Tihuanaco and Mars

[Skweek]

Hi all - post #1, with something I've meant to get off my chest for some time;

The following are images of the so-called "Gateway of the Sun" at Tihuanaco and the (in)famous "face on Mars".

It seems to me that there are three possible conclusions one could draw from them;

- the "Weeping God" on the gateway (sometimes identified as Viracocha) is a stylised representation of the "face on Mars" (Meso-American scuplture is not known for it's naturalism), therefore the "face on Mars" was known to someone on Earth several millennia ago.

- there are aspects of the morphology of the "face on Mars" that seem to be represented in the face of the "weeping God", but it is coincidental.

- there is no resemblence between "the weeping god" and the "face on Mars".

Any thoughts?

 

[karrie]

I think it resembles a fraggle as much as it resembles the stone carving you've showed. :smile:

I also think it's quite normal for us to try to piece together familiar objects from light and shadow, rather than to simply view a phenomena for what it really is. But, I make my millions selling grilled cheese sandwiches with the likeness of Elvis burned onto them, so, keep spreading posts like this k? :lol:

 

[Dexter Sinister]

It seems to me that there are three possible conclusions

The correct conclusion is that the Face on Mars is an example of pareidolia. Higher resolution images than the one you posted show it to be a perfectly ordinary erosional feature. You can see better images of it here.

 

[DurkaDurka]

Is that Stargate? lol

 

[darkbeaver]

Hi all - post #1, with something I've meant to get off my chest for some time;

The following are images of the so-called "Gateway of the Sun" at Tihuanaco and the (in)famous "face on Mars".

It seems to me that there are three possible conclusions one could draw from them;

- the "Weeping God" on the gateway (sometimes identified as Viracocha) is a stylised representation of the "face on Mars" (Meso-American scuplture is not known for it's naturalism), therefore the "face on Mars" was known to someone on Earth several millennia ago.

- there are aspects of the morphology of the "face on Mars" that seem to be represented in the face of the "weeping God", but it is coincidental.

- there is no resemblence between "the weeping god" and the "face on Mars".

Any thoughts?

You know about the construction dates of the gateway of the sun eh? 17,000 years by some calculation, predeluvial, used to be a seaport 600 feet from the water.

 

[darkbeaver]

 

[Skweek]

"The correct conclusion is that the Face on Mars is an example of pareidolia. Higher resolution images than the one you posted show it to be a perfectly ordinary erosional feature. You can see better images of it here. "


I said nothing about the origin of the face, re-read the post please.

I downloaded the high-res JP2's last year, and have had several virtual rambles around the face - IIRC the images resolve at about 3 pixels per metre.

 

[Skweek]

You know about the construction dates of the gateway of the sun eh? 17,000 years by some calculation, predeluvial, used to be a seaport 600 feet from the water.

Indeed, I'm familiar with Poznansky's(?) archeoastronomy. His treatment at the hands of the ever democratic and altruistic Scientific establishment was much like that of Velikovsky.

BTW, the reason I foud this site was that I am re-reading I.V. at the moment, and I found your threads discussing him.

 

[Ron in Regina]

So Skweek (by the way, welcome to Canadian Content Forums!!), to Fast Forward
a bit, where are you going with this, in a "cut to the chase" sort'a way?

 

[Skweek]

So Skweek (by the way, welcome to Canadian Content Forums!!), to Fast Forward
a bit, where are you going with this, in a "cut to the chase" sort'a way?

Thanks for the hello.

Don't worry, I'm not selling anything.

My opinion is that the face on the gateway is clearly a representation of the 'face on mars', and this has some rather profound implications, to say the least.

Some of these I might punt into play later, and they're likely to raise a few eyebrows - I'll see how it goes.

 

[Ron in Regina]

I'm curious. I can wait. The Universe is a weird place. 8O :lol::lol::lol:

 

[darkbeaver]

Indeed, I'm familiar with Poznansky's(?) archeoastronomy. His treatment at the hands of the ever democratic and altruistic Scientific establishment was much like that of Velikovsky.

BTW, the reason I foud this site was that I am re-reading I.V. at the moment, and I found your threads discussing him.

The scientific establishment is full of liars, thieves and murderers and it's run by priests , in my opinion. That establishment has ruined countless fine minds and replaced them with units like Hawkings, an author of bizarre episodes of science fiction suitable for cheap Holly-Wood movies. You've probably already experianced the religious fanaticism of a big banger or a black hole junkie, thier always looking for fixes to a quickly disappearing relativistic drug, and they get nasty when you don't agree with them.:smile:

 

[Dexter Sinister]

"I said nothing about the origin of the face, re-read the post please.

