>>12092888

(Please read from the start)

Next I’m going to talk about the “Out-of-Place-Artifacts”, listed in this Wikipedia page, which are geographically located in the entire South American continent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Out-of-place_artifact

The first artifacts from South American continent I want to take a look at are what is called the Quimbaya artifacts:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quimbaya_artifacts

“The Quimbaya artifacts are several dozen golden objects, found in Colombia, made by the Quimbaya civilization culture, dated around 1000 CE, a few of which (the so-called Quimbaya airplanes) are supposed to represent modern airplanes, and therefore to be out-of-place artifacts. The whole of the figurines, measuring 2 to 3 inches (5 to 7.5 cm) each, are described in mainstream archaeology as depicting birds, lizards, amphibians and insects common in that region and period, some of them highly stylized, as in the Gold Museum, Bogotá.

In 1994, Germans Peter Belting and Conrad Lubbers created simplified radio-controlled scale models of these objects and showed that their models, which lack some convoluted features present in the real figurines, could fly.”

>> Not much said about them isn’t it anons? And apart the alien spacecraft theory, I didn’t find something satisfying about them in the alternative history.

However, while looking around, I did find an opinion/comment from a person whom said the Quimbaya look like a modern day fighter plane. Upon further image search, I found this side by side picture of the artifact compared to a fighter plane. They do look alike don’t they anons? They are similar. But I also found this picture of the Quimbaya with a detached piece of it, reminding me once more about the ejectable seat of the fighter plane pilot and how we see in movies that protective glass lid fly off so that the pilot’s seat can eject from the plane. So I found the imagery similarities interesing.

Next I found an interesting article combining both the Quimbaya artifacts and the Nazca airplane runway strips.

https://www.ancient-origins.net/unexplained-phenomena/ancient-runways-and-flying-fish-did-nazca-culture-take-flight-008662

“24 AUGUST, 2017 - CALEB STROM

Ancient Runways and Flying Fish: Did the Nazca Culture Take Flight?

The Nazca lines are still mysterious even after decades of being carefully studied. Archaeologists believe they know how they were made, but why they were made remains uncertain. Recently, researchers have suggested that the lines were related to fertility rituals involving the availability of water, but there are some people who still see something different in lines that are very long and straight. Some alternative thinkers argue that the straighter lines represent runways for ancient airports. Although it is possible that this is the case, the evidence found to support this position is insufficient so far.”

• Page 563 –

>>12103228

(Please read from the start)

>> How many times must they flip-flop about the Nazca lines, how they were made and what they were made for? Compare with what was written earlier about them. For me, we still haven’t figured out a zit about them.

“Were the Nazca Lines Airports for Ancient Aliens?

The Nazca designs consist of a variety of figures. Some are recognizable as animals, such as spiders and monkeys, while others are more abstract. There is also a subset of figures that consist simply of straight lines. Some of them are built at the tops of hills and appear to stop at the edges of cliffs. Unlike the other designs that are clearly figural, these resemble runways in their length and straightness. This has led some fringe theorists to suggest that these lines were ancient air strips or airports. Some people even suggest that the lines made on hills were specifically created for launching gliders.”

>> Not to mention that moutain tops were flattened (as we can see in attached picture) just to provide a smooth surface to “draw” the lines on; totally different from the hill side geoglyphs of the Paracas culture. Just the scale of the work required to flatten the mountain top is incredible.

“There are two main groups which say that these particular Nazca lines represent runways - those who believe that the Nazca geoglyphs were made by visiting extraterrestrials and those who believe that the Nazca people had flight technology and used it to make the lines. Proponents of both views point to the Tolima artifacts: gold figurines that sometimes resemble jet planes, as further evidence that ancient South Americans either possessed flight technology themselves or encountered flight technology produced by someone else, such as ancient aliens.”

>> Well, it seems I belong to the second set of people whom thinks old flying technology existed. I know it might be hard for some to even conceive this though because we’ve been under (((their))) heavy brainwashing for centuries now. But in this thread, we have met a lot of “strange” artifacts that indicate FLIGHT, if it’s not itself, the idea of it, did exist for a very long time. And there are some stuff that are totally hard to explain, like the layout of certain constructions and structures, like the Nazca lines which are impossible to “draw” unless having a bird’s view, along with some “special” type of “drawing technology”; like what is used in topography.

