1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Thousands of ancient tombs and settlements found in Egypt with IR mapping

Discussion in 'Science & Technology' started by twilyth, May 25, 2011.

  1. twilyth Guest

    article

    You have to watch the video and look at the sat. images. They look like a virtual street map of ancient settlements buried under the sand. The find includes 17 lost pyramids.

    Ancient Tannis

    [​IMG]

    excerpt

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 25, 2011
  2. AltecV1

    AltecV1 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Messages:
    1,290 (0.61/day)
    Thanks Received:
    173
    Location:
    Republic of Estonia
    cool
     
  3. Easy Rhino

    Easy Rhino Linux Advocate

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2006
    Messages:
    13,461 (4.64/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,264
    truly incredible. we like to brag about our advanced society but look what these people did with only freaking wood and rocks.
     
    yogurt_21 says thanks.
  4. the54thvoid

    the54thvoid

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,375 (1.90/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,606
    Location:
    Glasgow - home of formal profanity
    And slaves. Thousands upon thousands of slaves. All the ancient empires were built with the unpaid labor of the enslaved. The IR mapping is a good tool for archaeology though.
     
    1Kurgan1 says thanks.
  5. erocker

    erocker Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    39,808 (13.18/day)
    Thanks Received:
    14,190
    With the loss of these once great societies, I'm quite positive technologies were also lost that rival some of our tech today. I remember watching some videos that suggest people were flying in planes (fighter aircraft even) thousands of years ago.
     
  6. Easy Rhino

    Easy Rhino Linux Advocate

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2006
    Messages:
    13,461 (4.64/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,264
    sure but that doesnt take away from their ability to create and plan out massive structures inside massive cities using only wood and rocks.
     
  7. erocker

    erocker Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    39,808 (13.18/day)
    Thanks Received:
    14,190
    We currently do that. The rock is just crushed and formed.
     
  8. Easy Rhino

    Easy Rhino Linux Advocate

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2006
    Messages:
    13,461 (4.64/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,264
    yup. and we use steel to support our structures and hard plastics molded to fit certain specs. they used rocks they found on the ground, pounded them into shape with other random rocks, used very little math to do so, and created awesome things. pretty impressive.
     
  9. WhiteLotus

    WhiteLotus

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2007
    Messages:
    6,551 (2.48/day)
    Thanks Received:
    857
    Read about this earlier today. Whilst I am impressed that they have found so much, and impressed that the even built it to be found, one must ask... should we really dig all that sand up?

    I know it's an archaeologists wet dream, but that's an awful lot of sand.
     
  10. kajson

    kajson

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2008
    Messages:
    145 (0.06/day)
    Thanks Received:
    27
    time to find atlantis? ;)
     
  11. the54thvoid

    the54thvoid

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,375 (1.90/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,606
    Location:
    Glasgow - home of formal profanity
  12. Bjorn_Of_Iceland

    Bjorn_Of_Iceland

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Messages:
    3,175 (1.28/day)
    Thanks Received:
    375
    I cant see the pyramid
     
  13. Easy Rhino

    Easy Rhino Linux Advocate

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2006
    Messages:
    13,461 (4.64/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,264
    where's waldo?
     
  14. Wrigleyvillain

    Wrigleyvillain PTFO or GTFO

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,667 (2.98/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,775
    Location:
    Chicago
    Incredible. This Sarah Parcek's wikipedia page has not been updated yet, surprisingly enough. Who wants this? :p

    The last of just two paragraphs:

     
  15. Benetanegia

    Benetanegia New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2009
    Messages:
    2,683 (1.43/day)
    Thanks Received:
    694
    Location:
    Reaching your left retina.
    Wow, that's a nice find. It goes to show how little we know about the psat and how much we (humanity) thinks that is so much more intelligent and advanced than the people who preceeded us.

    Santorini was not Atlantis. The most probable place is exactly where Plato said it was located: beyond the Pilars of Heracles, that is, outside Gibraltar.

    IMO there's a lot of evidence that places it there, and every evidence or reason given to not place it in that place or 12000 years ago, or the reason that it's very existence it doubted is that there could not existed such an advanced civilization (that's what they say), because we have not found evidence of civilizations so old. It's really stupid to think that we know everything about the past when we don't even know things for sure that happened just 100 years ago. I mean the discovery presented in the OT (and partly some of the comments, the surprise factor on them) already demostrates how little we know and how much we assume about how behind they were. And Troya was also a myth until they discovered it, and not only one but at least 13 of them, one below the other...

