Cathedrals: Who really built them?

BrokenAgate

Well-known member
Messages
367
Reactions
1,319
No longer accepting the modern paradigm leaves one free to consider alternative ideas about who did what, and when. Who built the world's cathedrals? Was the Catholic Church really responsible for them, as we have been told?

Cathedral Building in the Middle Ages - Durham World Heritage Site

babel 296.jpg

We are led to believe that these men are building a cathedral. If so, it isn't a very impressive one. They seem to be constructing a primitive tower of some sort, rather than a grand and glorious house for the spirit of the Lord. Putting up images like this in an article about cathedral building is highly disingenuous. We don't really know what this is intended to show, since it has been removed from whatever manuscript it was found in.

How were cathedrals built?

untitled.png

This could be any construction site, really. There's a guy walking in a wheel that's used to pull supplies up from the ground level. Would that work for these top ten tallest church buildings? 10 Tallest Church Buildings In The World - 10 Most Today What a workout that man would get! Glutes of iron for the glory of God!

Europe - Gothic Cathedrals

gothic_cathedrals2.jpg

gothic-cathedral-interior.jpgMilan-Duomo-Rooftop.jpg
Look at the details of this architecture. Does it seem like the sort of thing that could have been done in the 800s to 1200s, when we are told that all the cathedral building happened? Does this even remotely resemble the pictures before it, of men laboring to build simple tower structures using wheels and ladders?

Building in the Middle Ages This site is all about cathedral construction techniques, with artists' impressions of what the work sites might have looked like. I guess this would be fine for simpler, smaller churches, but when I look at the Top Ten Tallest, and try to reconcile it with what I see in these drawings, my head just won't accept it.

cathedral_building.jpg

Here is another image of alleged construction of a church. Tripods of wood for hoisting cut stones that were dragged to the site by horses and oxen, man-powered lifting wheels, wooden cranes.... Sorry, I just don't buy it.

And there is another reason why I can't accept it. The Catholic Church was well known as an institution of utter depravity. They rounded up heretics by the thousands and killed them in slow and horrible ways--flaying them alive, burning them at the stake, tossing their children and infants alive into fires, spreading their infernal, Satanic religion through war, terrorism, slavery, and fear. They traveled to other countries and did the same, butchering the native population and enslaving the children in religious boarding schools. It just doesn't seem possible that people with this kind of mentality would be spiritually capable of creating the sublime works of art and architecture that are the cathedrals of the world. Just seeing these churches in photographs is enough to make one gasp in wonder at the sheer beauty of it all. Trying to imagine Christianity of the 9th through the 13th Centuries creating such things is like imagining the Hitler regime doing the same. They didn't. They couldn't.

And of course, there is the undeniable presence of loads of high technology in the form of spires, rods, metal rooftops, and huge pipe organs. We now know that these are more than mere decoration, they served the purpose of gathering electrical energy from the atmosphere. These buildings were not originally churches, but power stations for entire communities, although they probably served other purposes, too. Nowadays, we build on the assumption that a thing that is useful should not also be beautiful to look at and pleasant to be near; back then, things were very different.

I think we are faced with the likelihood that the Church did not really build much of anything, certainly not the Gothic Cathedrals. They found these things already in place and simply modified or repaired them, adding some paintings and mosaics of Jesus and the saints to lay claim to what they did not, and could never, build themselves. We cannot find very many paintings or illustrations from the Middle Ages showing the churches under construction. What we do see is very primitive, certainly nothing we would associate with a tower nearly 200 feet high and topped with a gigantic metal cone. We are probably seeing some reconstruction going on, repair work that could be easily undertaken by unpaid labor using simple tools...unpaid, or paid very little, because of course, it was very easy to convince them they were working for the glory of God and Christ.
 

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
4,250
Reactions
17,006
Thank you, it's about time the issue got its own thread. It appears that our current civilization lives in accordance with our tech advancement. We do not jump over our heads, and live up to what we have. The medieval cathedrals are mind boggling. A simple question of why they would even fathom an idea of building something like that with the tools they had, has no real answer. There are plenty of plausible ones, but they are just that - convenient answers. I do not believe for a second that cathedrals had anything to do with either worshiping or religion.