“The main problem with the extraterrestrial explanation is that there is no other clear evidence that suggests alien visitation. There is no evidence of crashed spaceships, spacecraft parts, rare metal alloys not normally found on earth, or anything else that could not have come from this planet - no indisputable evidence at least. Furthermore, analysis of the lines shows they were made by delicately removing topsoil to create these designs. A spaceship landing would probably have disrupted this fragile configuration.”

>> They’ve got a point here. Just seeing how much wind an airplane landing or departing creates is enough to blow away the line’s design. I know a lot of UFO society people believe there are MANY crashed alien spaceships that are kept hidden from the public by the cabal. But has it occurred to anyone that those “crashed” aircrafts might turn out belonging to an ancient civilization on Earth and not alien? Which brought me to the question = why did they crash? Think about it for now anons, I will explain this when I bring the whole puzzle together.

• Page 564 –

>>12103263

(Please read from the start)

“There is no evidence of parts of the lines being disrupted because of exhaust from landing spacecraft and you would expect such evidence to remain since the desert is not very windy. This is, in fact, why the Nazca lines have not been obscured by windblown material. Based on these facts, it is unlikely that extraterrestrials made any of the Nazca lines, including the alleged runways.”

>> I must admit, this is more convincing now = saying there is wind, but not strong, or barely windy to blow the lines away. Yup, this is better than what was said before about it.

“Runways for Forgotten Nazca Aircraft?

The Nazca lines would not have been hard for the Nazca people to make and experimental archaeology has shown that a team of people can make such lines within a few hours to a few days using only the technological means known to have been available to the ancient Nazca through archaeological evidence. As a result, Occam’s razor is friendlier to the idea that the Nazca culture made the lines - we have evidence that they lived in the area at the time and could have constructed the lines - whereas we don’t have evidence that extraterrestrials were ever present.”

>> I’m all for the Nazca being the ones whom made the lines, I never doubted that. But I do have a few problems with what was said. See, it’s not just how easy or hard it is to make those lines. I have a few problems like: what tools were used to create these lines (topographer tools) - like how on earth did the Nazca managed to flatten the mountain tops at this huge scale, in order to “draw” the lines and keep it leveled for kilometerrs? – How did the Paracas managed to “draw” the lines on hill sides and have them not crumble? Why didn’t they also use like the Nazca flat hill tops for their lines? So you see anons why I’m having a hard time with this theory of how the lines were supposedly “drawn”? It’s not as easy as it looks at first because the Nazca obviously prepared the terrain = flat mountain tops, well leveled, before “drawing” the lines, and I’m mostly curious to know what type of tools or machines were used to “draw” the lines for so many kilometers and mostly make those curves/semi circles. All I can think about is some sort of tools like what we see modern day topographers use. With this anyone whom knows how to operate the tool can draw perfect lines for kilometers in length = maybe sort of tool with a lens. I still didn’t figure out the perfect semi-cercle shapes though.

“Since it is most likely the Nazca people themselves made all the lines, some fringe theorists have logically concluded that the Nazca civilization must have had flight and other advanced technology because of the supposed runways. Proponents of this view point to Nazca geoglyphs that look vaguely mechanical, resembling windmills and hooks, to bolster their case.”

>> If anons look at the “runway” geoglyphs of the Paracas culture I’ve put some pictures of before, you will notice how close they were “drawn” near ruins = maybe housing, working or storing units. This means people walked there, among them….kids played and ran…..and yet, somehow, the lines that looked like airplane runways weren’t that damanged. When I looked closely to them, I see them more like spearheads or arrowheads.

• Page 565 –

>>12103306

(Please read from the start)

“Although this hypothesis is probably more likely, there are still problems with it. We must remember that just because a design looks one way to us, doesn’t mean that it looked that way to the Nazca. For example, they may have been using a particular style of art to represent natural features such as plants and animals that just by coincidence causes them to resemble machines to us since we live in the age of machines.”

>> Oh yes! I do agree with what is written here. If something looked a specific way to us, it doesn’t mean it meant the same thing for the Nazca culture. As an example of what I’m saying, I would like to ask anons to take a look at the Dendera Zodiac ceiling and see how the constellations are depicted (their design) differently than the standard ones we are acquainted with nowadays. So it’s tricky.

“Another example of this might be the nicknames archaeologists will give to artifacts that they do not recognize. Early hominids used what archaeologists call a “hand axe” even though, in reality, it was probably not used as a hand axe. It just happens to resemble an object in our culture that didn’t exist in the culture of Homo Ergaster which originally produced the “hand axe.” This could be the same with the Nazca designs.

