Ancient History Criticisms

Im sorry @ziggydan1

@history_rev @plastolithic @scotthoward So versatile...

@AHC_Channel @plastolithic @scotthoward

Ollantaytambo, Peru, 1945. ETH Library Zurich, Image Archive / Hs_0494b-0128-018-013-F/ Photo: A. Heim

@plastolithic @history_rev @scotthoward or even a wall block possibly?

@AHC_Channel @history_rev @scotthoward or a block from one of these fountain/bath things.

@history_rev @plastolithic @scotthoward Same thing, just like... Really big ones...

@history_rev @plastolithic @scotthoward If there were more of them I would suspect that maybe the structure was crenelated.

@plastolithic @scotthoward @history_rev Those large photos really let you see just how many of those big rectangular blocks there are and their distribution all around the site. They are scattered everywhere! Some look toppled down, others look moved later, maybe attempts at organizing them / reusing them.

@scotthoward @AHC_Channel @history_rev I just found it. So it did tumble down. It would still be nice to see close-ups if you can get anywhere near it.

@history_rev @plastolithic 21 has to be a lintel or threshold, it's such a unique block.

@plastolithic @AHC_Channel Blocks appear to be numbered in this research (p. 346). Haven't looked into it yet. Don't think the other blocks, like that missing one, are mentioned. I've only looked at some of the photos quickly. Might be of interest. Link: researchgate.net/publication/30…

@plastolithic @AgresivoPasivo @Dan__Stevens @nobulart @history_rev I don't want my time wasted by anyone who invokes catastophism to explain the condition of these sites without acknowleding the divinty of the sites themselves and the implications/ramifications of the acting forces.

@AHC_Channel @AgresivoPasivo @Dan__Stevens @nobulart @history_rev The dude didn't even reply to the correct post. That's how concerned he is.

Noticed for the first time today. Flow lines mirrored on the East and West faces?

@plastolithic @AgresivoPasivo @Dan__Stevens @nobulart @history_rev There has not been an appropriately identified catalyst and subsequent chain of events that explains it.

@AHC_Channel @AgresivoPasivo @Dan__Stevens @nobulart @history_rev Randall Carlson has pointed out what the movement of massive volumes of water actually do to mountains. A big pile of bricks on top of a low plateau is going to receive a lot more than some exterior damage. Plus, as Dan pointed out, we have many other sites somehow unaffected.

@AgresivoPasivo @Dan__Stevens @nobulart @history_rev I think you're being overly-dramatic about an innocuous phrasing.

@AHC_Channel @Dan__Stevens @nobulart @plastolithic @history_rev That's inaccurate. What you are saying know doesn't match what you "did". Missinterpreting the evidence is another ad hominem? What evidence are you talking about? And please, stop this nonsensical running nowhere. We all make mistakes. It's fine. Do it better next time.

@plastolithic @AgresivoPasivo @Dan__Stevens @nobulart @history_rev Right, you would need to have an appropriate catalyst for such an event, that would explain how the sites came to be in their current states, and a speculative mega flood isn't sufficient contexualization.

@AgresivoPasivo @AHC_Channel @Dan__Stevens @nobulart @history_rev Oh you mean me? Yes, I am saying that the argument is not worth having when the evidence for it is so weak, speculative and requires >80 million cubic km of water to magically appear out of nowhere and gently wash over continents. Don't waste my time with it.

@AgresivoPasivo @Dan__Stevens @nobulart @plastolithic @history_rev There is an observational/logical disconnect here. A contextual/situational problem. "Can't see the forest for the trees" is another, non-libelous way to put it. The theory is predicated on a pre-assumed context of a "flood", but that may not be the best way to describe it.

@plastolithic @history_rev That does look like the right block, just spin it 180 degrees.

@AgresivoPasivo @Dan__Stevens @nobulart @plastolithic @history_rev "Ad hominem is a logical fallacy where an argument is countered by attacking the speaker's character, motive, or personal traits rather than addressing the substance of their argument." There was no ad hominem...

@Dan__Stevens @nobulart @AHC_Channel @plastolithic @history_rev Ad hominem. Do not compare. Criticize what you've got in front of you, I personally don't know about this study you mention, but it would be very rude to compare both without pointing out the differences and that will bring about another discussion, not the point from the post.

Get ready for moonspergs to call everything fake.

@Black_Pilled You posted a CBS link...

@AHC_Channel Why do moonspergs always lie? Nobody but moonspergs have ever represented that as real footage. Maybe at a bare minimum you should google tard memes before copying and pasting them.

@64thNWestern @devonzuegel

@64thNWestern @devonzuegel Yes!

Greene & Greene Architects

@Giacomo770 @Dan__Stevens @plastolithic You're a government puppet and we all know it.

Cusco: I find myself observing these cuts in the stone, which are truly unique. To date, there are no similar ones in any known archaeological site. This is evidence that is either not discussed or, at best, ignored. It does not appear in any technical or academic report. Furthermore, the type of tool used to make these cuts is unknown. The drill bit in the stone is at least half a meter deep, and everything indicates a rotational movement and pressure exerted from top to bottom, but the speed of the tool had to remain constant, and the material could not have been copper or bronze. Seeing this image, I can affirm that an ANCIENT HIGH TECHNOLOGY did indeed exist.