Here is the Medieval Carriage, by the way. How many trips of those would they need to build any one Cathedral?

1455
Kobelwagen,_Jean_Le_Tavernier,_nach_1455.jpg

Additionally we have these weird time frames where they build for a 200 years, stop for 400 hundred years and finish the construction in the 19th century. A good example of this issue would be the Cologne Cathedral.
  • Construction of Cologne Cathedral began in 1248 but was halted in 1473, unfinished. Work did not restart until the 1840s, and the edifice was completed to its original Medieval plan in 1880.
A bit related here: Single photo: 1856 photo of Cologne Cathedral and 15th century crane
 

Onthebit

Well-known member
Messages
218
Reactions
717
I live outside a 'village' of at best 100 people (half of those are a recent subdivision) and there are 2 old churches....Merrickville where I lived this summer must have 20 (much older churches imo)...it's insane the # of churches vs the population....ffs it can't make sense to anyone.....
 

Ice Nine

Well-known member
Messages
752
Reactions
3,236
Jeez Louise , yes! What a topic. I'm always thinking how in the hell did they build these things in the 12th-16th century. They are left from a prior advanced civilization, that makes the most sense to me for an explanation. But I have to do some more digging to see what else was "suppose" to be going on then. I don't think they were originally places of worship.

This is mainstream explanations, but just look at the pictures! :LOL:

10 Defining Characteristics of Gothic Architecture
The Gothic technique - extending from the 12th to 16th centuries - was a predominant architectural style of the medieval era, bookended by the Romanesque and the Renaissance periods. It marks a definitive shift from the earlier 'dumpy' Romanesque churches to lighter, taller cathedrals - the changing socio-religious climate wrought structural innovations that revolutionized ecclesiastical architecture.
The name 'Gothic' is retrospective; Renaissance builders scoffed at the whimsical construction devoid of symmetry, and used the term as a derisive reference to the barbarous Germanic tribes that pillaged Europe in the third and fourth centuries - the Ostrogoths and the Visigoths. Gothic architecture was erroneously seen as the product of a largely uncouth, chaotic, and superstitious era, while the truth was very different. It has since come to be regarded as the ultimate icon of scholasticism - a movement which sought to reconcile spirituality and religion with rationality.
Gothic architecture is acknowledged for spawning new structural marvels, phantasmagorical plays of light and raising the bar for cathedral construction everywhere - even by contemporary standards. Here are some characteristics your standard Gothic cathedral will showcase.

Spires

These are tapering architectural elements that often replaced the steeple to lend an impression of loftiness. Gothic cathedrals often feature profuse spiring, giving the impression of battlements - symbolic of a religious fortress protecting the faith. Openwork spires are perhaps the most common; this elaborate spire consisted of stone tracery held together by metal clamps. It had the ability to achieve radical heights while lending a feeling of lightness through its skeletal structure.


Flying Buttress

Spider-leg like in appearance, a flying buttress was originally instated as an aesthetic device. Later, they were converted into ingenious structural devices that transferred the dead-load of the vaulted roof to the ground. To add a degree of stiffness to the structure, they were stepped back from the main wall and connected to the roof via arching supports. The buttress now ‘carried’ the vault, freeing the walls of their load-bearing function. This allowed the walls to become thinner or almost completely replaced by glass windows, unlike in the Romanesque where walls were massive affairs with very less glazing. The buttresses enabled Gothic architecture to become lighter, taller and afford a greater aesthetic experience than before.