One of these mechanical looking geoglyphs resembles a windmill. Experts have identified it as a flower, but some fringe thinkers insist that the Nazca would have done a better job at depicting a flower. If this design is compared to others that are more clearly flowers, however, it is very similar to some of the flowers. Therefore, it could just be that there was a variety of representations of a flower in the Nazca culture, some more closely resembling a flower as we see it today and others more abstract.

It should also be noted that straight lines are very common and not all straight paths made in history have been runways. As a result, the fact that they are long and straight does not mean that these lines are runways. Thus, both the apparent runways and the geoglyphs supposedly representing mechanical devices are, by themselves, too ambiguous to be used as evidence that the Nazca were more advanced than would be expected at the time.”

• Page 566 –

>>12279756

(Please read from the start)

“Similarly, the claims that these objects consist of metal, e.g. "a nickel-steel alloy which does not occur naturally" according to Jochmans, are contradicted by Cairncross and Heinrich. The fact that many of the web pages that make this claim also incorrectly identify the pyrophyllite quarries, from which these objects came, as the "Wonderstone Silver Mine" is evidence that these authors have not verified the validity of, in this case, misinformation taken from other sources since these quarries are neither known as silver mines nor has silver ever been mined in them in the decades in which they have been in operation.”

>> I’m actually more interested in their proprieties, like conductivity, than what type of metal they are made of.

“Heinrich notes that one of Michael Cremo's sources regarding the allegedly anomalous spheres was the Weekly World News, a satirical tabloid, which he described as an "unreliable source of data for discussing the origins of the South African spheres described as used by Forbidden Archeology". According to Cairncross, it appears that the source of the Weekly World News article is an earlier article by Barritt. This article appeared in a 1982 issue of Scope magazine about these objects. Additionally, Roelf Marx, as quoted in Cairncross and Pope and Cairncross, former curator of the Klerksdorp Museum, reports that he was misquoted regarding these objects. Marx was quoted in popular articles as saying that the objects rotated by themselves in vibration-free display cases in the Klerksdorp Museum. Instead, Marx stated that they rotated because of the numerous earth tremors generated by underground blasting in local gold mining. Similarly, inquiries of scientists, who studied these objects, have found that the claims that NASA found these objects to be either perfectly balanced, unnatural, or puzzling are unsubstantiated.”

>> For anons doubting if these artifacts are real = authentic or are just fakes, this paragraph answers those doubts: wherever (((they))) intervene to debunk something and/or ridicule it, you know (((they))) don’t want you looking into it.

“Published descriptions of these spheres being harder than steel are meaningless in terms of Mohs scale of mineral hardness. Steel can vary from 4 to 8 on the Mohs scale, depending on the type of alloy, heat treatment, and whether it is case-hardened or not. An examination of several Klerksdorp spheres found none to be harder than 5.0 on the Mohs scale. For comparison, common glass has a Mohs hardness of 5.5.”

• Page 601 –

>>12293663

(Please read from the start)

That was the Main Stream History view on the spheres, so now let’s hear what the Alternative History has to say about them: https://www.ancient-origins.net/unexplained-phenomena/28-billion-year-old-spheres-found-south-africa-how-were-they-made-002018

“29 AUGUST, 2014 -

2.8-Billion-Year-Old Spheres Found in South Africa: How Were They Made?

Spheres found in the mines of South Africa have piqued the curiosity of researchers for decades.

According to Michael Cremo and other researchers of prehistoric culture, these spheres add to a body of evidence suggesting intelligent life existed on Earth long before a conventional view of history places it here.”

>> I agree.

“Cremo has traveled the world gathering information on out-of-place artefacts (ooparts); he compiled his findings in the popular book, “Forbidden Archaeology: The Hidden History of the Human Race.”

In 1984, while investigating the spheres, he contacted Roelf Marx, curator of the museum of Klerksdorp, South Africa, where some of the spheres are kept. Marx described the spheres as being about 2.8 billion years old, with a very hard surface and a fibrous structure inside. He found them quite strange and puzzling.

Marx wrote, according to Cremo: “’There is nothing scientific published about the globes, but the facts are: They are found in pyrophyllite, which is mined near the little town of Ottosdal in the Western Transvaal. This pyrophyllite … is a quite soft secondary mineral with a count of only 3 on the Mohs scale [a scale of 1 to 10 to rank the hardness of minerals] and was formed by sedimentation about 2.8 billion years ago.