    Some of the evidences that Atlantis existed and where Plato said are IMO:

    1- There's a sunken island there, 50 m below sea surface, which was sank 12000 years ago (when plato said). It's also in the conjuntion of two tectonic plates, so that can be the reason for not finding many evidences. Although it's not as if they had searched, until now not a single search has been made there, that I know.

    2- Plato said Atantis was divided in some regions that were given to each of the sons, between them two were Atlas to the south and Gadeira on the north. Well we have the Atlas mountains there and Gadeira was the very old name (before Romans got there) for what now is Cadiz.

    3- The most advanced metallurgy and sword crafting on the entire ancient world were found in the Iberian peninsula. So much that Romans were impressed and copied the design, not to mention that there's oficial documents where generals on campaign in the peninsula asked the Roman Republica a total and massive renewal of the shields and armor, because they were absolutely innefective against the falcatas used by iberians. They also had very good boats apparently, way more advanced than their other technology would suggest. The fact they had such advanced technologies while they were still pretty much barbarians in everything else, IMO shows that they might have inherited all that from another place. When a civilization advances on it's own it usually has similar levels of technology on every front. Seing those barbarians with so advanced swords and boats its like looking at those african tribes hunting with AK47s.

    4- The most ancient megalithic constructions to date have been found in north Africa, Portugal and Great Britain, all of them on the Atlantic ocean, not where the first great civilizations where supposed to have generated.


    One of the main reasons that most "experts" give for not locating Atlantis in place and in time is that according to them a civilization can not survive without agriculture or domestic animals, which is entirely false, because many civilizations have survived from fishing and reclection. And on top of that the reason that it is said that they had no animals or no agriculture is that there's no evidence of related tools until much later in Mesopotamia, which is IMO completely bonkers, because we also have very little evidence of tools from any era and/or place including the middle age, which is so much closer and ultimately they could do everything with their bare hands, which is true for many tribes in Africa and Australia. I could also argue that humanity has been decimating wildlife since a long time ago, much more than we usually think and that hunting and fishing was much easier 10k years ago than it has been in the last 2k years. For instance, we know that happened to whales and that has been in the last 500 years, to assume that an ancient civilization could not do the same to many other especies is estupid.

    Another reason is the buildings, as in many "experts" still mantain that ancient egiptians could not create the pyramids, which is stupid because, well they did. And hell, even the existence of many of the 7 wonders is put into question, despite the documentation, because "they simply lacked the technology to create those things".
     
  16. AphexDreamer

    AphexDreamer

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Messages:
    7,134 (2.65/day)
    Thanks Received:
    917
    Location:
    C:\Program Files (x86)\Aphexdreamer\
    They didn't have cell phones, therefore they couldn't have long distance communications.
     
  17. Red_Machine

    Red_Machine

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Messages:
    1,733 (1.17/day)
    Thanks Received:
    380
    Location:
    Marlow, ENGLAND
    You ever hear of snail mail?
     
  18. AphexDreamer

    AphexDreamer

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Messages:
    7,134 (2.65/day)
    Thanks Received:
    917
    Location:
    C:\Program Files (x86)\Aphexdreamer\
    Of course!


    [​IMG]
     
  19. micropage7

    micropage7

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    Messages:
    5,953 (3.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,380
    Location:
    Jakarta, Indonesia
    very interesting when technology works on this case, especially in pyramid things
    i ever read that the structur of it is pretty accurate so you cant put credit card between the granit stones
    not just about accuracy, how they construct it, how they cut the stone and how they transport and their placement is amazing when they do it manually
     
  20. the54thvoid

    the54thvoid

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,375 (1.90/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,606
    Location:
    Glasgow - home of formal profanity
    Umm, that's not what I said. Granted I wasn't clear but the Nat Geo article references the Minoans (Crete). Searches for Atlantis can't be based too much on what the ancient Philosophers and historians wrote, they tended to use massive amounts of hyperbole. I read the Iliad and Herodotus at Uni and we were always told - 'pinch of salt'.