Gargoyles

The gargoyle (derived from the French word gargouille, meaning gargle) is a sculptural waterspout, placed to prevent rainwater from running down masonry walls. These numerous grimacing sculptures divided the flow among them, minimizing potential water damage. Gargoyles were sculpted on the ground and placed as the building neared completion. St. Romanus is often associated with the gargoyle; legend speaks of him saving Rouen from a snarling dragon that struck terror even in the heart of spirits. Known as La Gargouille, the beast was vanquished and its head mounted on a newly built church, as an example and warning. While the gargoyle has been around since Egyptian times, prolific use of the element in Europe is attributed to the Gothic era. Profusely grouped upon several cathedrals, it heightens a sense of allegory and the fantastic.

Pinnacles

Unlike the flying buttress, the pinnacle started out as a structural element meant to deflect the pressures of the vaulted roof downward. They were imbued with lead, literally ‘pinning down’ the sideways pressures of the vault, served as counterweights to extended gargoyles and overhanging corbels and stabilized flying buttresses. As their aesthetic possibilities began to be known, pinnacles were lightened and the flying buttress was structurally developed to handle the vaulted roof. Pinnacles are profusely used to break the abrupt change in slenderness, as the church building gives way to the mounted spire, lending the building a distinctively Gothic, tapering appearance.

Pointed Arch

Recorded for the first time in Christian architecture during the Gothic era, the pointed arch was used to direct the weight of the vaulted roof downward along its ribs. Unlike the earlier Romanesque churches which depended solely on the walls to carry the immense weight of the roof, the pointed arches helped restrict and selectively transfer the load onto columns and other load-bearing supports, thereby freeing up the walls. It no longer mattered what the walls were made of, since (between the flying buttress and the pointed arch) they were no longer carrying any loads - thus the walls of Gothic cathedrals began to be replaced by large stained-glass windows and tracery.

Tracery

Tracery refers to a series of thin stone frames, inlaid in window openings to support the glass. Bar tracery found expression in the Gothic period, with its lancet-and-oculus pattern that aimed at conveying a slenderness of design, and increasing the amount of glass paneling. Unlike in plate tracery, thin stone mullions were used to divide the window opening into two or more lancets. Y tracery was a specific variety of bar tracery that separated the window head using thin bars of stone, splitting in the shape of a Y. These delicate web-like tracings helped increase the glass-to-stone ratio and grew into florid detail as Gothic architecture developed further.


The Oculus

Two specific window designs were established during the Gothic period - the narrowly pointed lancet reinforced height, while the circular oculus held stained-glass. As height grew less of an objective with Gothic builders, the latter half of the Rayonnant Gothic saw structures reduced to an almost-skeletal, diaphanous frame. Windows were expanded and walls replaced by traceried glass. An immense oculus on the triforium wall of churches formed a rose window, the largest of which is found at St. Denis. Divided by stone mullions and bars, it held radiating stone spokes like a wheel and was placed below a pointed arch.

Ribbed Vault

Gothic architecture replaced Romanesque groin vaults with ribbed vaults to counteract complexities of construction and limitations that allowed it to only span square rooms. Also known as ogival vaulting, ribbed vaulting developed with the need to transfer roof-loads better, while freeing up inner walls for tracery and glass. More ribs were added to the basic Romanesque barrel vault to increase the transfer of loads to the ground. As the Gothic era achieved its zenith, complex vaulting systems such as the quadripartite and sexpartite vaulting techniques were developed. The development of ribbed vaulting reduced the need for inner load-bearing walls, thereby opening up the inner space and providing visual and aesthetic unity.

Fan Vault

One of the most obvious distinctions between the English and French Gothic styles, fan vaulting was used exclusively in English cathedrals. The ribs of the fan vault are curved equally and equidistantly spaced, giving it the appearance of an open fan. The fan vault was also applied during the reconstruction of Norman churches in England, doing away with the need for flying buttresses. Fan vaulting was used profusely in ecclesiastical buildings and chantry chapels.

Statue Column

The Early Gothic era showcases some of the most detailed sculpture of the period. It was not uncommon to find statues that were of ‘structural’ nature, carved from the same stone as the column that held up the roof. Often depicting patriarchs, prophets, and kings, they were placed in the porches of later Gothic churches to lend an element of verticality. These larger-than-life depictions may also be spotted in the embrasures on either side of cathedral entrances. In France, column-statues often depicted rows of finely-dressed courtiers, reflecting the prosperity of the kingdom.