“On the other hand, the globes, which have a fibrous structure on the inside with a shell around it, are very hard and cannot be scratched, even by steel. The Mohs scale of hardness is named after Friedrich Mohs, who chose ten minerals as references points for comparative hardness, with talc the softest and diamond the hardest.”

Steel ranks about a 6.5 to 7.5 on the Mohs scale, so the spheres would be harder than that, according to Marx.”

• Page 602 –

>>12293672

(Please read from the start)

“Were They Naturally Formed?

Some say the spheres were formed by a natural process of concretion. Concretions are masses of hardened mineral matter.

Some of the so-called Klerksdorp spheres are elliptical in shape with rough ridges around the center. But some are so balanced in shape and proportion, and the grooves around them look so straight and hand-carved, it seems unlikely they were naturally formed, say proponents of the theory that these spheres were made by intelligent beings.”

>> Anons noticed something here? Re-read carefully that sentence followed by that paragraph. We can sort them to 2 categories. This wasn’t mentioned by the Main Stream History, in fact, if we re-read the Wikipedia page, (((they))) put the spheres all together in one big lot. But it’s clear that these spheres can be easily divided into 2 separate, distinct categories. We’ve seen this before with Wikipedia where (((they))) put ALL the elongated skulls in one basket, all together, without sorting them as to which one was elongated naturally and which one was artificially elongated. I think we are facing the same type of scenario here. I think both the Main Stream History and the Alternative History are correct about these spheres. I believe the Main Stream History picked one of the two categories, took samples from it and “scientifically” (supposedly) proved (((they))) were right. While the Alternative History is talking and studying the other lot. What a circus! All of these acrobatics for mere spheres? For me, it’s proof, there is a secret about these spheres (((they))) don’t want us to find out about it.

Notice the picture I’ve attached to this page anons: we have 2 different types of objects here:

1- The first has more like an egg shape = ovoid, not all though. The surface is polished (more or less), I mean it’s smooth and most are smaller in size. They also have 2 very notable characteristics about them:

A- The reddish-brown coloring.

B – The two parallel lines made via incision on the diameter.

An incision is when you make a mark or a cut into a surface using a sharp tool, like what I showed in the picture I’ve attached.

• Page 603–

>>12293681

(Please read from the start)

2- The second has a spherical shape. Their surface is rugged to the touch and it’s not smoothly polished. The coloring is different and they are genrally bigger in size. Looking closely to the circumference, at the diameter, there are no incisions but there is a “bump” – well actually it looks like an Obi belt wrapped around the sphere at its diameter. It’s not separate from the sphere, it’s part of it = just making the diameter thicker, shaping it into a band wrapped around it.

I don’t know about you anons, but for me, I see 2 distinct artifacts, not ONE. And maybe (just a hypothesis from me) both were mixed together on purpose to blur the truth about the reddish brown spheres. I’ve looked around on the net for as many pictures as I can and for me it’s clear we are looking at 2 different artifacts that are similar in shape = spheres, but they are not the same. It’s just my personal take, I might be totally wrong on this, so I will ask anons reading to make up their own mind about this issue.

“In 2002, the Klerksdorp Museum posted a letter from John Hund of Pietersburg, South Africa, on its website. The claims made in this letter were not verified, according to geologist Paul V. Heinrich , and the letter was later removed. Hund stated that one of the spheres was tested at the California Space Institute, and scientists concluded that its balance “is so fine, it exceeded the limit of their measuring technology.” It was “within one-hundred thousandths of an inch from absolute perfection.”

Heinrich did not find the South African spheres he studied perfectly balanced and shaped.”

>> I think it depends on which lot you took the samples from. That’s why we have different test results.

“Moqui Marbles of Utah

In Utah, similar spheres were found. They are about 2 million years old, and they are known as Moqui marbles or Moqui balls. Legend holds that the departed ancestors of the Hopi Native Americans would play games with the marbles and leave them as messages to their relatives that they are happy and well.

Moqui marbles have a sandy interior and a hard, round exterior made of iron oxide. Heinrich’s tests on one of the Klerksdorp spheres showed it to be made of hematite, a mineral form of iron oxide. He found another Klerksdorp sphere consisted of the mineral wollastonite along with hematite and geothite, a hydrated iron oxide.”