    Point is pointless anyway. Atlantis, as people believe it in popular culture is a whimsical fantasy, much like Arthurian Britain or Beowulf or even Robin Hood. It's not history, it's mythtory.
     
  21. twilyth Guest

    I think Egypt and Mesopotamia (Akkadia, Assyria, etc) could be shadows of the Atlantean race. Supposedly there is a book of the knowledge of Thoth buried between the front paws of the Sphinx and ground penetrating radar has show a void there. Something like that might provide a link.

    The fact that these ancient cultures apparently understood astronomical phenomena like the 26000 year period of earth's axial precession makes you wonder if some of their knowledge wasn't "inherited".
     
  22. HTC

    HTC

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,240 (0.93/day)
    Thanks Received:
    303
    Dunno if it were the Incas, the Mayans or someone else but i seem to recall seeing a documentary where they stated rocks were "assembled together" (dunno better term), forming structures. They did it in such a way that you can't even stick the edge of a knife between two rocks and, to this day, nobody can say how they did that.

    Though there have been many theories, the exact way the Ancient Egyptians built the pyramids still isn't known.

    EDIT

    When i say rocks, i'm referring to very heavy ones: think over one ton each.
     
    Last edited: May 26, 2011
  23. 1Kurgan1

    1Kurgan1 The Knife in your Back

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2008
    Messages:
    10,325 (4.81/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,371
    Location:
    Duluth, Minnesota
    If not more than a ton, I'm pretty sure that the pyramids used rocks weighing up to 10 tons :O
     
  24. HTC

    HTC

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,240 (0.93/day)
    Thanks Received:
    303
    I was referring to the line where i mentioned the Incas and the Mayans: not where i mentioned the pyramids.
     
  25. Benetanegia

    Benetanegia New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2009
    Messages:
    2,683 (1.43/day)
    Thanks Received:
    694
    Location:
    Reaching your left retina.
    One of the theories about Atlantis says that Plato based his story on the destruction of the Minoans. I thought you were talking about that. It's a posibility, but IMO it is a stupid one and very shortsighted, as it assumes that historians back then, Plato himself and the pupils that the story was supposedly created for, completely lacked any knowledge about the recent story of an island so close to them, while they knew Egypt so well and they knew something, although not as much, about the Iberian peninsula (to the point they supposedly traded wit them). Hell there's apparently even some mention to Britain islands. So they knew a fair bit about the surroundings as to Plato needing to invent a story about a civilization that didn't exist, when with the same purpose of teaching morals, he could have just mentioned the Minoans. There's no need to place the event in another place.

    Regardng the accuracy of ancient historians, it's the same I said earlier, we assume they always used the hyperbole and that their claims were overly exagerated, but IMO that's too much assumption with no single proof. One example is when the number of soldiers brought to battles are mentioned. Historians always say the actual number was probably 10 or 20 times lower and on what do they base their claims? On the number of soldiers brought to battle in middle age, and between many other stupid "evidences", the notion that population has always always been on the rise.

    As if population had not been halved twice during the middle age due to plagues and war. And that was during a span of around 800 years and very localized, while just before the rise of the Greeks as a power, a longer, widespread and probably blodier dark age happened, which probably decimated all the civilizations beyond what it's conceivable today. The very existence and nature of Sea People suggest a massive devastation. (ironically though, many historians say Sea People are another myth too, whatever)

    But it's always the same, as we move into the future we must be more intelligent, we must be stronger and we must be simply more of us and we don't see the truth even when part of this truth could be explained by this very notion of the superiority of "today". For example, you would say that after the democratic Greeks extended a more elaborated diplomacy around their area of influence, the need for war and the required defense forces would decrease dramatically, but apparently this simple notion is not even considered.

    Greeks themselves often talked about themselves as a nation made of slaves of some other civlization that escaped after a glorious victory. An story that resembles a lot the failed attempt made later by Spartacus and his men some centuries later. In this one many died too and I don't think it's too far fetched to think that a bigger "anything" (in this case a revolt) has ever happened before we have records, for the simple reason that we do not have records. It's stupid but a norm no matter which modern historian you read... I'm kind of sick of that actitude whenever I read history.
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page