I didn't suggest you had, there's nothing wrong with my reading comprehension. I merely told you the face is a natural erosional feature. You're going to have a pretty hard time demonstrating the face on the gateway is a representation of it, it's not visible from here even in the best telescope on the planet. You're going to have to argue that the civilization that built the gate had better optical instruments than we have now, or they had images of it from space travellers. Going down the path of loons like Erich von Daniken, Richard Hoagland, Immanuel Velikovsky, Graham Hancock...

 

[Skweek]

The scientific establishment is full of liars, thieves and murderers and it's run by priests , in my opinion. That establishment has ruined countless fine minds and replaced them with units like Hawkings, an author of bizarre episodes of science fiction suitable for cheap Holly-Wood movies. You've probably already experianced the religious fanaticism of a big banger or a black hole junkie, thier always looking for fixes to a quickly disappearing relativistic drug, and they get nasty when you don't agree with them.:smile:

I have to agree, largely.

The 'natural sciences' were hi-jacked by the idiocy of "uniformitarianism" or gradualism at the beginning of the 19th C, and 'hard' science (by which I mean classical, empirical physics)at the begining of the 20th by the mathematical 'metaphyics' of Einstein and his successors (such as Hawking).

Hence we now have the oxymoronically named "theoretical sciences" of physics and cosmology which could hardly have less explanatory or predictive powers if they had been constructed in a lunatic asylum. That said, getting $3,000,000,000 dollars to play with a white elephant like the "large hadron collider" is nice work if you can get it. I'm sure it was money well-spent.

The question is whether this has all been the result of pathopsychology (as I.V. maintained), or whether a hidden hand has busied itself actively lying to us, for whatever agenda. Science might br crippled, but technology (the words are NOT synonymous) continues it's relentless advance.

Money is king, so follow the money as far as you can, and you can get an idea who has been instrumental in the promotion or suppression of ideas and knowledge.

 

[Skweek]

I didn't suggest you had, there's nothing wrong with my reading comprehension. I merely told you the face is a natural erosional feature. You're going to have a pretty hard time demonstrating the face on the gateway is a representation of it, it's not visible from here even in the best telescope on the planet. You're going to have to argue that the civilization that built the gate had better optical instruments than we have now, or they had images of it from space travellers. Going down the path of loons like Erich von Daniken, Richard Hoagland, Immanuel Velikovsky, Graham Hancock...

A "skeptic" speaks.

Your 'argumentation' after only 2 posts is all over the shop, so I think I'll leave it there.

But one thing; you know the definition of 'sceptic'? "A person disinclined to accept popularity or authority as indicating the truth of assertions or beliefs".

Very few people seem to question the appropriation of the word by those (apparently such as yourself) who are absolutely and unwaveringly un-sceptical of authority and popular belief.

 

[darkbeaver]

A very sad state of affairs for the vital natural skeptics Skweek. When there are so many deserving of the educations and the oportunitys and so much of the universe to discover it is a crime against humanity that we are kept from the real and entertained with officially sanctioned fictions that cloud humanitys prospects.

 

[gerryh]

A very sad state of affairs for the vital natural skeptics Skweek. When there are so many deserving of the educations and the oportunitys and so much of the universe to discover it is a crime against humanity that we are kept from the real and entertained with officially sanctioned fictions that cloud humanitys prospects.

Db, why don't you illuminate us with one of the more "popular" officially sanctioned fictions and remove the clouds with truth?

 

[EagleSmack]

When there are so many deserving of the educations and the oportunitys and so much of the universe to discover it is a crime against humanity that we are kept from the real and entertained with officially sanctioned fictions that cloud humanitys prospects.

You can say that again!

 

[lone wolf]

South-west Ontario is shaped like an elephant. Italy is shaped like a boot ... but I doubt if there is any religious significance attached

 

[darkbeaver]

Db, why don't you illuminate us with one of the more "popular" officially sanctioned fictions and remove the clouds with truth?

The origins, engineering, technology and the orientation of that big stone in the OP gerrryh it is a small part of vast ruins inconclusivly dated some of which appear to be beneath sediments laid down 12,800 years ago maybe. Some say it was covered in a great flood. Just the magnificent stonework itself requires a high order civilization and hugh resources of power and wealth.