>> Anons, these spheres from Utah, fall into the second category of spheres I’ve mentioned at the beginning of this page. These are not the Klerksdorp spheres. Notice the details, how rough the surface is, the coloring, and mostly there are NO incision marks. (((They))) surely pulled a good trick with these spheres = combining, mixing the REAL Klerksdorp spheres with the second group, putting everything in one basket, making one LOT of them without any type of difference or identification.

• Page 604 –

>>12293705

(Please read from the start)

“Various theories for exactly how these spheres may have been made are presented by those who say they are natural phenomena. Dr. Karrie Weber at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln is researching microbes that she has said may have helped form the spheres out of the by-products of its life processes.

Geologist Dave Crosby, who has done research in Utah where the Moqui marbles are found, originally hypothesized that a meteor impact scattered molten spheres that then condensed on sand grains. Upon closer examination, as explained on RocksandMinerals.com, he found no evidence of a meteor impact. He then developed a theory that involves rainwater dissolving iron and other minerals and carrying them to the groundwater. As they flow through the groundwater, the ions are deposited around sand grains forming spheres.

Cremo, and others who hold that parts are evidence of advanced prehistoric civilizations, say mainstream scientists need to be more bold and more willing to acknowledge evidence that could contradict dominant views.”

>> Why didn’t he do a test = experimented it by re-creating his theory?

The last point to talk about when it comes to these spheres is their resemblance to the Pyrite spheres we’ve seen in a chamber under the temple of the Feathered Serpent in Teotihuacan (p. 300). Those spheres from Teotihuacan have a core made of clay and unknown organic material, and they are covered with a layer of Pyrite. It is also said that no one can establish their function because it’s the first time anyone seeing something of the sort.

Then in page 299, they mentioned that the underground chamber where these spheres were discovered there was a mercury pool and “The walls and ceiling of the tunnel were found to have been carefully impregnated with mineral powder composed of magnetite, pyrite (fool's gold), and hematite to provide a glittering brightness to the complex, and to create the effect of standing under the stars as a peculiar re-creation of the underworld.”

Anons noticed the components: Pyrite, magnetite, hematite = a déjà vu, right? If we look closely to the surface of the spheres in Teotihuacan we notice their surface is rugged, rough, not smooth. They look extremely close to the second category of spheres we’ve been talking about. They don’t have the brown/reddish coloring, nor the polished, smooth surface, nor the ovoid shape and surely no incisions on the diameter.

• Page 605 –

>>12293720

(Please read from the start)

Another common point about the Teotihuacan spheres and the second category spheres is their electro-magnetic characteristics. So why do we have such spheres underground in a Chamber of the Feathered Serpent Temple? They sprinkled pyrite and hematite dust to make the ceiling glitter as if it’s some sort of star dust. So what happens if these Teotihuacan spheres and the second category spheres are placed on the walls and ceilings then an electrical current passes through them? = Using Tesla’s way to transfer electricity of course. Will they “shine” or “light up” like…light bulbs? Or will they create some type of magnetic field?

For me, this is another proof that Teotihuacan was founded and built by Flood survivors as I’ve mentioned before. And these survivors brought their ancient electrical knowledge with them and tried to re-create the ancient material they had in order to conduct electricity in dark chambers and light them up. We also see echoes of this idea behind the Dendera light bulb (starting page 101).

This is how they re-created the Teotihuacan spheres and the chances are high the second category of spheres fall in the same line. As for the first category of spheres, the ones with reddish/brown coloring and incisions in them, well….I’m thinking we are looking to the original, authentic material here: as in the spheres used before the Flood. But since the survivors didn’t have the necessary tools to re-create the perfect balanced spheres of pre-flood, they created a bit rugged looking spheres = close enough to the old ones.

This is how I see this spheres issue:

1– Before Flood spheres: The Klerksdorp reddish/brown spheres with incisions.

2– After Flood spheres: A – Naturally formed spheres.

B – Spheres made by Flood survivors.

I always wondered from where (((they))) got the idea of the scarabs on the wall from the movie: The Mummy. I wonder if this is where (((they))) got inspiration from because no matter how much I look or wreck my brain, I’ve never ever read or heard of such scarabs on walls in Ancient Egypt, in all of my archaeological life. I know it’s different from the spheres, but still, the idea behind it is close. I’ve attached some pictures from the movie to this page for anons to have a visual.

Is this far-fetched anons? Yeah! Maybe. Just think about it for now.

This is it for the Klerksdorp spheres.

• Page 606 –