Forums | MacLife

Dude, I have the music video for that song on Laserdisc! And this is something which pre-dates the music video era by a good two decades or so. Pure cheesy goodness.

iSeamas wrote:

Daddyo wrote:

Other than proving that the forrest disappeared, where did they state the proof that humans chopped all of the trees down?

Analysing plant remains and pollen in soil 1.5m deep, the team was able to trace an important sequence of events which show the clearing of woodland for agriculture.

"At the bottom of the profile there is a lot of huarango pollen and little evidence of human impact," explains Dr Alex Chepstow-Lusty from the French Institute of Andean Studies in Lima, Peru who also took part in the study.

"Then, at 80cm deep, maize pollen becomes common, showing the importance of this crop, suggesting a greater need for food and an increasing population," he says.

"It is now we notice a big impact on the huarangos and a major decrease in their pollen."

No proof in these statements, try again.

All those tens of billions of dollars spent on archeology should be redirected to time machine research.

iSeamas wrote:

Huh?

Proof now?

It is supported evidence, NOT as you claimed mere conjecture.

You'll find the proof under Cheyenne Mountain.

resedit wrote:

You'll find the proof under Cheyenne Mountain.

Isn't that where they keep Skynet or the WOPR or something?

Pariah wrote:

Bren wrote:

radarman wrote:

Or, the fact that many were sealed with Egyptian bodies, art, literature, and other artifacts still inside?

Many? I didn't say all of the pyramids pre-dated the Egyptians. I said the great pyramid pre-dates their civilization. The Egyptians did, in fact, build numerous inferior copies of the great pyramid. Normally you'd expect any civilization's technology to get better over time, but this is not the case in Egypt. Their oldest, earliest pyramid is a technological marvel, and the further forward we move in time, the less sophisticated the pyramids become.

This, along with a whole mountain of other evidence, supports the theory that the great pyramid and the sphinx were the work of a much older, much more technologically advanced civilization.

Atlantians.

To be precise: Yeti.

Well yes, among other things. There's also the fact that the pyramid's placement relative to other monuments in its vicinity, as well as its placement relative to magnetic North and its lattitude and longitude betray a knowledge of geography and astronomy which the Egyptians are not know to have possessed.

There is a demonstrable reduction of tree pollen in concert to the increase of corn pollen. Corn requires full sunlight and a lot of water. Trees produce shade and require a lot of water making them incompatible with growing corn. Corn is an engineered species and thus could only be planted by man. Tree tend to be hardy organisms and tend to not die easily and leave significant evidence when they die naturally.

You need any more explanation?

Bren wrote:

Well yes, among other things. There's also the fact that the pyramid's placement relative to other monuments in its vicinity, as well as its placement relative to magnetic North and its lattitude and longitude betray a knowledge of geography and astronomy which the Egyptians are not know to have possessed.

I think the obvious answer would be to reassess what Egyptians knew.

Imagine that you discover an ancient stone room. You get out your metre stick, and find out that the dimensions are 22 cubits by 7 cubits. What does that tell you?

I would also wonder what happened to my third dimension.

Bren wrote:

If the technology was there, howcome the newer pyramids lack the great pyramid's impossible-to-replicate level of precision? And if the great pyramid was built by Egyptians, I again ask, where did the water-erosion damage come from?

Let's not forget the cannon fire damage on the Sphinx put there by Napoleons bored artillerymen.

Bren, you overlook the documentation of the building of the Great Pyramid, left behind by the Pharaoh who had ordered it built.