What in your opinion is great?

  • #26
phinds
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Gold Member
2019 Award
16,419
6,697
@KenJackson, I see you are avoiding my question about what flood you are talking about. You brought it up, now explain it.
 
  • #27
22,089
3,286
And regardless of how the rope was rigged, the minimum breaking strength of a 2" steel cable is about 160 tons. Safety limits are well below that, so I suspect they had something much stronger than steel cable to lift these hundreds of tons.
Or they could use multiple ropes.
I agree there are many unexplained things of the past, but you are willfully ignoring perfectly good explanations for some reason you're not willing to divulge.
 
  • Like
Likes Hoophy
  • #28
61
10
@KenJackson, I see you are avoiding my question about what flood you are talking about. You brought it up, now explain it.
I avoided it because you implied it would get the thread banned. Is that your goal? Are you one who likes to provoke fights to get others kicked out?

There's unlimited evidence of a world-wide flood both on the physical earth and in ancient literature. And I seem to recall more than one historian lamenting that history starts at 5000 BC (oops) 3000 BC. What a coincidence. But never mind. The great mystery doesn't depend on that.
 
Last edited:
  • #29
22,089
3,286
I avoided it because you implied it would get the thread banned. Is that your goal? Are you one who likes to provoke fights to get others kicked out?

There's unlimited evidence of a world-wide flood both on the physical earth and in ancient literature. And I seem to recall more than one historian lamenting that history starts at 5000 BC. What a coincidence. But never mind. The great mystery doesn't depend on that.
Provide some evidence then. Let's start with some geological evidence.
 
  • #30
phinds
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Gold Member
2019 Award
16,419
6,697
I avoided it because you implied it would get the thread banned. Is that your goal? Are you one who likes to provoke fights to get others kicked out?
No, my goal is not to get you kicked out, it is to support the forums rules of providing citations for claims you make, as micromass just requested. The point is, you should not make claims you can't support. If you can support your claim, then I will have learned something new.
 
  • Like
Likes Rubidium_71, Hoophy and 1oldman2
  • #31
22,089
3,286
Hey, if you get kicked out for making claims you can't support, then that's not phind's fault, it's yours. You made the claim, so you should either defend it or retract it.
 
  • #32
George Jones
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,390
1,014
What is great? .... Life, the Universe and Everything. Even after decades, the more I study, the more amazed I am! I also like the book(s).

You should consider a visit to Germany.
In a way, my wife made something similar last night, something like
http://onlinerecipesbook.blogspot.ca/2012/12/kofaty-anda-shorba.html

which I ate with fresh roti (chapati), and with raw red chile peppers (optional). Absolutely Great!
 
  • Like
Likes Hoophy
  • #33
61
10
I agree there are many unexplained things of the past, ...
It doesn't sound like you're agreeing. It sounds like you're fighting for the fun of fighting.
...but you are willfully ignoring perfectly good explanations...
You haven't presented any explanation at all as to how those heavy blocks were delicately positioned at Sacsayhuaman, and no plausible explanation for how they got the curved shapes so exact on mating rocks.

This was another interesting video you posted. Maybe Wally can explain Stonehenge, though not everything scales as nicely as he and you assume. At one point he said the whole weight was on one rope. I wonder how many 2" steel cables or hemp ropes would be needed to support one of those massive Stonehenge blocks.

And he couldn't use his device to delicately position the blocks at Sacsayhuaman. Probably not at any wall.
..for some reason you're not willing to divulge.
Oh, that's it. I must have a sinister plot.

People who believe in ancient aliens watch the videos and movies and say ah, yes, yes, that's proof. And we look at them with some disgust for not analyzing what has been said. But here you are doing the same for videos like the ones you've posted.

I'm pretty sure there were no ancient aliens. A much simpler and more plausible explanation is that man at one point had much greater knowledge and advanced technology than we do today. The theory that man was an idiot cave man until we smart people were born is just arrogance.
 
  • #34
22,089
3,286
A much simpler and more plausible explanation is that man at one point had much greater knowledge and advanced technology than we do today. The theory that man was an idiot cave man until we smart people were born is just arrogance.
Aaah, so they had advanced technology that we now do not have? So that explains why they found for example hard rocks with which they carved out other rocks, because that's totally more advanced than we have today. That's why at the query's we find such advanced technology. Really, your explanation is only plausible if you completely ignore everything else.

Sure, they must have had lasers and levitations devices, but somehow we can't find any proof of them. Maybe there were two types of workers: the workers who could cut stone with lasers, and those who had to use copper chisels.

Except for "there are building that I can't explain", you have zero proof. What's more, you wilfully ignore every other kind of evidence that there was no advanced technology.

And you ignored our requests for some evidence on a global flood.
 
  • #35
87
568
Finding someone you can talk openly with because he understands you is great.
 
  • Like
Likes Monsterboy, EnumaElish and fresh_42
  • #36
61
10
Sure, they must have had lasers and levitations devices, but somehow we can't find any proof of them.
Maybe they had lasers, but I didn't suggest it because no one has ever found evidence of them. But there IS evidence of incredible things that someone did (the remaining stone structures) and no one has adequately explained them.

And I wonder about levitation devices. But if they were possible, surely some modern day physicist would have at least suggested a way to temporarily neutralize mass. As far as I know, no one has done that.
Maybe there were two types of workers: the workers who could cut stone with lasers, and those who had to use copper chisels.
You are the one suggesting lasers, not me. But yes, there were two or three or dozens of different levels of technology used by the many different peoples who worked on these sites over the millennia.

Except for "there are building that I can't explain", you have zero proof.
You're making a logic error. I have said this is a great mystery. You are saying no, it's explainable. The burden of proof falls on you. And you've failed to provide a plausible explanation. No, I didn't ignore, I rejected and said why.

