Fingerprints of the Gods

Open your mind

The map we are speaking is much older that can be dated it's original map puts the continent I speak of originaly places east of australia in the lower Indian ocean. Most likeley moving souheast, where it ened up in it's preseent position. Palm trees have been fond miles deep in the ice. This shows it was once much higher at one time,closer to India. And most of all in a different climate zone much more temperent.:cool::cool:

Machiaventa
 
time has been going on so longasfor eny conceivable arrangement to have occured and once when i was young i found a small black basalt like rektangular object this was in nw ohio and on itappeaered the likes of cuniform or simular writing we now now that southamerica and europ once had a trade rought because of such archeological finds with ancient forms of writeing evidensed im posting no links but logic agrees as far as i can say " the item i mentioned disapeared after i took it to school (about 1969)but i have never forgotton it
 
Cuneiform wasn't used as a native script for any language in South America or Europe. Not understanding that, it isn't too hard of a stretch to realize that you probably had limited ability to evaluate this alleged "black basalt."
 
SkinWalker said:
Cuneiform wasn't used as a native script for any language in South America or Europe. Not understanding that, it isn't too hard of a stretch to realize that you probably had limited ability to evaluate this alleged "black basalt."
Click to expand...

here are nott the links to alleged cuniform or phonecian inscriptions of out of place archeological finds all one has to do is google>..Fuente Magna <.. or google ..> North America’s Lost Archaeology <...search the archeology sites too find that as far as anything science , medicine , history, or sociology , they canot conclude outher than little if nothing is know i dont claim to know what has been but it is safe to assume that certain earth desastors have and will occure
and a lot of things are being keep from public education
and i had 3 links backing up what ive asserted", and basically i cant post them as rules state that i have to have posted 20 times and i dont hang around here like some people do i think just to create conflicts and refutiate fact
 
Last edited:
SkinWalker said:
http://www.intersurf.com/~chalcedony/FOG9.html

This link explains pretty well the Piri Reis map.
Click to expand...

I didn't even know about this map - the significance junkie in me is starting to shake!

Reading it (your link) - skimming it right now. Looks like the main reason they say the map could not have been made from previous maps, is the last time someone could have done it was 6000 years ago.

That's their reason?? Lame.

Reading word for word now...I'll be back.
 
pirimap.jpg


Ok, is that the map??

Sure looks like Antarctica at the bottom. Damn good map of South America for just 21 years after Columbus!

Reading Skin's link, it looks like they just debunk the presumption it is a very accurate map, do they claim this map resembles nothing?
 
Fuente Magna appears on the surface to be a complete forgery, as do most of the so-called "out of place artifacts" that significance-junkies and mystery-mongers frequently cite as "significant mysteries."

It looks to me like it might possibly be a genuine ancient bowl (probably a ceremonial bowl of some sort) which was altered in modernity with cuneiform-like script on the inside. There is claimed to be a translation, but I've yet to see the full text (the alleged cuneiform). I know a couple people who are experienced with cuneiform derived from several Mesopotamian languages and it should be a simple matter of reviewing it for errors.

There are common methods for spotting forgeries of artifacts claimed to be in their right place which can be employed. Epigraphic examination is but one; physical examination of the bowl itself is another. The photos available show a remarkably bright and "fresh" epigraphical surface on the inside (where the alleged cuneiform is) but more subdued on the outside.

I'm willing to bet that the owner isn't willing to allow too close an examination for the right patina and wear.

There's far more probability that the bowl is a forgery and a hoax than an artifact that was brought over to Bolivia by lucky Sumerian sailors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top