10 Defining Characteristics of Gothic Architecture

And here are 39 more Gothic Buildings, they are all quite unbelievable, especially if some were built in 1200. It's actually pretty astounding what they were supposedly building, some almost 900 years ago, we sure dropped the ball somewhere along the lines. If mankind was building things like these, we should be really building better stuff now.

The 39 Greatest Constructions of Gothic Architecture in the World
 
Last edited:

Timeshifter

Well-known member
Messages
427
Reactions
1,387
Something about these massive builds that does not ring true, I always thought the same with the pyramids, why would anyone commission something that would take 2 or 3 lifetimes to build.

In the UK, in my favourite city, The Liverpool Anglican Cathedral took 74 years to build, at a cost today of 3 billion UK pounds!! Built utilising tech from 1904 up to 1978...supposedly, except whatever tech they used, I believe that they don't want us to know. I could find very little evidence of its creation, in photos all but one look like renovations-additions...

cathbuildearly.jpg

376695.jpg

Also 2 images below suposedly from 1934 show the Cathederal in differing states of completion...

images.jpeg

liverpools-anglican-cathedral-under-construction.jpg

images_full_373.jpg

Strange lack of public photos for a relatively modern build and photography everywhere even by 1904. No images of the foundation stone or opening by royalty? Spidy senses tingling...

So I headed to the cathedral website archives to find more only to be met by this, astonishing admission (IMO) of a cover up.. they have their own secret stash of evidence which we are not allowed to view...

‘The Archive department of Liverpool Cathedral is a unique collection of drawings, letters, and artefacts relating to the building and history of the Cathedral from the beginning of the 20th century’.

‘Although it is not possible to have personal access to the collection, we are always happy to answer queries and regularly respond to email and telephone enquiries, especially where family members may have had an historic link to the Cathedral’.

Wow! Link below.

Liverpool Cathedral - Cathedral Archives

What could the reasons be? It seems even to this day there’s much secrecy around some of these buildings. I have been in the Cathedral, it is monstrous, a place of worship? The organ and acoustics in their are meant to be felt, not heard. You could also house a thousand families in it.

As an aside, the Liverpool Metropolitan Cathedral was originally designed to have the popular ‘dome’ but ended up looking like a wigwam. Strangely there is lots of public info on its design and construction.

liverpool metropoliton cathedral construction - Google Search:

I’m sure these older Cathedrals in the Op were knocked up in a much shorter time than we are told, using tech we don’t yet understand, perhaps something akin to the coral castle.
 
Last edited:

Ice Nine

Well-known member
Messages
752
Reactions
3,236
@Timeshifter , that's crazy nobody can see the pictures, well or not. I think it was being remodeled, spruced up, not built from scratch.

I'm always dumbfounded by the massive size(s) in more than a few respects. First off why do humans our size need buildings with up to 156 foot high ceilings. And built, supposedly, in a time where, come on, that couldn't have been easy. It actually seems quite insane to me.

List_of_highest_church_naves

And let's notice how big the doors are :eek: jeez regular humans look like ants near these doors.

20110724_Milan_Cathedral_5255.jpg
Honestly, I'm starting to feel like there was a race of giants building these, seems to be the best explanation I can come up with.
 
