to post it?
Posted at Undo's request.
(http://i1141.photobucket.com/albums/n582/Pimander/ezeke.jpg)
Phew, finally done it. Photobucket didn't like that png file for some reason. I had to play about with GIMP. lol
I can see that being what Ezekiel saw!
Cool imagination, Undo!
the going away and returning thing, is the outerwheel spinning the cherubim away and toward him. when it says the angels are in the wheels, they mean literally in the wheels. not inside the hole in the wheels. so imagine the outerwheel spinning. the angels aren't fixed position, they rotate with the outer wheel, away and back again. when the outer wheel is moving their wing tips touch each other and when the wheel stops, the wing tips must like drop down at an angle or something.
Quote from: undo11 on December 12, 2012, 04:37:46 AM
the going away and returning thing, is the outerwheel spinning the cherubim away and toward him. when it says the angels are in the wheels, they mean literally in the wheels. not inside the hole in the wheels. so imagine the outerwheel spinning. the angels aren't fixed position, they rotate with the outer wheel, away and back again.
I always pictured a gyroscopic device of sorts, with a clear defined seat at the top for the figure to be seated in. I think the wheels were perhaps some sort of blurred spinning or pulsating feature which were described as wheels.
The faces are where Im a bit thrown off..Ezekiel knew what faces look like, its the machinery I think he descirbed in an archetypical manner.
Were the faces for different places along the stargate's maps? Instead of lettering or numbers, just pictures or reliefs of the people who occupied that particular destination?
Also, I perceive the glass in front of the figure, perhaps as a screen for a helmet, and not a windsheild as some have posed.
As for the wheels within wheels//well have you ever seen a track setup for an offroad vehicle?
(http://www.gearfuse.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/tracked_hummer_green_06.jpg)
Lots of possibilities there....
49 and 36 Lady!
Refreshing to see people awake! Of course, there is nothing
like a fresh infusion of wisdom, Thanks Undo!
thanks pim for posting that.
BFT
aww you're too nice
Quote from: undo11 on December 12, 2012, 04:37:46 AM
the going away and returning thing, is the outerwheel spinning the cherubim away and toward him. when it says the angels are in the wheels, they mean literally in the wheels. not inside the hole in the wheels. so imagine the outerwheel spinning.
You give me the word picture of a geroter. ;D
LE
there's 2 wheels. an inner one and outer one. the outer one has 4 cherubim literally attached to it. the reason the cherubim by themselves are shown first, is to depict the address each part must "dial." the 4 faces on the cherubim are 4 different constellations during taurus (feet of calf) so it's a very precise address. the inner wheel must contain representations of the constellations, which in this case are called "eyes", i think. imagine if the outer wheel is moving while the inner wheel is stationary. in this example, they show the gate dialing the parts of an address.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJ6k7GnKXfI
Quote from: burntheships on December 12, 2012, 05:53:39 AM
You give me the word picture of a geroter. ;D
lol i had to look that up lol
Quote from: Pimander on December 11, 2012, 10:21:41 PM
If I hit a tuning fork tuned to the note E, in the same room as a guitar, then the two E strings on the guitar will vibrate in sympathetic resonance with the tuning fork. The other strings will not vibrate. If there is another tuning fork tuned to E that will vibrate too. However a fork tuned to C will not vibrate.
So basically, if the sound from say a drum or large trumpet like device is tuned to the stone, then it makes the stone vibrate. So what?
(http://eonlinetutors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Untitled-5_391.jpg)
If we go back to this diagram, then we will see that if the stone is vibrating then it is not touching the ground all of the time. When it is not touching the ground then there is little friction and the stone is easy to pull.
So, drums may not have just been to keep the workers pulling in rhythm. Acoustic/sonic technology, may well have been used to assist in the movement of stone.
If we look for hints of musical instruments in association with construction in Egypt, perhaps in their artwork, my guess is that we will find some.
Aree. moving is one. Only lifting it to a higher place is something else. you still need a lot of force
Quote from: Pimander on December 12, 2012, 02:46:18 AM
Posted at Undo's request.