There's too much arrogance here. It's very wearying. No one challenged the other contributors to prove anything else was great. I'm disgusted.
 
  • #37
22,089
3,286
I'm disgusted.
How sad... Disgusted by a little bit of intellectual discussion...

Here's my philosophy: whenever I say something, I accept that I can be challenged and I am always prepared to retract my claim or back it up. THAT is the core of science. The core of science is not to be disgusted by somebody challenging your world view.
 
  • #38
collinsmark
Homework Helper
Gold Member
2,909
1,293
There's unlimited evidence of a world-wide flood both on the physical earth and in ancient literature.
In bible related mythology there are references to a "great flood." The references are nowhere near unlimited, however. But the fact that it was called a "great" flood (at least in English translations) actually is on topic. :woot:

That's about where the evidence ends though.

Just think about. What would happen if all the water Earth's atmosphere -- all of it, every drop -- fell to the surface of the earth all at once. How would that affect the rise in sea-level?

How much water is in the atmosphere? According to this site (which references Gleick, P. H., 1996: Water resources. In Encyclopedia of Climate and Weather, ed. by S. H. Schneider, Oxford University Press, New York, vol. 2, pp.817-823), about 12.9 trillion cubic meters.

For a back-of-the-envelope calculation, note that the volume of a sphere is [itex] V = \frac{4}{3} \pi r^3 [/itex]. Thus
[tex] dV = 4 \pi r^2 dr. [/tex]
Rearranging,
[tex] dr = \frac{dV}{4 \pi r^2} [/tex]
Plugging in [itex] 12.9 \times 10^{12} [/itex] cubic meters into dV, and [itex] 6.371 \times 10^6 [/itex] meters into r, the radius of the Earth, tells us the sea level would rise somewhere around 2.5 cm. That's hardly enough to describe a flood of biblical proportions.

Finds of fossilized sea-life found atop mountains is expected due to plate tectonics (particularly in the role of mountain formation). Any claims that the sea life must have arrived there due to a great flood requires ignorance of plate tectonics and mountain formation.
 
  • Like
Likes Hoophy and Pepper Mint
  • #39
22,089
3,286
Finds of fossilized sea-life found atop mountains is expected due to plate tectonics
Right. What could change my mind however is that if the fossilized sea life atop mountains and on ALL other places stem from the exact same time period. This is actually a very simple test for the global flood.
 
  • #40
90
61
I think that ancient structures such as Stonehenge are pretty great because of the LACK of 'advanced' technology used during construction. I do not believe that the technology of the time was more advanced (or even close) to today's but PERHAPS (and therefore perhaps not) the builders used a method that we have not thought of yet. Now assuming they used a method we have not yet thought of I would argue that their technology is NOT more advanced, but rather different. I bet there are many many many ways to build, well anything really :) and it would be a shame to think that because we do not do different things as well as others that they are technologically superior. Maybe somebody just had a really good idea on how to place 'this or that log'. This different method that we are no longer aware of does not imply advanced technology. Surely there are many ways to build a Stonehenge and with enough time/people/LUCK we will have the same creative idea as the builders, or we will have a better idea on how to construct a Stonehenge (with their technology) and we might not be able to prove if the idea is the one that was used because it is another way to complete the same task. Take for example the Moai of Easter Island, for a long time we ('modern' humans) were clueless as to how the ancient builders were able to move the structures, but eventually we figured out a likely way they could have achieved it. It took creativity to rediscover the method just as it took creativity to figure out how to move the Moai originally. The natives of Easter Island did not have 'advanced' technology because we did not know how they did something, and even if we never did find out we could not assume they were technologically superior (as it has been proven they were not). In my OPINION this applies to all the baffling structures mentioned in this thread. The creativity and ingenuity these ancient engineers harnessed to build amazing structures with the rudimentary technology available is pretty GREAT to me, but even MORE GREAT is that to this day we are still pondering their accomplishments and trying to figure them out, we solve some mysteries and at the same time are continuing to be stumped with others. History would not surprise us if we knew it all. This is all my own opinion and I hope it does not make anybody mad! I am curious to hear the opinions of those who disagree with me and I will treat your opinions with respect as I hope you will show mine. Thanks! :D
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Monsterboy, 1oldman2, Sophia and 2 others
  • #41
90
61
I think that this is great. I would love to go see it myself one day.
 
  • Like
Likes Pepper Mint
  • #42
EnumaElish
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
2,304
124
Alexander - he's just great.

Danes can be great.

Grateful Dead?
 
  • Like
Likes Hoophy and 1oldman2
  • #43
1,448
1,203
Alexander - he's just great.

Danes can be great.

Grateful Dead?
Great Scott !!
 
  • Like
Likes EnumaElish
  • #44
phinds
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Gold Member
2019 Award
16,419
6,697
Jerry Lee Lewis' song Great Balls of Fire was great
 
  • Like
Likes EnumaElish and 1oldman2
  • #45
Evo
Mentor
23,153
2,796
Fresh butter.
 
  • Like
Likes Rubidium_71, collinsmark, Hoophy and 1 other person
  • #46
257
407
A cup of hot tea early in the morning is great.
 
  • Like
Likes Sophia
  • #47
44
31
Consciousness is great. Beauty is great. Dreaming is great. Everything is absurd, which is great.
 
  • #48
3,379
944
I guess the greatest of all things would be the Universe.
 
  • Like
Likes Sophia, EnumaElish and Hoophy
  • #49
45
19
Being free is great.:wink:
 
  • Like
Likes Hoophy, Sophia and EnumaElish

Related Threads on What in your opinion is great?

  • Last Post
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • Last Post
3
Replies
55
Views
8K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
441
  • Last Post
Replies
21
Views
3K
Replies
70
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
825
Top