Last edited:
OP
BrokenAgate

BrokenAgate

Well-known member
Messages
367
Reactions
1,319
These are tapering architectural elements that often replaced the steeple to lend an impression of loftiness. Gothic cathedrals often feature profuse spiring, giving the impression of battlements - symbolic of a religious fortress protecting the faith.
They certainly are very sure of themselves, aren't they? :/
 

whitewave

Well-known member
Messages
1,570
Reactions
5,065
@Korben Dallas:
  • Construction of Cologne Cathedral began in 1248 but was halted in 1473, unfinished. Work did not restart until the 1840s, and the edifice was completed to its original Medieval plan in 1880.
In 1880 the original 1248 plans were still available? Where were those stashed for 632 years? And the paper didn't crumble to dust after that time? Someone should alert the Vatican that they can quit spending money on climate controlled rooms for their (our) documents. Apparently paper with detailed drawings can sit on dusty shelves subject to leaky roofs for over 600 years and still be perfectly fine.
 

jd755

Well-known member
Messages
808
Reactions
2,176
Been up close to york minister a long time ago and it appears to be cast in place as concrete is today...likely it is an unknown 'concrete' recipe stored away from prying eyes...

the thing that i find striking though is given their size it is truly amazing so few of them were bombed in world war 2 or are taken out by the current terrapin ensemble said to be wandering european countries...

as with all 'stone' buildings they appear to be impossible to date even using the calendar we are told is correct (not a thousand years out)...oldest building in appearance round these parts we are told is a cistercian monastery aged over 800 and yet in a strange twist even the mainstream insist it wasn't built by the cistercians but by another order of monks who fell on hard times so simply handed it over to the cistercians...

a wander around it reveals it has weathered a fair bit but made of sandstone one would expct that however there are a lot of 'bits' of it in the local buildings and they do not often show the same level of weathering so go figure as the saying goes...
number one son who is as utterly convinced as i am that the mainstream is a bunch of lies has discovered at least one ley line crosses the valley in which the monastry sits right under the monastry itself...
i'll lay odds all cathedrals do the same...

the buildings on the ley lines do appear to me to be relay stations of earth energies charging up and moderating the lines themselves and as such places where heaven and earth truly connect.
 

wild heretic

Well-known member
Messages
77
Reactions
302
It appears that for us, everything might have started between the 1400s (more or less) and the emergence of the first ruin paintings in the 16th century.

Chances are, them giants were just a bit prior.
Funnily enough that would fit with a couple of other pieces of circumstantial evidence. One of which is Pangea earth. At least 90% of the expansion of the Earth when looking at old maps occurred from around this time (circa 1400 or 1400s AD possibly) and continued in continually less aggressive spurts until the last one I have detected which is around the mid to late 1700s (only a 6 degree eastward expansion of the Pacific Ocean).

The next question is: was everyone a giant in the middle ages or were there two or more differing height groups co-existing?

It's an incredible topic really. Maybe we will stumble on more clues as time goes on.
Been up close to york minister a long time ago and it appears to be cast in place as concrete is today...likely it is an unknown 'concrete' recipe stored away from prying eyes...

the thing that i find striking though is given their size it is truly amazing so few of them were bombed in world war 2 or are taken out by the current terrapin ensemble said to be wandering european countries...

as with all 'stone' buildings they appear to be impossible to date even using the calendar we are told is correct (not a thousand years out)...oldest building in appearance round these parts we are told is a cistercian monastery aged over 800 and yet in a strange twist even the mainstream insist it wasn't built by the cistercians but by another order of monks who fell on hard times so simply handed it over to the cistercians...

a wander around it reveals it has weathered a fair bit but made of sandstone one would expct that however there are a lot of 'bits' of it in the local buildings and they do not often show the same level of weathering so go figure as the saying goes...
number one son who is as utterly convinced as i am that the mainstream is a bunch of lies has discovered at least one ley line crosses the valley in which the monastry sits right under the monastry itself...
i'll lay odds all cathedrals do the same...

the buildings on the ley lines do appear to me to be relay stations of earth energies charging up and moderating the lines themselves and as such places where heaven and earth truly connect.
Reminds me of a you tube video I saw years ago about churches really being portals between dimensions in the "old days" so humans could communicate directly with god or the gods, and even physically move to/from heaven and earth. Not sure on its validity, but one of the points was that all the English churches resided on the intersections of ley lines, supposedly.

No chance on finding the video now. Might not exist today.

