#1151
Posted: 30/04/2006 01:10
Uzgred evo jedan text vezan za Sfinge u kojem se spominje starost od 4500 - 9000 godina
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3077390/
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3077390/
U pravu si nije stara 12 000 godina. (vjerovatno - pošto se ne može egzaktno utvrditi starost). Nova otkrica upućuju na to da je stara 7-10 hiljada godina.edosman wrote:Eh, vala ja ne trazio za necim u sta ne vjerujem.Goran_35 wrote:Edo,neda mi se,ali potrazi i naci ces sam.Ja sam licno o tome citao iz par naucnih casopisa i gledao par emisija na Discovery koje govore o ovom otkricu...
Strucnjaci su to potvrdili na osnovu erozije sfinge u odnosu na piramide...
Od mene trazite dokaze, a sami ih ne donosite. Nije fair.
Dakle vazi da nije stara 12.000 godina.
http://www.catchpenny.org/augustm.html
http://www.plim.org/sphinx.htm wrote: What new theory exists on the Sphinx?
Now the other view of the Great Sphinx was that its builder was a civilization that existed before the Egyptians. This civilization existed in the Ante-Diluvian age (i.e. before the great Flood). The time frame this group placed on the construction of the Sphinx is between 5,000 – 10,500 B.C. The Egyptians came later and built their tombs and temples along side and on top of these great structures.
Now the evidence consists of first ancient astronomical and astrological calculations of the stars and secondly of geological evidences that the Sphinx and other monuments of Giza suffered water erosion. It is this evidence that has turned the Egyptologists’ world upside down. Many have chosen to ignore the evidence.
Robert Bauval, a Belgian construction engineer, had a flair for astronomy. He saw that the monuments in the Giza region on the earth mimic various constellations in the sky. It was this piece of evidence that the Egyptologists had ignored.
He showed that the three pyramids align with the stars in the Orion constellation. Mathematicians and astronomers endorsed his calculation. Graham Hancock makes the following quotes about Bauval’s calculation. "…the Giza monuments as a whole were so arranged as to provide a picture of the skies not as they had looked in Fourth Dynasty around 2500 B.C., but as they looked…around the year 10,450 B.C."
Using Bauval’s method, archaeology-astronomy and the computer model for stars for 2,500 B.C. and 10,500 B.C. shows why the Sphinx has the form of a lion’s body. He showed that the Sphinx facing east or the raising sun is clearly a marker for the spring equinox. Now Leo is the zodiac sign that conforms to a lion’s body. The sun rose in the constellation or house of Leo during the time of the spring equinox 10,500 B.C. This was also at the same time the Orion constellation lined up with the pyramids and other monuments had aligned with various other constellations.
Secondly, a geologist at Boston University, Professor Robert Schoch, verified that water eroded the Sphinx. Geologists know scientifically that wind/sand erosion on limestone differs from water erosion. Schoch states that the pattern of erosion on the limestone body of the Sphinx is consistent with water erosion. Many of his colleagues back his findings.
The erosion "…is entirely consistent with precipitation-induced weathering where you have water, rain water beating down from above (p. 422)." He also placed the age of the Sphinx between 5,000 - 7,000 B.C.
John West says for a majority of the 4500 year period that the Sphinx was built, it would have been buried in sand up to its neck. This means that it could not have suffered wind/sand erosion if it was buried most of the time. There is no other monument that has suffered this type of erosion during this same period. Thus, the weathering was due to thousands of years of heavy rainfall, before the existence of Egypt.
Now these two findings permanently altered mankind’s view of the Sphinx and advanced ancient civilizations. It is the first time hard evidence has verified ancient legends and myths concerning previous advanced civilizations.
Even if these new findings are proven wrong, the old Egyptologists’ model of the Sphinx has been permanently changed from its rigid model that refused to reexamine itself in face of new evidence.
, ali osim njih postoje u Evropi još neki ( npr. ugrofinski ). Ako svi osim Baskijaca, kako kažeš, govore indogermanskim jezicima, ispada da su i nasi i svi ostali slavenski jezici zapravo germanski...što nije tačno, naravno.
Mozda se narod na putu od Kavkaza do Pirineja zaustavljao na Balkanu, tj. u Visokom? 
Jel iko znao da ono ispod Visocice postoji 