(http://i1141.photobucket.com/albums/n582/Pimander/ezeke.jpg)
Phew, finally done it. Photobucket didn't like that png file for some reason. I had to play about with GIMP. lol
This reminds me of the flywheel that was used on the Coral Castle. I posted a vid that described the mathematics behind it.
Great thread.
Quote from: Lunica on December 12, 2012, 08:20:27 AM
Aree. moving is one. Only lifting it to a higher place is something else. you still need a lot of force
Levers. With a long enough lever one person could lift the Earth.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/51/Archimedes_lever_%28Small%29.jpg)
And acoustics....
(http://www.human-resonance.org/levitation5.jpg)
A basic acoustic levitator has two main parts -- a transducer, which is a vibrating surface that makes sound, and a reflector. Often, the transducer and reflector have concave surfaces to help focus the sound. A sound wave travels away from the transducer and bounces off the reflector. Three basic properties of this traveling, reflecting wave help it to suspend objects in midair. TEXT CREDIT: http://science.howstuffworks.com/acoustic-levitation1.htm (http://science.howstuffworks.com/acoustic-levitation1.htm) IMAGE CREDIT: http://www.human-resonance.org/levitation_basins.html (http://www.human-resonance.org/levitation_basins.html)Now take note of the shape of the concave reflectors above. Compare that to the shape of the artefacts below.
(http://www.human-resonance.org/levitation4.jpg)
(http://www.human-resonance.org/levitation.jpg)
Limestone basins were collected near the northwest corner of the remains of the giant obelisk at Abu Ghurab, each bearing identical forms and carefully rendered circular concavities. The identical dimensions and curvature of the many stone basins, with perfectly rendered geometric forms, gives the appearance of having been serially manufactured through mold-making processes rather than being quarried and carved in a solid state. Abundant evidence of this fact has been ignored for close to 30 years by much of the academic community, despite publication in scientific journals. CREDIT: http://www.human-resonance.org/levitation_basins.html (http://www.human-resonance.org/levitation_basins.html)(http://www.human-resonance.org/tibetan_levitation.jpg)
Tibetan monks with trumpets. Well boys, don't you have a big one?(http://doernenburg.alien.de/alternativ/dendera/foto/lampnummer.jpg)
According to the website that this picture of a Denderah, Egyptian relief is taken from, this is an electrical device. Why then is there a guy with what appears to be a trowel stood next to it? Why is there clearly association with figures lifting in the image? Compare the instrument to the Tibetan trumpets. CREDIT: http://doernenburg.alien.de/alternativ/dendera/dend05_e.php (http://doernenburg.alien.de/alternativ/dendera/dend05_e.php)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=669AcEBpdsY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ah2X0F0nBfQ
I could give you more details but surely you can follow this up guys. I do have other mundane stuff to do like cloning arthropod venom genes.
I'll take a Little Old Lady over some Alien Debunker any day of the week ;)
Quote from: Somamech on December 12, 2012, 05:34:41 PM
I'll take a Little Old Lady over some Alien Debunker any day of the week ;)
me too. lol!!
thought i'd share my last point in the thread, regarding my interpretation of Ezekiel 1, for those who haven't, can't or aren't planning on reading the thread any more:
everyone assumes that's god, but it says "likeness", which doesn't mean it's god. could be a projection of god, i suppose, but that's not the impression i get when reading the text there. to me it almost sounds like it's saying "one who looks like god". but since the OT claims no one has seen god, i'm thinking that ain't god, cause how would he know what god looked like in order to say he looks like god? so this must be one of those cases where god (as in elohim) doesn't mean god and dr. heiser knows what i mean when i say that, since he knows that elohim doesn't always mean god. perhaps this is a case where that leaked over into the interpretation of jehovah. seriously, how do you say "that's what god looks like" or "that's what god's glory looks like" etc, if you've never seen god ?
Quote from: undo11 on December 12, 2012, 08:21:05 PM
thought i'd share my last point in the thread, regarding my interpretation of Ezekiel 1, for those who haven't, can't or aren't planning on reading the thread any more:
everyone assumes that's god, but it says "likeness", which doesn't mean it's god. could be a projection of god, i suppose, but that's not the impression i get when reading the text there. to me it almost sounds like it's saying "one who looks like god". but since the OT claims no one has seen god, i'm thinking that ain't god, cause how would he know what god looked like in order to say he looks like god? so this must be one of those cases where god (as in elohim) doesn't mean god and dr. heiser knows what i mean when i say that, since he knows that elohim doesn't always mean god. perhaps this is a case where that leaked over into the interpretation of jehovah. seriously, how do you say "that's what god looks like" or "that's what god's glory looks like" etc, if you've never seen god ?