Pure speculation, but maybe the ley network has been closed down due to abuse in the past, or some other reason requiring the earth to be quarantined. Maybe "UFOS" are inter-dimensional vehicles (which supposedly travel along the ley line network) and can bypass this quarantine using technology?

Just throwing a few ideas out there.
 
Last edited:

Ice Nine

Well-known member
Messages
752
Reactions
3,236
Good stuff here, wish we could just sit and talk in person, it would be easier. I've been thinking we need to know what else was going on in the world at the about the same time as all these huge not Cathedrals were being constructed.

My mind wandered off thinking about the very famous Kailasa Temple in India. Cave 16, called The Kailasa or Kailasanatha Temple, is the unrivalled centerpiece of Ellora. This gargantuan structure—designed to recall Mount Kailash, the abode of Lord Shiva—looks like a freestanding, multi-storied temple complex, but it was carved out of one single rock, and covers an area double the size of Parthenon in Athens.

I just want to share something about it, that to me is very relevant. "They" say this was constructed in the 8th century, Please bear in mind that I'm of the opinion that these "rock cut" Temples were being unearthed, not carved/constructed.

I'm honestly not going off topic, maybe this bit of info will spark another idea from somebody else on here.

Virtually indestructible Cathedrals and indestructible Temples. If they were originally some sort of power stations, energy collectors, they could have been charged with electrical currents so many times it affected the stone, made it even harder. As brought up by Peter Mungo Japp of The Thunderbolts he puts forth petrification as instantaneous and under the control of dynamic Earth-shaking events.
My long winded point is, virtually indestructible stone structures. Instantaneous petrification? can stone be made harder than it already is?
Now this seem very impractical, still I feel there is some connection.

The Temple that Could Not be Destroyed
There is an interesting tale about the Kailasa Temple that dates to the Mughal period. During the reign of the Emperor Aurangzeb, an attempt was made by the Mughals to destroy the temple. Aurangzeb had already destroyed countless Hindu temples, and had intended to add the Kailasa Temple to this list. It is said that 1000 workers were sent to dismantle the temple. Three years passed, and the temple only suffered minimal damage, i.e. several disfigured or broken statues. Realizing that it was impossible to completely destroy the temple, Aurangzeb finally gave up

The Temple that could not be destroyed

@jd755
#11
"Been up close to york minister a long time ago and it appears to be cast in place as concrete is today...likely it is an unknown 'concrete' recipe stored away from prying eyes..." I'm still thinking about this, "appears to be cast in place".
 
Last edited:

dreamtime

Well-known member
Messages
575
Reactions
3,024
Funnily enough that would fit with a couple of other pieces of circumstantial evidence. One of which is Pangea earth. At least 90% of the expansion of the Earth when looking at old maps occurred from around this time (circa 1400 or 1400s AD possibly) and continued in continually less aggressive spurts until the last one I have detected which is around the mid to late 1700s (only a 6 degree eastward expansion of the Pacific Ocean).
The next question is: was everyone a giant in the middle ages or were there two or more differing height groups co-existing?

The earth expansion is the only explanation to me why the entire world appears to be so weakened all of the sudden, to be overrun by a parasitic force.

I still don't get why, coincidentally, Europe was spared most of the damage where that force originates from. It's puzzling.

Nevertheless, if the expanded earth came with new properties that made people smaller, I think that would have happened suddenly. So basically, everyone was gigantic in size, relative to us. It was simply normal, and the buildings were created appropriately. When the earth changed with it's new electro-physical properties, all organisms on earth adapted within a single generation, and there was a large die-off. The more famous of older generation humans were buried in the mounds. The young children and babies simply stopped growing tall and were quick to adapt. The parents died. The new earth properties basically took away most of the abilities that humans had gathered and developed throughout the ages. It created a new human.

