Is history wrong?

[Fascinate]

Tell me again how I'm the one dismissing the works of ancient peoples? Jebus.



That's an incredibly recent phenomenon. There has been no long-term universal drive to have "the tallest building" over all of human history.

To me that would seem a human nature thing, like the one guy said earlier in the thread......biggest dick building.

[Puupi]

Can't be arsed to read through 14 pages, but has anyone mentioned Graham Hancock yet?

[GodlyBob]

Classical Renaissance education.

Ah the Renaissance, the real dark ages.

Specifically, I mean contrasted against the classics. Y'know, Greek and Roman and whatnot.

[Deleted]

Wait what, not at all. Again:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor...lest_buildings

Not arbitrary at all, tallest is a measure and that is the one that usually gets tracked. For something to be the tallest thing for 3800 years is beyond my realm of comprehension, it would be the same wonder if there was a building that was the widest for 3800 years.

Because engineers focused on making more advanced structures rather than really big ones. Bigger isn't better.
That, and Egypt had a lot of room to build on and was geologically stable. Oh and it was one of the largest most powerful empires in history.

Empires like it built many great, wondrous things that weren't just stacks of rock ontop of another. The Colossus, the library of Alexandria, the Parthenon and so on. All marvels of ancient engineering and scholars.

[Dezerte]

Shit, what the hell happened with this thread, maybe it was aliens.

[GodlyBob]

Can't be arsed to read through 14 pages, but has anyone mentioned Graham Hancock yet?

3 or 4 times. Referenced, but not specifically. Mostly n terms of "Hancock's work."

[Fascinate]

Because engineers focused on making more advanced structures rather than really big ones. Bigger isn't better.
That, and Egypt had a lot of room to build on and was geologically stable. Oh and it was one of the largest most powerful empires in history.

Empires like it built many great, wondrous things that weren't just stacks of rock ontop of another. The Colossus, the library of Alexandria, the Parthenon and so on. All marvels of ancient engineering and scholars.

I absolutely understand those buildings exist, and they are great in their own right. But that STILL does not explain how they were the tallest for 4 millenia, sorry. Again for the umpteenth time, try and please understand how long of a time period that is, and then multiply that x5.

[Deleted]

I'd lead towards L. Ron Hubbard.

Obviously he'd actually be far more similar to Hubbard, but at least comparing him to Asimov might inspire him.

[Deleted]

I absolutely understand those buildings exist, and they are great in their own right. But that STILL does not explain how they were the tallest for 4 millenia, sorry. Again for the umpteenth time, try and please understand how long of a time period that is, and then multiply that x5.

Because places like Rome didn't care about height, and a tall tower falls easier than a smaller one. Learn your European history, it was a different geopolitical climate.

[Fascinate]

Do you guys realize WHY ancient aliens was so popular (yet incredibly wrong)? Because EVERYONE KNOWS something fishy went down in those days, this shit just DOES NOT ADD UP. Since i have had a warning i cannot talk about what i believe to have happened, but we should all agree these were special times.

[draynay]

Is this thread still stupid?

Again for the umpteenth time, try and please understand how long of a time period that is, and then multiply that x5.

Good grief.

Should I make some kind of sound effect while imagining this, to further enhance my awe?

[Fascinate]

Is this thread still stupid?



Good grief.

Should I make some kind of sound effect while imagining this, to further enhance my awe?

I feel the need to repeat this because of how incredible it is these things were completed that long ago. Maybe you have taken the time to internalize how long that really is, but others just hear the number and dont think much of it (given the large estimates of how old the universe is etc). 4500 years in human terms is a ridiculously long time, and you need to understand that before making comments on these ancient structures.

[Violent]

My internet history is wrong on so many levels....oh...

Can only imagine... Buncha tentacle & anime porn. With a dash of Furries.

[draynay]

Do you guys realize WHY ancient aliens was so popular (yet incredibly wrong)? Because EVERYONE KNOWS something fishy went down in those days, this shit just DOES NOT ADD UP.

Just because you, and others like you, find the accomplishments of our ancestors unfathomable does not make them "fishy". It only speaks to your own limits.

[Puupi]

3 or 4 times. Referenced, but not specifically. Mostly n terms of "Hancock's work."

His books (Fingerprints of the Gods, Magicians of the Gods) are absolutely awesome. I suggest everyone interested in the subject of our ancient origins to read them. His hypothesis might be incorrect, but the facts and overall information on the subject he provides is phenomenal. And not only does he cover it from one perspective, but several - ranging from geology, anthropology, archaeology etc. to astronomy and engineering.

[Dezerte]

Do you guys realize WHY ancient aliens was so popular (yet incredibly wrong)? Because EVERYONE KNOWS something fishy went down in those days, this shit just DOES NOT ADD UP. Since i have had a warning i cannot talk about what i believe to have happened, but we should all agree these were special times.

Ancient Aliens was popular because it told a fantastical story. And please don't assume to speak for everyone.

[Vanyali]

His books (Fingerprints of the Gods, Magicians of the Gods) are absolutely awesome. I suggest everyone interested in the subject of our ancient origins to read them. His hypothesis might be incorrect, but the facts and overall information on the subject he provides is phenomenal. And not only does he cover it from one perspective, but several - ranging from geology, anthropology, archaeology etc. to astronomy and engineering.

Most of his perspectives are either wrong or out-right ignore actual evidence in favor of foo-vidence.

[Fascinate]

Just because you, and others like you, find the accomplishments of our ancestors unfathomable does not make them "fishy". It only speaks to your own limits.

They are unfathomable, that is why this thread is 15 pages long, as well as the popularity of the ancient aliens theory. Aliens are not a thing, neither are the mainstream theories of how these ancient structures were completed. This isnt me taking credit away from human ingenuity, this is me saying we either have a flawed view of our history (which would invalidate all of the mainstream theories) or something bigger was happening. To me i think ancient people were more advanced, but advanced in a way that we cant exactly understand, which is why this subject intrigues me so much.

[Vanyali]

They are unfathomable, that is why this thread is 15 pages long, as well as the popularity of the ancient aliens theory. Aliens are not a thing, neither are the mainstream theories of how these ancient structures were completed. This isnt me taking credit away from human ingenuity, this is me saying we either have a flawed view of our history (which would invalidate all of the mainstream theories) or something bigger was happening. To me i think ancient people were more advanced, but advanced in a way that we cant exactly understand, which is why this subject intrigues me so much.

They're unfathomable to bottom-feeders who stare at things and don't realize human beings are absolutely capable of things then that we're not now because they were far, far more familiar with it than we could ever be.

Could you take a hunk of stone and make a sharp weapon out of it? how about turning it into a blank to produce dozens? Doubtful. Stone-knapping is actually really, really hard... but our ancestors did it because all they HAD was stone, so they HAD to get used to it and know how to work with it.

[Puupi]

Most of his perspectives are either wrong or out-right ignore actual evidence in favor of foo-vidence.

As I said, his hypothesis might be incorrect. Also I don't agree on the conclusions he draws from various findings of his studies. But I haven't seen anyone disprove the facts he has laid out. Conclusions are up for debate obviously.