Photoshop. I forgot you are too busy to read an article.
I'm assuming many have heard Werewolves of London except maybe our southern most friends.
well that is the perennial problem with alternative theories. The artifacts themselves may be genuine (e.g. the Baghdad batteries) but the alternative theories range from plausible to insane. In the case of the "batteries" they can be used to produce electricity (with, I gather, a little bit of modification) but as you say there's literally no evidence that they were ever used for that purpose.*Well, I have no formal training in zoology, so cryptozoology is all good fun to me. I have formal engineering/technology training, so I feel more comfortable assessing artifacts. The Delhi Pillar is a great example of nationalists not really understanding metallurgy/chemistry. The Baghdad Battery, I think, is an example of an artifact where you need rose-tinted glasses to believe it was used for electroplating, given that we haven't found electroplated items from that era. The Saqqara bird/plane can't actually fly or glide!
I am a huge fan of a modern version of Daniken though: Graham Hancock. At times I wonder if he should change his name to Hankook, but he raises some interesting points.
.
Graham Hancock is a nutter
I too went through the Graham Hancock phase where I bought (hard copies, would you believe!) all his books. I like some of his theories, but dislike the way he twists the evidence to fit his wilder theories. I am still a fan.
I skim-read the article.
wait, what? Oh that's right, you believe the Piri Reis map is realnanoboy said:
but they did! They also visited NZ, as did the Portuguese, Spanish, Sumerians, Phoenicians, Arabians, Tamils, Chinese, Vikings, Celts, some of the African and South American tribes...
yes the map exists. I was referring to the "ice-free Antarctica" that is claimed by many people to be at the bottom. (As you know, the claim is that Piri Reis compiled his map from very much older maps passed down through the generations from when humans lived on Antarctica).
in contrast I believe it is literally impossible for humans to have lived in Antarctica in the distant past. Perhaps read up on the age of the ice cover of the continent....and I mean actual science, not "fringe science" or the ramblings of followers of Hancock, Hapgood et alnanoboy said:
At least you're sceptical of the 12,000 years ago date!!indeed there are (stories). NZ has the same sort of nutjobs writing books as other parts of the world. The Chinese explorers is the most famous one because of Gavin Menzies' books (which have been widely ripped to shreds by real historians). The Tamil story derives from the so-called Tamil bell (google it), a shifting buried shipwreck, and of course the fishing otters left behind by them (i.e. the waitoreke: google it). The Phoenicians established an entire colony in the central North Island before being wiped out by the Taupo eruption (the existence of these people has been proven by the rock carvings they left behind....which look suspiciously like the effects of root-action on the rocks but never mind). The Celts and Vikings left runes and woodhenges and things like that....apparently. The legendary Maori hero Maui (google him) was actually an Egyptian or Ethiopian or Sumerian or something (I forget the story now). The Arabians derives from the story of Sinbad (you know, the roc, which was actually a Harpagornis, and the giant snakes he saw were actually the heads and necks of giant moa sticking up above the undergrowth; the giant egg he found was naturally a moa egg). As you can see, all quite convincingnanoboy said:
do you even know what "plausible" means?nanoboy said:
so what did you think of the recent movie versions then?
The A Team was a complete travesty! So embarrassing. I didn't mind The Dukes Of Hazzard though, it was quite fun.QUOTE]
Dukes of Hazzard as you say was fun and really no more than that. I didn't watch the new A-Team film. My brother went to the cinema with his wife and on his return he told me that it would only annoy me on many levels if I saw it, so I took him for his word, many others since have said the same too, shame really.
I know that Antarctica has had ice on the order of hundreds of thousands to millions of years, but I can't see why there couldn't be people there, given that humans were capable of surviving the harsh conditions of an ice age and had the ability to travel long distances in ships. In addition, given the warming and cooling periods over the last few thousand years, I see no reason for some parts of Antarctica near the coast to have been ice free where a settlement/city could have been established. We are a pretty adventurous species. Until they found evidence of plants/trees there a few decades (?) ago, no one would have believed that plants could have survived there, ever! Looks like I have some reading to do about NZ tonight. Maybe I'll just skim it and ask you to summarise the webpages. *chuckle chuckle* All your NZ stories sound plausible to me though. I mean, until a couple generations ago, the "legend" of Vikings settling America was still just a saga right?
Yes, even here in Australia, we still have sea-faring people trying to settle on this island.