In that way all of the sudden 90% of the knowledge on earth could have died if the earth changes affected the older people mostly. Then a couple of larger people were left, and the "children" built myths around those, who tried to give their remaining knowledge to the new generations. Yes, "there were giants on earth in those days", but they were us. The calamity created two different sorts of people: Those few with old powers, and the majority without. The god-slave relationship was born. Our entire history is the history of our relationship with ourselves, in different forms. At the same time, the changes make humans obsessed with health, to preserve the pre-catastrophe conditions, so they develop all kinds of technology to increase their electro-magnetic energy and frequency. So a large part of the new society is focused on remembering and keeping the level they had before.

Our original ancestors could have been extremely developed people, even the so called gods with custom animals heads. Everything is possible with genetic engineering.

Lets say the earth changes and those original humans die out mostly. Basically the majority of giants would have died out, but maybe there was some time in-between with older giants still left, but the children already grown up. It would basically be a gigantic devolution event, and come with a regression in knowledge and spirituality. Some of the last original humans mate with the smaller humans, produce mixed humans who become the leaders of old, but they disappear into the gene pool with each watered down generation. Now the elite is obsessed with tracing down their roots to those old humans.

Amazingly all of this could explain our religious myths, and completely come without any alien force. It would be us all of the time throughout history, only us.

You then have different factions developing, obviously the one striving for dominance, secrecy and control of this new world where everything has to be re-negotiated. And there would be those who want to preserve the old knowledge and live in harmony. Basically the story of our religions. Obviously the group striving for secrecy has a large benefit over the other, and maybe humanity did not have much experience with evil at that time. This whole experience could be something very new to us.
 
Last edited:

Ice Nine

Well-known member
Messages
752
Reactions
3,236
@dreamtime I really, really like your theory, it makes a lot of sense. And I'm also thinking this is correct:
"Amazingly all of this could explain our religious myths, and completely come without any alien force. It would be us all of the time throughout history, only us."
Although I can't discount all the worldwide myths and legends about our ancestors coming from above, it could still have just been us. We were the Annunaki, the makers, we just forgot.
 

0harris0

Well-known member
Messages
120
Reactions
292
@dreamtime I really, really like your theory, it makes a lot of sense. And I'm also thinking this is correct:
"Amazingly all of this could explain our religious myths, and completely come without any alien force. It would be us all of the time throughout history, only us."
Although I can't discount all the worldwide myths and legends about our ancestors coming from above, it could still have just been us. We were the Annunaki, the makers, we just forgot.
this resounds very strongly with me.. i always found it too strange that our ancestors (with no lesser minds than ours) would have chosen to live in caves.. the concept of "primitive" cave-dwelling ancestors yet, physiologically, no different to us, what makes them primitive?? the only reason I'd be living in a cave is if I were hiding from something, surviving a cataclysm or the like :)
Post automatically merged:

and also ties in with the hindu concept of Yugas.. age of greatness, turning to ages of ignorance, and back, and around, so forth, etc :p

we lost our way, and getting back is the confusing part!! (physically and spiritually) o_O
 

wild heretic

Well-known member
Messages
77
Reactions
302
Well judging by the floor height, there could have been distinct sizes.

Kind of like this, I guess.

Yeah it's funny that as soon as I posed the question I was on a you tube video by Phillip D (mud flood guy) and he showed loads of statues like the one above. Then there are the Egyptian drawings of the same.

 
OP
BrokenAgate

BrokenAgate

Well-known member
Messages
367
Reactions
1,319
I live outside a 'village' of at best 100 people (half of those are a recent subdivision) and there are 2 old churches....Merrickville where I lived this summer must have 20 (much older churches imo)...it's insane the # of churches vs the population....ffs it can't make sense to anyone.....
These churches would require hundreds of workmen every single day for many years. Where did these tiny villages come up with that big a workforce? Would people from other towns and villages sacrifice their own time and labor to help build a church that they'd never attend, on account of they didn't live there? And everyone still had to work in the fields from spring through early autumn--plowing, seeding, harvesting, storing and preserving crops. They had their animals to tend to, as well, and important events like livestock fairs. And then there's the issue of feeding such a massive workforce. Who provided the food? Surely not those poor, small villages with barely enough to sustain themselves at any given time. None of this makes any damn sense at all.
 

Top