Most people have trouble with that word Undo, 'Eloh-im'.
The Hebrew word Elohim is plural, as can be seen from the ending -im.
Plural you say? What you talking about Willis?
Well plural as in the same way that your family (Surname) name is plural, i can use that word to refer to all the members of your family.
And, therefore, Eloh-im is saying this: There is a God 'family'.... all speaking and acting by the command of the Father....... therefore there is no distinction between them in that respect, but they are individual beings.
So, you are most probably right... it wasn't the Father who appeared.... mostly likely the 'Word' (who later became Yeshoah).
And yes, none have seen the Father.... the dead know nothing etc. etc..... hope that gives you some insight :)
starwarp
yeah, i thought it was the divine council. you call it the god family hehe
well anyway, i'm trying to get the reader to pay closer attention to the text. it helps everyone if they try to account for all the descriptions that they can, especially in a vision like that. not that we'll always be right, but at least trying to connect the dots is better than just chalking it up to something mundane if it isn't mundane. ya know?
i knew something was up with that but i still hadn't connected all the pieces together. then it dawned on me that it was a gate that created a wormhole, for lack of a better word. perhaps white hole is closer to the mark. yesterday i finally figured out the firmanent of awesome ice was the event horizon.
Quote from: Pimander on December 12, 2012, 01:19:34 AM
You can actually demonstrate this using an elastic band. Fix one end of an elastic band to an object and the other to something that can't move. Pull the elastic out and allow it to pull the object as far as it can back. There will still be some potential energy in the elastic band (it will have some tightness still providing the object is heavy enough to give some friction with the surface. Now hit a drum near to the object and the elastic band will pull it some more. This proves that the vibration reduces the friction.
Couldn't that be because of the extra stress on the elastic band pulling the object?
I think a better experiment would be made with an object on a sloping surface, then trying to find that object's acoustic resonance frequency (or using an object for which we already know that frequency) and making a sound at that frequency and see if it would move down slope.
Quote from: ArMaP on December 14, 2012, 12:17:58 AM
I think a better experiment would be made with an object on a sloping surface, then trying to find that object's acoustic resonance frequency (or using an object for which we already know that frequency) and making a sound at that frequency and see if it would move down slope.
That would still show that friction is reduced by "resonating" an object. It would also work. :)
Quote from: starwarp2000 on December 13, 2012, 06:48:12 AM
And, therefore, Eloh-im is saying this: There is a God 'family'.... all speaking and acting by the command of the Father....... therefore there is no distinction between them in that respect, but they are individual beings.
So, you are most probably right... it wasn't the Father who appeared.... mostly likely the 'Word' (who later became Yeshoah).
I would put it in a slightly different way. I view "the will of God," as a
decentralised, co-ordinating intelligence, which transmits itself, and in some respects is added to, by every individual node in the overall network; the plurality which the term "Elohim," implies.
I've been accused of transhumanism before, and the main reason why is because I tend to use their vocabulary for describing a lot of things. I would argue that I am
not a transhumanist, and that the main reason why, is because I accept the existence of the Akash, or what Pimander called the "A-field," which is another part of what we tend to collectively refer to as God.
I could (and have before) rave on at length about how transhumanism is a lethal threat to the survival of humanity, etc etc, but that truthfully is not my main objection to it. My main objection to transhumanism as a philosophy, is simply that it is redundant. Because it is based on Cartesian mechanism, which presupposes a dead, hollow, entirely mechanistic universe in which astral space does not exist, the transhumanist ideal essentially consists of using machines, to re-implement a very large amount of functionality which we already have anyway.
It's a case of them wanting to do large amounts of work to obtain things (such as telepathy, as one great example) which already exist, but which they do not accept the existence of, simply because of their own atheistic pseudo-skepticism.